Assessment of vulnerability reduction policies: Integration of economic and cognitive models of decision-making
Introduction
In disaster-prone societies, natural hazards can result in significant adverse consequences [1]. Among these consequences are the financial and life losses resulted from damage to residential and commercial buildings [2], transportation networks [3], and healthcare facilities [4], [5], [6]. Policymakers often attempt to mitigate the negative consequences of probable future hazards by implementing various policies. They can use existing models such as the recently presented reliability-based and Bayesian network models [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13] to assess the vulnerability of civil infrastructure systems at system or component levels and, based on the outcome of these assessments, design appropriate policies. The adopted policies may aim to promote the adoption of hazard mitigation measures such as seismic retrofits that can enhance the robustness of buildings and reduce the probability of death, injury, and economic losses. Alternatively, they may promote disaster insurance, which transfers losses sustained by the residents to other parties [14, 15]. Examples of these programs that could be supported by policies are enhancing the public awareness of the seismic risk and its adverse outcomes, providing long-term and low-interest loans, tax credits, and penalties, as well as subsidies on insurance premiums [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23].
Despite the past efforts made by governments, evidence suggests that, in many cases, the implementation of hazard mitigation policies has not led to the widespread adoption of protective measures [24], [25], [26]. Several past studies [27], [28], [29] have highlighted the need for a multi-disciplinary perspective toward enhancing communities' resilience. In other words, the design and implementation of policies based on the application of technical models such as the existing reliability and resilience models while ignoring the human response may lead to unsatisfactory results [30]. Therefore, to optimally use the available government resources and achieve the desired outcomes, policymakers should consider the community's probable feedback to the proposed policies [31], [32], [33]. Critical to the prediction of the response of the community to a given policy is the understanding of the decision-making process and the behavior of individual owners under their social settings.
In the past, the expected utility theory [34, 35] has been used in several analytical models [36, 37] to model how people decide about the adoption of hazard mitigation measures. The expected utility theory argues that individuals decide based upon their level of risk-aversion, wealth, and uncertain financial benefits and losses. Despite its strength, the expected utility theory is subject to a critical limitation. This limitation is stemmed from the underlying assumption that individuals make rational decisions solely based on objective financial losses and benefits. It does not take into account how individuals perceive low-probability, high-consequence events such as earthquakes in a region [38, 39]. Due to their lack of knowledge and misunderstanding about the probability and consequences of events, individuals frequently under- or over-estimate the risks [40]. Due to its omission of individuals' perception of low-probability, high-consequence events, the expected utility theory cannot explain sub-optimal choices that individuals make about adopting seismic retrofit measures even when presented with objective risk analysis results [31].
An expanding body of literature (see, e.g., Mulilis and Duval (1995) [41], Lindell and Perry (2012) [42], Paton (2006) [43], Egbelakin et al., (2011a) [44]) has attempted to model individuals' hazard mitigation behavior as a complex phenomenon. They propose behavioral models that characterize the building owners' hazard mitigation decision and behavior based on several social and behavioral factors [43]. Unlike the expected utility theory, these models consider how individuals' biases influence their decision-making and behavior. Nevertheless, these models cannot characterize the impact of incremental changes in financial gains and losses associated with investments in seismic risk mitigation measures on individuals’ behavior. Therefore, there is a need for a new generation of models that considers the role of social and behavioral factors as well as incremental changes in the financial gains and losses associated with a given measure in driving individuals' mitigation behavior against low-probability, high-consequence natural hazards such as devastating earthquakes.
Furthermore, past studies (see, e.g., Terpstra and Lindell (2013) [45]) often approach individuals' risk mitigation decision making as a static, one-step, and now-or-never problem; whereas the owners’ choice of risk mitigation measures is inherently dynamic (e.g., an owner that currently finds a given measure inappropriate, may decide to adopt it at a later time if situation becomes favorable). Considering individuals hazard mitigation behavior as a static problem can lead to lead to over- or underestimation of building owners' response since humans respond adaptively to risk communication [46], risk reduction incentives [47] and interactions with neighbors and friends [48]. There is a need for appropriate models that characterize the dynamic and adaptive behavior of individuals while taking into account the role of social interactions, the diffusion pattern of the impact of government subsidies, and the changes in the level and nature of government interventions [49, 50]. Policymakers are most concerned with the impact of candidate policies and programs as characterized by the consequent change in the vulnerability of the community. Accordingly, they need tools that consider the behavior of individuals to determine the overall response of the community to vulnerability reduction policies and programs and characterize the vulnerability of the community at a given time using theoretically sound and well-founded models.
