Assessing the Disaster Vulnerability, Preparedness and Resilience of Selected Flood-Prone Barangays in the Northern Region of the Philippines: Towards Actionable Risk Communication Intervention

Assessing the Disaster Vulnerability, Preparedness and Resilience of Selected Flood-Prone Barangays in the Northern Region of the Philippines: Towards Actionable Risk Communication Intervention   

Rosalinda S. Guingab* Myrna C. Cureg, Regina Blair S. Santiago

College of Communication and Social Sciences, Isabela State University, Cabagan, Isabela, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.9020338

Received: 13 February 2025; Accepted: 22 February 2025; Published: 22 March 2025

ABSTRACT

Disasters, such as flooding, have become progressively frequent and financially-draining, especially among the poor and vulnerable. This research study aimed to determine the disaster vulnerability, preparedness, and resilience of households in the most flood-prone barangays in three municipalities in the northern part Isabela. Descriptive quantitative research design guided the conduct of this study with a pretested and reliability-tested survey questionnaire as the research instrument. Simple random sampling was used to select the 140 respondents residing in the three barangays. In the past five years, most respondents in the three barangays experienced four to five instances of flooding with a greater number having experienced floodwater almost reaching the roof of their one-story house. Indicators of preparedness and resilience reveal that the respondents were ill-prepared for flooding, with most of them living in one-storey houses made of lightweight materials.  Financial limitations that translate to poor preparedness compromise their resilience and increase their vulnerability to effects of flooding. Although they have access to evacuation centers, most respondents preferred to stay in their homes, exposing themselves to the dangers of flooding. It appears that most respondents face challenges in absorbing financial losses should they experience extensive damage due to flooding. Comparisons between barangays did not reveal any significant differences in vulnerability, but significant disparity in terms of their financial preparedness and resilience were  observed.  Enhancing the households’ disaster preparedness and resilience by equipping them with livelihood capability trainings  should be initiated in these barangays. As an actionable risk communication intervention, developed IEC materials will be turned over to the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction Office of the three municipalities to be used during disaster capability-building programs to enhance their community preparedness and resilience.

Keywords: disaster preparedness, vulnerability, resilience, flooding

INTRODUCTION

The Philippines is one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world.  Every year, an average of 20 typhoons wreak havoc on the country, killing thousands of people and causing massive destruction of property and infrastructure (Santos, 2021). Of all the natural hazards that likely impact this country, typhoons that cause massive flooding have been identified as most likely to bring catastrophic effects.  In a nationwide survey conducted in 2017 that looked into the preparedness and resilience of Filipinos, Bolletino et al (2018) found out that households were only slightly prepared or not at all prepared to respond to a disaster. Large numbers of the population reported having experienced significant damage to property and assets and have been displaced from their homes due to a disaster. Their ability to cope and recover were also reported to be limited. In another study still in the Philippines, Roggayan and Dollete (2020) found that majority of those affected by disasters were not fully aware about the nature, impact and threats of most of disasters they have experienced. Lack of information has also been identified as an impediment to the awareness levels identified by those involved in the study. This is lamentable as scholars generally agree that communities that are more prepared for calamities are more able to respond more effectively when various adversities manifest, making them more resilient (Bodas et al., 2022). A number of studies show that communities could become more resilient to catastrophic events, preserve lives, and even reduce economic losses by putting mitigation and preparedness measures into place. Weitzel et al (2022) found in his review of past researches associating resilience with sociodemographic and social factors that higher preparedness and resilience were connected with being female, married, with high education, and full-time work, with this variable enabling people affected by disasters a regular source of income.  Scholars agree that while disasters cannot be eliminated, actions towards preparedness and building of resilience to effectively manage their impacts can be undertaken (Mojtahedi & Oo, 2012).

One proactive action that builds resilience is the strong bond within the family and community. According to Lawrence & Anton (2016) research, families who have a stronger sense of place or community are more likely to be prepared for emergencies and the more prepared communities are for disasters, the better they are able to adapt to them. Also, the better prepared they are to disasters, the more willing are the government and humanitarian organizations to work with them (Lin & Lee, 2022).

