ABSTRACT

Although hurricanes can cause severe hazard effects well inland, little is known about the evacuation behaviour of inland populations compared to coastal populations. Using survey data collected in the United States after Hurricanes Florence (2018), Michael (2018), Barry (2019), and Dorian (2019), we investigate differences between coastal and inland populations in evacuation decisions and timing, and their causes. The data indicate that coastal populations evacuated at a higher rate than their inland counterparts (those not in coastal counties) in every hurricane studied. Chi-square tests identified differences in characteristics of coastal and inland populations, and a multiple logistic regression identified variables associated with evacuation. Together they suggest multiple factors that help explain the difference in evacuation rates. The most significant findings were related to geographic differences in the issuance of evacuation orders and reported receiving of orders (whether or not orders were actually issued). Most interestingly, the analysis indicates that variance between inland and coastal evacuation is not fully explained by the factors suggested in existing literature. We suggest here that differences between inland and coastal evacuation may also result from risk perception, in particular, a view that hurricanes are a coastal phenomenon and therefore do not apply to inland populations.

摘要

尽管飓风会对内陆造成严重的危害影响，但与沿海人口相比，内陆人口的疏散行为知之甚少。使用在飓风佛罗伦萨（2018 年）、迈克尔（2018 年）、巴里（2019 年）和多里安（2019 年）之后在美国收集的调查数据，我们调查了沿海和内陆人口在疏散决策和时间方面的差异及其原因。数据表明，在所研究的每场飓风中，沿海人口的疏散率都高于内陆人口（不在沿海县的人口）。卡方检验确定了沿海和内陆人口特征的差异，多元逻辑回归确定了与疏散相关的变量。他们共同提出了有助于解释疏散率差异的多种因素。最重要的发现与疏散命令的发布和所报告的命令接收（无论命令是否实际发布）的地域差异有关。最有趣的是，分析表明，现有文献中提出的因素并不能完全解释内陆和沿海疏散之间的差异。我们在此建议，内陆和沿海疏散之间的差异也可能源于风险感知，特别是认为飓风是一种沿海现象，因此不适用于内陆人口的观点。分析表明，现有文献中提出的因素不能完全解释内陆和沿海疏散之间的差异。我们在此建议，内陆和沿海疏散之间的差异也可能源于风险感知，特别是认为飓风是一种沿海现象，因此不适用于内陆人口的观点。分析表明，现有文献中提出的因素不能完全解释内陆和沿海疏散之间的差异。我们在此建议，内陆和沿海疏散之间的差异也可能源于风险感知，特别是认为飓风是一种沿海现象，因此不适用于内陆人口的观点。