This paper contributes to the body of knowledge by addressing these two needs. First, it presents a new generation of models that characterize the homeowners' response to vulnerability reduction policies and programs. The proposed model addresses the limitations of existing models by simultaneously considering several social and behavioral factors as well as the utility individuals assign to the financial outcome of each vulnerability reduction measure (e.g., seismic retrofit). Secondly, an agent-based simulation model is developed to characterize the dynamic and emergent risk mitigation behavior of households under various exogenous and endogenous factors (e.g., seismic risk mitigation programs and social interactions among individuals). At the core of this agent-based model is the proposed decision-making model. By characterizing the time variant risk mitigation behavior of individuals, this agent-based model can determine the overall response of the community to a given program. A novel feature of this simulation model is the characterization of the community's vulnerability using a reliability-based seismic performance assessment model. Practitioners and policymakers can use the results and ensuing insights obtained from applying the developed simulation tool in the design and fine-tuning of seismic risk mitigation programs before their implementation.
The remainder of this manuscript is organized as follows. First, the foundations of the utility theory and the social-behavioral models are discussed. Next, the proposed decision-making model is presented. Then, the integration of the proposed decision-making model into an agent-based model is discussed. This is followed by an illustrative application of the proposed decision-making model to assess the impact of candidate seismic risk mitigation programs on the individuals' behavior and the community's overall vulnerability. The validation and testing for the developed model are subsequently presented.
Section snippets
Research Background
Several theories and models in economics, psychology, and sociology attempt to explain the individuals' risk-based decision-making logic. The Expected utility theory [34, 35], which became prevalent after the Second World War, has been the foundation of several models that describe people's decision-making under risk and uncertainty [51], [52], [53]. Based on this theory, rational individuals prefer the choice with the highest expected utility. The utility of each possible outcome of an action
Proposed decision-making model
Fig. 2 shows the structure of the proposed decision-making model. The proposed model determines the behavior of each owner in terms of choosing among various alternatives such as buying insurance, implementing loss reduction measures (e.g., seismic retrofits), or keeping the status quo (i.e., do nothing) based on the utility assigned to the outcomes of choosing each alternative and the owner's attributes. The intention and decision formation stages and the attributes associated with each stage
Integration of the proposed decision-making and agent-based models
The proposed model explains the risk mitigation behavior of individuals when provided with multiple alternatives. When it comes to applying the proposed model, it is critical to understand that the individuals' attributes that drive their hazard mitigation behavior are dynamic. These attributes, and consequently the individuals' behavior, can change over time due to various reasons such as interactions among individuals, the changes in the levels and types of government interventions, and the
Illustrative Example
In this section, an illustrative application of the proposed decision-making model integrated into an agent-based model is presented. The key model inputs, the policy analysis results, and the verification and testing of the decision-making and agent-based models are discussed in the following.
Verification and validation
Several testing methods, such as extreme condition test and sensitivity analysis, are commonly used to assess the validity of the simulation models and identify their limitations [4, 161, 162]. This section presents the results of the application of the two verification methods mentioned above.
Conclusions
This research was motivated by the need for a new model that describes individuals' hazard-mitigation behavior by considering both the economic and behavioral aspects of their decision. The proposed decision-making model can effectively explain the building owners’ behavior when presented with multiple seismic risk mitigation alternatives. It considers the characteristics of the buildings, the owners' attitude, and their condition-dependent response to proposed policies and subsidies. The
Opportunities for future research
The benefits of retrofitting seismically vulnerable buildings are not limited to a reduction in the probable losses in the face of an earthquake. Other factors such as the possibility of receiving awards and recognition can motivate owners to embark on seismic retrofit missions [20, 167, 168]. Cultural and social norms of the society under study can influence the degree to which these factors become prevalent in the owners' decision-making. Future research can be designed to uncover the role of
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References (168)
- et al.
An integrated socio-technical approach for post-earthquake recovery of interdependent healthcare system
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2020) - et al.
Matrix-based system reliability method and applications to bridge networks
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2008) Recovery-based seismic resilience enhancement strategies of water distribution networks
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2020)Bayesian network-based seismic damage estimation for power and potable water supply systems
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2020)- et al.
Spatial distribution of water supply reliability and critical links of water supply to crucial water consumers under an earthquake
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2009) Probabilistic capacity models and seismic fragility estimates for RC columns subject to corrosion
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2008)A quantitative approach for assessment and improvement of network resilience
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2020)- et al.
Review of major approaches to analyze vulnerability in power system
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2019) - et al.
Integration of physical infrastructure and social systems in communities’ reliability and resilience analysis
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
(2019) - et al.