Clearly, disaster preparedness and resilience intertwine with various social, economic, ecological and political factors. According to Ma et al (2021), community preparedness and resilience are positively correlated.  Similarly, Lin & Lee (2022) noted that people who reside in disaster-prone locations will take initiatives to create and plan according to their capacity for disaster resilience.  These initiatives may include ways to lessen the negative effects of catastrophes, decrease the risk and vulnerability factors that affect communities, cities, and people, boost community resilience, and improve community recovery capability following disasters. Also, based on a study by Peng et al (2020), community-based participation resolves vulnerabilities, boosts resilience, and generally results in improved community outcomes. Similar findings were revealed by Ma et al (2023) in which they found that people’s participation in community activities improves their resilience by enhancing their capacity to respond to natural disaster risks.

According to Bolletino, et al (2018), although there have been studies conducted in the past measuring different aspects of natural disaster management including preparedness, resilience, mitigation efforts, social vulnerability, and hazard exposures,  these data gave a picture of the situation of the Philippines at the national level only. Little data have been generated at the level of communities. Yet, it is important to understand the situation at the family and community level as it would help guide local governments in preparing programs and projects to build up households’ preparedness and resilience towards flooding, especially in low-income communities. This is compounded by the observation that local government units in the Philippines with higher vulnerability to disasters are also those which belong to the low-income class (Enriquez at al., 2018).

This study was conducted to fill this gap by looking into the situation at the local level, and in areas in the Philippines that not only are vulnerable to flooding but also are financially-challenged to prepare adequately for the negative effects of flooding. It was focused on finding out the vulnerability, preparedness and resilience of flood-prone communities in selected municipalities in the northern part of the Philippines.  Among the provinces considered to be most vulnerable to the impacts of weather extremes is Isabela. With the vulnerability of the Isabela province to flooding, it is important to find out the preparedness and resilience of its flood-prone communities.  When disasters occur, an emergency savings fund can be one of the primary resources to handle their impacts and jumpstart recovery. Indeed, the impacts of disasters on development, poverty and vulnerability have led to calls for improving disaster resilience (Combaz, 2014).

The conduct of this study is consistent with achieving the Sustainable Development Goal objectives 13 and 17, to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, and resilient and SDG 13, to take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.

Objectives of the study

The main objective of this study is to determine the vulnerability, preparedness, and resilience of households living in the three most flood-prone barangays in Isabela.  Specifically, it aimed to:

1. Find out the households’ socio-demographic characteristics;
2. Assess the households’ vulnerability to flooding;
3. Find out their preparedness to flooding and their perceived limiting factors to prepare for flooding;
4. Assess their resilience to flooding in terms of the following:

5.1   duration of recovery from flood-related losses;

5.2   access to health care services and evacuation centers;

5.3   involvement in local government-initiated disaster preparedness activities;

5.4  trust accorded to local government officials;

5.5  social cohesiveness

6. Determine whether there is significant difference in the vulnerability, preparedness and resilience of respondents in the three barangays;
7. Develop a communication campaign material to promote disaster preparedness and resilience.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design. The descriptive quantitative research design guided the conduct of this study to determine the vulnerability, preparedness and resilience of the households in the most flood-prone barangays in the northern part of the Philippines. The barangays covered were Pilig Abajo in Cabagan, Isabela; Quinagabian in Sta. Maria, Isabela and Ragan Norte in Delfin Albano. The usual flood height in these barangays ranges from 0.5 to 1.3m, rendering their flood susceptibility from moderate to very high.

Data Collection Procedure and Research Instrument. Permission was secured from the Municipal Disaster Reduction Management Office (MDRRMO) before the data collection ensued. The researcher-developed questionnaire was first pretested among 10 household (HH) heads in another flood-prone barangay in Delfin Albano that was not part of the study’s locale. It was slightly modified based on the results of the pretest. A re-test was administered with the same respondents to test for the questionnaire’s reliability.  The computed correlation coefficients of 1.00 for vulnerability and 0.85 for preparedness and resilience suggest excellent and good reliability of the items, respectively, in the questionnaire. After ensuring the questionnaire’s reliability, it was reproduced for data gathering.

Respondents and Sampling Procedure. The respondents were the household heads chosen through simple random sampling from the list of household heads secured from their barangay office. Only those who willingly consented to the interview were included in the study. A total of 140 household heads served as respondents, broken down as follows: 50 each from Brgy Pilig Abajo and Brgy Quinagabian and 40 from Brgy Ragan Norte.

Ethical considerations. Ethical considerations were observed in this study by ensuring the respondents’ consent before they were interviewed in their respective homes. Each respondent was first briefed by the researchers with the purpose of the study.  Each was also handed an Informed Consent Form and was given ample time to read through it and consider their decision to participate or not in the study as respondent. Upon their consent, they were assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses.

