The challenges of longitudinal surveys in the flood risk domain
Paul Hudson,
Annegret H. Thieken and
Philip Bubeck
Journal of Risk Research, 2020, vol. 23, issue 5, 642-663
Abstract:
There has been much research regarding the perceptions, preferences, behaviour, and responses of people exposed to flooding and other natural hazards. Cross-sectional surveys have been the predominant method applied in such research. While cross-sectional data can provide a snapshot of a respondent’s behaviour and perceptions, it cannot be assumed that the respondent’s perceptions are constant over time. As a result, many important research questions relating to dynamic processes, such as changes in risk perceptions, adaptation behaviour, and resilience cannot be fully addressed by cross-sectional surveys. To overcome these shortcomings, there has been a call for developing longitudinal (or panel) datasets in research on natural hazards, vulnerabilities, and risks. However, experiences with implementing longitudinal surveys in the flood risk domain (FRD), which pose distinct methodological challenges, are largely lacking. The key problems are sample recruitment, attrition rate, and attrition bias. We present a review of the few existing longitudinal surveys in the FRD. In addition, we investigate the potential attrition bias and attrition rates in a panel dataset of flood-affected households in Germany. We find little potential for attrition bias to occur. High attrition rates across longitudinal survey waves are the larger concern. A high attrition rate rapidly depletes the longitudinal sample. To overcome high attrition, longitudinal data should be collected as part of a multisector partnership to allow for sufficient resources to implement sample retention strategies. If flood-specific panels are developed, different sample retention strategies should be applied and evaluated in future research to understand how much-needed longitudinal surveying techniques can be successfully applied to the study of individuals threatened by flooding.
Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)
Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2019.1617339 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:23:y:2020:i:5:p:642-663
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJRR20
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2019.1617339
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Risk Research is currently edited by Bryan MacGregor
More articles in Journal of Risk Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().