Identifying Neighborhood Effects on Geohazard Adaptation in Mountainous Rural Areas of China: A Spatial Econometric Model

Abstract

In mountainous rural settlements facing the threat of geohazards, local adaptation is a self-organizing process influenced by individual and group behaviors. Encouraging a wide range of local populations to embrace geohazard adaptation strategies emerges as a potent means of mitigating disaster risks. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether neighbors influence individuals’ adaptation decisions, as well as to unravel the mechanisms through which neighborhood effects exert their influence. We employed a spatial Durbin model and a series of robustness checks to confirm the results. The dataset used in this research came from a face-to-face survey involving 516 respondents residing in 32 rural settlements highly susceptible to geohazards. Our empirical results reveal that neighborhood effects are an important determinant of adaptation to geohazards. That is, a farmer’s adaptation decision is influenced by the adaptation choices of his/her neighbors. Furthermore, when neighbors adopt adaptation strategies, the focal individuals may also want to adapt, both because they learn from their neighbors’ choices (social learning) and because they tend to abide by the majority’s choice (social norms). Incorporating neighborhood effects into geohazard adaptation studies offers a new perspective for promoting disaster risk reduction decision making.

Keywords

Disaster risk reduction / Geohazard adaptation / Neighborhood effects / Rural China / Spatial Durbin model (SDM)

References

[1] Abrahamse W, Steg L. Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 2013, 23(6): 1773-1785

[2] Adger WN. Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Economic Geography, 2003, 79: 387-404

[3] Adjognon, S., and L. Liverpool-Tasie. 2015. Spatial neighborhood effects in agricultural technology adoption: Evidence from Nigeria. In: Proceeding of the international association of agricultural economists (IAAE) 2015 Conference, 9–14 August 2015, Milan, Italy

[4] Ajilore O. Identifying peer effects using spatial analysis: The role of peers on risky sexual behavior. Review of Economics of the Household, 2015, 13: 635-652

[5] Bergquist, M., A. Nilsson, and W.P. Schultz. 2019. A meta-analysis of field-experiments using social norms to promote pro-environmental behaviors. Global Environmental Change 59: Article 101941.

[6] Blume LE, Brock WA, Durlauf SN, Jayaraman R. Linear social interactions models. Journal of Political Economy, 2015, 123(2): 444-496

[7] Bursztyn L, Ederer F, Ferman B, Yuchtman N. Understanding mechanisms underlying peer effects: Evidence from a field experiment on financial decisions. Econometrica, 2014, 82(4): 1273-1301

[8] Cappelli, F., V. Costantini, and D. Consoli. 2021. The trap of climate change-induced “natural” disasters and inequality. Global Environmental Change 70: Article 102329.

[9] Conley T, Udry C. Learning about a new technology: Pineapple in Ghana. The American Economic Review, 2010, 100(1): 35-69

[10] Coronese M, Lamperti F, Keller K, Chiaromonte F, Roventini A. Evidence for sharp increase in the economic damages of extreme natural disasters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2019, 116(43): 21450-21455

[11] Cui P. Progress and prospects in research on mountain hazards in China. Progress in Geography, 2014, 33(2): 145-152 (in Chinese)

[12] Durlauf SN, Ioannides YM. Social interactions. Annual Review of Economics, 2010, 2(1): 451-478

[13] Esham M, Garforth C. Agricultural adaptation to climate change: Insights from a farming community in Sri Lanka. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2013, 18(5): 535-549

[14] Glaeser E, Sacerdote B, Scheinkman J. The social multiplier. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2003, 1(2–3): 345-353

[15] Hoffmann R, Muttarak R. Learn from the past, prepare for the future: Impacts of education and experience on disaster preparedness in the Philippines and Thailand. World Development, 2017, 96: 32-51

[16] Kunreuther H, Michel-Kerjan EO. Managing catastrophes through insurance: Challenges and opportunities for reducing future risks, 2009 Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center

[17] Läpple D, Kelley H. Spatial dependence in the adoption of organic drystock farming in Ireland. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2015, 42(2): 315-337

[18] LeSage J, Pace RK. Introduction to spatial econometrics, 2009, New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC

[19] LeSage JP, Pace RK, Lam N, Campanella R, Liu X. New Orleans business recovery in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 2011, 174(4): 1007-1027