Data Availability. Data for this study is archived on the database of the Department of Communication Office, College of Communication and Social Sciences of the Isabela State University, Philippines.

Data Analysis. Data collected from the survey were organized in MS Excel and were subjected to descriptive statistics, namely, frequency and percentage counts. The weighted means for perceived social cohesiveness of the barangays were elicited using the 5-point Likert Scale. Weighted means were also computed for responses pertaining respondents’ views on social cohesion, measured using a 5-point Likert Scale. The following served as basis in determining the adjectival values for the Likert Scale data.

Weighted Means                                       Adjectival Value

1-1.80                                                     Strongly Disagree

1.81 -2.60                                              Disagree

2.61- 3.40                                              Neither agree nor disagree

3.41-4.20                                               Agree

4.21-5.00                                               Strongly agree

To test for the significant difference in the vulnerability, preparedness and resilience among the three barangays, Kruskall-Wallis test for non-parametric data was used.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Respondents’ Socio-Demographic Characteristics

Most of the respondents who were household heads were male, jibing with the results of national surveys and affirming the highly patriarchal nature of families in the Philippines. They were mostly between 41 to 60 years of age, with respondents from Ragan Norte being on the average the oldest, with a mean age of 54, compared with those from Quinagabian and Pilig Abajo , whose mean ages were 50 and 48, respectively. This indicates that the respondents  were in their middle years. Most of them were elementary graduates only. A big majority (90 %) have a monthly household income ranging  from  PhP 5,189 (equivalent to 88 USD and PhP 8,192 (equivalent to 139 USD), with Ragan Norte receiving the lowest income and Quinagabian being a bit better than the other two. With the poverty threshold level at PhP 12,030 (equivalent to 204 USD) per month for a family of five (PSA, 2022), the respondents’ average income is undoubtedly insufficient for their families to cover their basic needs and prepare for flooding.

As to their main source of income, the greater proportion of respondents in Ragan Norte (60 %) were dependent on their children for sustenance, while almost the same proportion in Quingabian were engaged in small-time pottery making business. Meanwhile, the biggest number of respondents in Pilig Abajo (70%) survived by small-time farming and fishing. It appears that the respondents did not have a regular source of income. This profile, coupled with their very low financial sustenance could make them vulnerable to impacts of disasters, and compromise their resilience. A big majority (80 %) were living in one-storey structure which could make them very vulnerable to the impacts of flooding, whereas a few lived in houses made of lightweight materials that could easily be swept down by raging floodwater.  In terms of assets that may prove useful in case of disasters, almost all of the respondents have cell phones, which they can use to receive early warnings from the Municipal Disaster Reduction Management Office (MDRRMO) should they need to evacuate.

Households’ vulnerability  to flooding

Households’ experience of flooding in the past five years. In the past five years, most respondents in the three barangays experienced four to five instances of flooding with a greater number having experienced floodwater almost reaching the roof of their single-story house.  Those living in two-story structure experienced flood water almost reaching their second floor. These findings indicate the pitiful condition and vulnerability of the respondents to flooding (Table 1).

Table 1:  Households’ experience of flooding in the past five years

Impact of recent flooding on respondents’ properties and livelihood. Three-quarters of the respondents in Pilig Abajo and slightly less than one-fourth in Quinagabian reported having their houses partially destroyed during the recent flooding in their areas. Only a small number reported complete damage to their houses. Majority of the respondents in Ragan Norte experienced having their farm animals swept by the floodwater (67.5%). A significant proportion of respondents in the three barangays reported experiencing destroyed pieces of furniture and electrical appliances. Lamentably, a number of respondents (14%) in Quinagabian, Sta. Maria that is known for pottery making reported to have their source of livelihood severely affected by the recent flooding. Few survived the recent flooding experience without incurring damage in their properties (Table 2).  

Table 2: Impact of recent flooding on respondents’ properties and livelihood*

*Multiple response

Likelihood of flooding in the area of residence during strong rains or typhoons

In assessing the respondents’ vulnerability to flooding, they were asked about their likelihood of experiencing  flooding when there is continuous heavy downpour.  Almost all of the respondents who live in the three low-lying barangays covered by this study answered that they are very likely to be flooded due to heavy rains (Table 3).

