Gender Differences in Exposure and Preparedness in Post-Disaster Settings

Background and Purpose: Over the last five decades  disasters have affected 6.9 trillion people and caused damages totaling US $2.6 trillion (CRED, 2014). There is an increasingly large literature exploring which factors impact an individual and communities’ ability to cope after a disaster (Cutter, 2016).  However, far less research has focused on how gender impacts resilience in post-disaster settings. Females may be especially vulnerable following disasters, in large part due to family responsibilities and economic constraints, and susceptibility to domestic violence (Enarson & Morrow, 1998; Norris, 2014). The Protective Action Decision Model (PADM) offers researchers a tool for analyzing a respondents threat perception, protective action perceptions, and stakeholder perceptions in response to a disaster or environmental hazard (Lindell & Perry, 2012). The present research investigates gender differences and the relationship between disaster exposure and the PADM.

Methods: A face-to-face mixed-methods survey was administered to a total of 300 Gulf Coast residents in three communities in coastal Louisiana and Alabama to assess their resilience following the Deep-Water Horizon oil spill. Respondents were asked questions about their social networks, the economic and social impact of the disaster, individual resilience, and perceived preparedness for future disasters. Structural Equation Modeling, a combination of factor analysis and multiple regression was used to explore gender differences in the relationship between disaster exposure and the PADM for 218 participants.

Results: The structural model estimating the effect of exposure on PADM indicated good model fit based on a series of goodness of fit indicators including: Root Mean Square Error (RMSEA = 0.67, CI 0.05-0.08, p<0.05) Akaike’s Information Criteria (AIC = 4492.19), Bayesian Information Criterial (BIC =4641.11), Comparative fit index (CFI = 0.94 ), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI = 0.92), Standardized Root Mean Squared Residual (SRMR = 0.07), and Coefficient of Determination (CD = 0.93). Exposure demonstrated a significant negative effect on PADM, such that greater exposure was associated with lower scores on the PADM (g = -3.09, p <0.001). Similarly, gender was a significant covariate in the model, such that being female was associated with an increase in scores on the PADM (g = 0.33, p< 0.05). All models were estimated in STATA version 13.1

Conclusion and Implications: Differences in resiliency based on gender have been less explored. Adding an explicit analysis of the role of gender to this model offers an important contribution to body of literature looking at disaster resiliency and self-mastery following disasters. This research begins to address this gap and identifies differences in strengths and vulnerabilities, in addition to discussing implications for policy and social programs. 

References

Cutter, S.L. (2016). The landscape of disaster resilience indicators in the USA. Natural Hazards, 80(2), 741-758.

EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database. (2014). Natural disaster trends.

Enarson, E. and Morrow, B. (1998).  The Gendered Terrain of Disaster. New York: Praeger.

Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2012). The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Analysis, 32(4), 616-632.

Norris, F. H. (2014).Disasters and domestic violence. National Center for PTSD. Retrieved from http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/trauma/disaster-terrorism/disasters-domestic-violence.asp