Seismic risk analysis and management of civil infrastructure systems: an overview, in Handbook of Seismic Risk Analysis and Management of Civil Infrastructure Systems
(2013)
An agent-based simulation model to evaluate the response to seismic retrofit promotion policies
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction
Willingness of homeowners to mitigate climate risk through insurance
Ecological Economics
The role of social norms in climate adaptation: Mediating risk perception and flood insurance purchase
Global Environmental Change
The effectiveness of flood risk communication strategies and the influence of social networks—Insights from an agent-based model
Environmental Science & Policy
Risk-averse decision-making for civil infrastructure exposed to low-probability, high-consequence events
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
The life profitability method (LPM): A financial approach to engineering decisions
Structural Safety
Application of cumulative prospect theory: Implied seismic design preference
Structural Safety
The theory of planned behavior
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
It's just a natural way of life…” an investigation of wildfire preparedness in rural Australia
Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards
Factors influencing homeowners' seismic risk mitigation behavior: A case study in Zeytinburnu district of Istanbul
International journal of disaster risk reduction
A lifeline vulnerability study in Barcelona, Spain
Reliability engineering & system safety
A system dynamics model to evaluate the housing market response to vulnerability reduction promotion policies
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction
Seismic risk analysis with reliability methods, part I: Models
Structural Safety
Seismic risk analysis with reliability methods, part II: Analysis
Structural Safety
Multi-variate and Single-variable Flood Fragility and Loss Approaches for Wood Frame Buildings
Reliability Engineering & System Safety
Explaining the failure to insure catastrophic risks
The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance-Issues and Practice
Feasibility of pre-earthquake strengthening of buildings based on cost-benefit and life-cycle cost analysis, with the aid of fragility curves
Natural Hazards
Resilience as optimization criterion for the rehabilitation of bridges belonging to a transportation network subject to earthquake
A System Dynamics Approach to the Seismic Resilience Enhancement of Hospitals
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction
Capacity Building for an Infrastructure System in Case of Disaster Using the System's Associated Social and Technical Components
Journal of Management in Engineering
Demand for fixed-price multi-year contracts: Experimental evidence from insurance decisions
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
Public-private partnership for earthquake mitigation involving retrofit and insurance
Technological and Economic Development of Economy
Risk area residents’ perceptions and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Analysis of the impact of large scale seismic retrofitting strategies through the application of a vulnerability-based approach on traditional masonry buildings
Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration
Defining the Roles of the Public and Private Sector in Risk Communication
Risk Reduction, and Risk Transfer
Measuring earthquake risk concentration for hazard mitigation
Natural Hazards
Incentives and motivators for improving building resilience to earthquake disaster
Natural Hazards Review
A risk de-aggregation framework that relates community resilience goals to building performance objectives
Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure
Enforcement of Building Construction Regulations in Urban Centers of India
Disaster Risk Governance in India and Cross Cutting Issues
Probabilistic benefit-cost analysis for earthquake damage mitigation: Evaluating measures for apartment houses in Turkey
Earthquake Spectra
A different view on human vulnerability to earthquakes: lessons from risk perception studies, in Human Casualties in Earthquakes
Implementing earthquake prone building policy under the Building Act 2004: Wellington City's Approach
Social capital and community resilience
American Behavioral Scientist
Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster recovery
Engineering meets institutions: an interdisciplinary approach to the management of resilience
Environment Systems and Decisions
Integrating Household Risk Mitigation Behavior in Flood Risk Analysis: An Agent-Based Model Approach
Risk Analysis
Theory of games and economic behavior
Theory of games and economic behavior (commemorative edition)
Aspects of rational insurance purchasing
Journal of political economy
Cited by (10)
Impact of government risk communication on residents’ decisions to adopt earthquake insurance: Evidence from a field survey in China
2023, International Journal of Disaster Risk ReductionA clustering-classification approach in categorizing vulnerability of roads and bridges using public assistance big data
2023, International Journal of Disaster Risk ReductionCitation Excerpt :In a report published in 2010 [20], National Infrastructure Advisory Council stated that the risk profile of the electricity sector in the face of extreme weather-related events such as hurricanes, floods, and icing is going beyond the limit to be effectively managed. Policymakers often implement risk mitigation strategies to reduce the adverse outcomes of future natural hazards [21]. To alleviate the existing condition of infrastructure systems, huge amounts of investments have been made in the US over the recent years.
Modeling the impact of mitigation policies in a pandemic: A system dynamics approach
2022, International Journal of Disaster Risk ReductionCitation Excerpt :To alleviate these issues, there should be appropriate plans to enhance the capability of the healthcare system in the face of pandemics. Public health decision-makers need appropriate quantitative tools that assist them in determining the impact of various policies and plans for responding to the outbreak and fine-tune them before their implementation [8,9]. These policy analysis tools should be able to model the spread of the infectious disease considering the characteristics of the disease, the behavior of the community, the performance of the healthcare system, and the behavior of other elements that are fundamental to the pandemic response (e.g., medicine supply).
Probabilistic framework to quantify the seismic resilience of natural gas distribution networks
2022, International Journal of Disaster Risk ReductionCitation Excerpt :They employed their framework to assess the seismic resilience of a community comprising a portfolio of residential and commercial buildings, a power system, a water system, and a healthcare system subject to an earthquake. Morshedi and Kashani [31] developed a new generation of models that characterize homeowners’ decisions and behavior when exposed to vulnerability reduction policies and programs. They incorporated this decision-making model into an agent-based simulation model.
Prioritizing Capacity Building Strategies to Ensure Robustness and Faster Recovery of Cellular Networks from Hurricanes
2024, Construction Research Congress 2024, CRC 2024Impacts of Stress on Workers' Risk-Taking Behaviors: Cognitive Tunneling and Impaired Selective Attention
2023, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management