Table 3: Likelihood of flooding in the area of residence during strong rains or typhoons

Current preparedness actions

Because of their vulnerability to flooding, the respondents were asked about their current actions to prepare for another flooding.   Apparently, a greater proportion of respondents in the three barangays were taking proactive actions, with the most laudable action as saving money to add a second floor to their existing houses or to elevate their houses. This is especially true among respondents of Pilig Abajo (58.0 %) and Quinagabian (34.0%). Almost a  third of respondents (30%) in Ragan Norte were already elevating their houses at the time of survey. However, there were still a significant proportion in Ragan Norte (30 %) and Pilig Abajo (20%) who were not taking actions at all. This is a cause for concern that requires communication intervention to encourage proactive preparedness actions to minimize disaster impacts on lives and properties (Table 4).

Table 4: Current actions taken by respondents to prepare themselves from the impacts of flooding*

*Multiple response

Respondents’ limitations for taking proactive actions. Even as they foresee the necessity to mitigate the impacts of flooding, respondents faced a number of limiting factors with the most commonly reported reason as “lack of money” to elevate their houses or build second story structures (Table 8). Undeniably, financial readiness is a crucial key to disaster readiness and resilience as past researches reveal. However, as Hallegatte  et al (2020) observed, the poor who are financially limited are more likely to experience difficulty in coping with disasters and recovering from them (Table 5).

Table 5: Factors that limit households in preparing  for disasters such as flooding *

*Multiple response

Household’s Resilience

Duration of recovery from losses. A significant measure of resilience is recovery time from losses from the last flooding experience. Clearly, the respondents varied in their duration of recovery. A greater proportion of respondents from Quinagabian (48%) took the longest time (1-2 months) to recover compared to those residing in Ragan Norte with 52.5 percent taking between 2-3 weeks to recover from losses brought about by the flooding. Among the three barangays, Quinagabian’s topography and proximity to the Cagayan River renders it the most vulnerable to flooding.  All these three barangays are living below the poverty threshold level. These findings corroborate with a study by Laurien & Keating (2019) revealing disparity in recovery time with rural communities taking longer compared to urban communities because of their poor socio-economic conditions and low resilience capacity (Table 6).

Table 6: Household’s duration of recovery from losses due to flooding

Respondents’ access to health care services

Health-related services appear to be accessible in all three barangays as it took only less than 10 minutes for most respondents in all the three barangays to reach health care facilities, with the farthest respondents from Pilig Abajo reaching these facilities in more than 30 minutes. Their easy access to such life-giving services would prove useful in case of flood-related accidents or when they fall ill and consequently need immediate health care. (Table 7).

Table 7: Households’ access to healthcare services

Access to evacuation center

Access to an evacuation center did not seem to be an issue with most respondents as it only took them less than 10 minutes to reach this crucial facility. Easy access of flood-prone residents to evacuation centers presents a sensible motivation to leave their houses for their safety, especially when the flooding is becoming severe and their house faces the risk of being submerged in the floodwater. Unfortunately, however, even with the short distance to such centers, most respondents, particularly in Pilig Abajo and Quingabian, still preferred not to leave their houses (Table 8).

Table 8: Households’ access to evacuation centers

Respondents’ involvement in LGU disaster-initiated activities

Community involvement in disaster management activities is important to build people’s resilience (Sharma, 2017). In this study, a greater proportion of respondents in Ragan Norte and Pilig Abajo were very much involved, but a sharp contrast is presented by the respondents in Brgy Quinagabian (Table 9). This finding exposes the need for a continuous communication between the community and the local government to ensure heightened involvement among the residents in resilience – building projects (Sharma, 2017).

Table 9: Households’ level of involvement of respondents in local government-initiated disaster preparedness activities

Trust accorded to local officials

Respondents in Ragan Norte put more trust in their LGU officials than in the other two barangays. Nonetheless, trust is not a problem in the three barangays, although slightly less than half (22 %) in Quinagabian reported to have not much trust in the local officials (Table 10).

Table 10: Households’ level of trust on local government officials

This is a significant finding because people who have high trust in their local officials will likely follow policies and measures during emergency cases such as when they are asked to evacuate their homes because of the threat of severe flooding (Kurata et al, 2022). Similar findings were noted by Seebauer & Babcicky (2018).