[20] Li Q, Zang WB, An L. Peer effects and school dropout in rural China. China Economic Review, 2013, 27: 238-248

[21] Lindell MK, Huang SK, Wei HL, Samuelson CD. Perceptions and expected immediate reactions to tornado warning polygons. Natural Hazards, 2016, 80(1): 683-707

[22] Ling C, Zhang AQ, Zhen XP. Peer effects in consumption among Chinese rural households. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 2018, 54(10): 2333-2347

[23] Lo AY. The role of social norms in climate adaptation: Mediating risk perception and flood insurance purchase. Global Environmental Change, 2013, 23(5): 1249-1257

[24] Loh CPA, Li Q. Peer effects in adolescent bodyweight: Evidence from rural China. Social Science and Medicine, 2013, 86: 35-44

[25] Manski CF. Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. The Review of Economic Studies, 1993, 60(3): 531-542

[26] Manski CF. Economic analysis of social interactions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2000, 14(3): 115-136

[27] Mertens K, Jacobs L, Maes J, Poesen J, Kervyn M, Vranken L. Disaster risk reduction among households exposed to landslide hazard: A crucial role for self-efficacy?. Land Use Policy, 2018, 75: 77-91

[28] Moretti E. Social learning and peer effects in consumption: Evidence from movie sales. The Review of Economic Studies, 2011, 78(1): 356-393

[29] Peng L, Tan J, Lin L, Xu D. Understanding sustainable disaster mitigation of stakeholder engagement: Risk perception, trust in public institutions, and disaster insurance. Sustainable Development, 2019, 27(5): 885-897

[30] Peng, L., J. Tan, W. Deng, and Y. Liu. 2020. Farmers’ participation in community-based disaster management: The role of trust, place attachment and self-efficacy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 51: Article 101895.

[31] Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science, 1987, 236(4799): 280-285

[32] Song Z, Daryanto A, Soopramanien D. Place attachment, trust and mobility: Three-way interaction effect on urban residents’ environmental citizenship behaviour. Journal of Business Research, 2019, 105: 168-177

[33] Tan J, Peng L, Guo S. Measuring household resilience in hazard-prone mountain areas: A capacity-based approach. Social Indicators Research, 2020, 152(3): 1153-1176

[34] Tan J, Zhou K, Peng L, Lin L. The role of social networks in relocation induced by climate-related hazards: An empirical investigation in China. Climate and Development, 2021, 14(1): 1-12

[35] Trainor JE, Nagele D, Philips B, Scott B. Tornadoes, social science, and the false alarm effect. Weather, Climate, and Society, 2015, 7(4): 333-352

[36] Tran TA, Rodela R. Integrating farmers’ adaptive knowledge into flood management and adaptation policies in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta: A social learning perspective. Global Environmental Change, 2019, 55: 84-96

[37] van Valkengoed AM, Steg L. Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour. Nature Climate Change, 2019, 9(2): 158-163

[38] Walker AJ, Ryan RL. Place attachment and landscape preservation in rural New England: A Maine case study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2008, 86(2): 141-152

[39] Wilby RL, Keenan R. Adapting to flood risk under climate change. Progress in Physical Geography, 2012, 36(3): 348-378

[40] Williams DR, Vaske JJ. The measurement of place attachment: Validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science, 2003, 49(6): 830-840.

[41] Yamamura E. The impact of natural disasters on income inequality: Analysis using panel data during the period 1970 to 2004. International Economic Journal, 2015, 29(3): 359-374

[42] Yang W, Sharp B. Spatial dependence and determinants of dairy farmers’ adoption of best management practices for water protection in New Zealand. Environmental Management, 2017, 59(4): 594-603

[43] Yang, F., J. Tan, and L. Peng. 2020. The effect of risk perception on the willingness to purchase hazard insurance—A case study in the Three Gorges Reservoir region, China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 45: Article 101379.

[44] Zhang, F., and S. Maroulis. 2021. Experience is not enough: A dynamic explanation of the limited adaptation to extreme weather events in public organizations. Global Environmental Change 70: Article 102358.

[45] Zheng H, Ma W, Li G. Learning from neighboring farmers: Does spatial dependence affect adoption of drought-tolerant wheat varieties in China?. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2021, 69(4): 519-537