Household’s views on community cohesion

Seemingly, the three communities were socially cohesive. Findings show that overall, respondents perceived that people in their respective barangays strongly agreed that their community was willing to help their neighbors, that theirs was a place where people from different areas get on well together, and that they liked meeting and getting to know people from different areas other than their own. Their positive views may indicate their trust in the people from their neighborhood and community and may translate to reliance on their social support in case of emergencies brought about by flooding in their areas. This social cohesiveness is important in building the households’ capacity to cope with the impacts of flooding as the communal spirit drives them to rescue, donate food, and provide other help to their neighbors. However, they differed in their views on the statement that they could have a real say on issues in their communities with respondents saying they neither agree nor disagree. Local officials need to acknowledge the residents’ shyness and encourage them to express their views during meetings (Table 11).

 Table 11: Households’ views on their community cohesion

Test of significant difference in the vulnerability, preparedness and resilience of the respondents in the three flood-prone barangays

Table 12 presents the results of pairwise comparisons of vulnerability, preparedness, financial preparedness, and resilience among respondents from three barangays.

Table 12: Pairwise comparisons of vulnerability, preparedness, and resilience of respondents  across the three barangays

*significant at 5%

For vulnerability, the comparisons between barangays did not reveal any significant differences, as indicated by the p-values, which were all above the 0.05 threshold. This suggests that respondents across the barangays have similar assessment regarding their vulnerability. In terms of preparedness, the comparison between Abajo and Ragan Norte yielded a test statistic of 1.7871 with a p-value of 0.0739, indicating a trend toward significance but insufficient evidence to confirm a meaningful difference. Regarding financial preparedness, significant differences emerged, particularly between Abajo and Ragan Norte, where the test statistic was 6.3358 and the p-value was 0.0000, indicating a significant disparity in financial preparedness levels among respondents from these barangays. Similarly, the comparison between Ragan Norte and Quinagabian also revealed a significant difference, with a test statistic of 6.5575 and a p-value of 0.0000, underscoring the variations in financial preparedness among the barangays. Among the three, respondents from Ragan Norte were the least financially prepared for flooding. Also, notable differences in their resilience were observed, particularly between Abajo and Quinagabian, where the test statistic was 5.6231 and the p-value was 0.0000. This suggests a significant disparity in resilience levels between these two barangays. Comparison between Ragan Norte and Quinagabian also yielded significant results, with a test statistic of 4.9511 and a p-value of 0.0000, indicating further differences in resilience. As noted earlier, resilience is linked with financial preparedness. Among the three barangays, Ragan Norte seemed to be the least resilient.

Actionable risk communication for disaster preparedness and resiliency

The need to prepare for flooding has become clearer than ever. Based on findings about respondents’ limitations in the disaster preparedness which showed financial inadequacy, one of the actionable risk communication interventions designed by the researchers to promote households’ preparedness and resilience for flooding includes a leaflet written in Filipino. This print material encourages the habit of saving for emergency needs.

Fig. 1. Leaflet written in Filipino that was produced to encourage disaster preparedness

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of the study, it is concluded that:

Most of the respondents may be considered vulnerable and ill-prepared for flooding. They lived in a one-storey house that clearly expose them to impacts of severe flooding. Their income is below the poverty threshold level which clearly  impairs their coping capacity for loss of livelihood and property. Inadequate proactive actions, such as  insufficient or lack of savings to cover for emergency needs, and lack of a regular source of income increases their vulnerability to effects of flooding and may likely affect their resilience. They mostly engaged in livelihood activities such as farming and pottery that compromise their vulnerability and resilience to flooding.   In terms of their resilience, it appears that the respondents face challenges in absorbing financial losses should they experience extensive damage due to flooding. Respondents have insufficient income to cover for basic needs. This limitation is compounded by their lack of regular source of income, with most of them depending on their children living in the country for sustenance. However, it is laudable that the respondents have good access to a health care facility and evacuation centers in times of emergency. This will prove useful in case they meet flood-related accidents or when they fall ill and they need immediate health care. The respondents appear to possess social cohesiveness which is important as they can all contribute to rescue, donate food, and provide other help to their neighbours in times of disaster.

In the light of the findings, the following are recommended:

Local government officials must build up the financial preparedness of their constituents to augment their income, thereby contribute to minimizing their vulnerability to the impacts of severe flooding and to enhancing their disaster resilience. Resilience-building activities such as conducting seminars and trainings on financial literacy and livelihood skills capability may be initiated in low-income flood-prone barangays. Extension projects geared towards empowering these communities to engage in other income-generating projects may be conducted by the higher education institutions in this part of Northern Luzon in the Philippines, in collaboration with local government officials in these areas. Also, residents’ participation and involvement in these activities must be encouraged.  Strategies to promote emergency savings among these poor barangays and programs and policies to increase their access to short-term savings opportunities and incentives may be formulated.  Lastly, to further add to the local body of knowledge on disaster preparedness, this study may be conducted in other flood-prone communities in the province.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare the absence of  conflict of interest in the conduct of the study.

REFERENCES

1. Bodas, M, Peleg, K, Stolero N & Adini, B. (2022). Risk perception of natural and human-made disasters—Cross sectional study in eight countries in Europe and beyond. Front. Public Health, 10:825985. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.825985
2. Bollettino, V., Alcayna, T., Enriquez, K. & Vinck, P. (2018). Perceptions of disaster resilience and preparedness in the Philippines. Harvard humanitarian initiative. https://hhi.harvard.edu/publications/perceptions-disaster-resilience-and-preparedness-philippines
3. Combaz, E. (2014). Disaster resilience: Topic guide. Birmingham, UK: GSDRC. https://gsdrc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/GSDRC DR topic guide.pdf
4. Enriquez, Caleda,  M., & Bunao  , D (2018). Capacity  and funding:  Examining  local disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM) gaps, challenges,  and solutions  for high-risk, low-income LGUs. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3192947
5. Lawrence, C. & Anton, C. (2016). Does place attachment predict wildfire mitigation and preparedness? A comparison of wildland-urban interface and rural communities. Environmental Management, 57(1): 148–162. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00267-015-0597-7
6. Lin, B & Lee, C (2022). Conducting community-capacity-based evaluation framework of importance and performance for earthquake disaster management. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1435451/v1
7. Hallegatte,, Vogt-Schilb, A., Rozenberg, J. et al (2020). From poverty to disaster and back: A review of the literature. EconDisCliCha, 4, 223–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41885-020-00060-5
8. Kurata, Y, Prasetyo, Y & Ong, A., Nadlifatan, , Chuenyindee,  T. (2022). Factors affecting perceived effectiveness      of Typhoon Vamco (Ulysses)  flood disaster response among Filipinos  in Luzon, Philippines:  an integration of protection motivation theory and extended theory of planned behavior. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212420921006312
9. Laurien, F & Keating, A. (2019). Evidence from measuring community flood resilience in Asia. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/534666/ewp-595-measuring-community- flood-resilience-asia.pdf
10. Ma, Z, Guo, S., & Deng, X. (2021). Community resilience and resident’s disaster preparedness: evidence from China’s earthquake-stricken areas. Natural Hazards,108(2). DOI: 1007/s11069-021-04695-9
11. Ma, C., Qirui, C. & Lv, Y (2023). “One community at a time”: promoting community resilience in the face of natural hazards and public health challenges. BMC Public Health23, 2510 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-17458-x
12. Mojtahedi and Oo B.  (2012). Stakeholders’ approaches towards natural disasters in built environment: A theoretical framework. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289059222 Stakeholders’ approaches towards natural disasters in built environment A theoretical framework
13. Philippine Statistics Authority (2021). Proportion of poor Filipinos registered at 23.7 percent in the First Semester of 2021. https://psa.gov.ph/poverty-press-releases/nid/165535#:
14. Peng, L., Tan, J., Deng, W., Liu, Y. (2020). Farmers’ participation in community-based disaster management: The role of trust, place attachment and self-efficacy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420920313972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101895
15. Roggayan, D. & Dollete, F.  (2020). Disaster Awareness and Preparedness of Barrio Community in Zambales, Philippines: Creating a Baseline for Curricular Integration and Extension Program. Review Of International Geographical Education, 10 (2). https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1105526. doi: 10.33403/rigeo.634564
16. Seebauer, S. & Babcicky, P. (2018). Trust and the communication of flood risks: comparing the roles of local governments, volunteers in emergency services, and neighbours. J Flood Risk Manag. 11(3): 305–316.doi: 1111/jfr3.12313
17. Santos, G. (2021). 2020ropical cyclones in the Philippines: A review. Tropical Cyclone Research and Review, 10  (3):191-1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcrr.2021.09.003
18. Sharma, S. (2017). Analysis of technology in disaster management in India. International Journal of Recent Scientific Research, 8 (5): 16995-16996. http://recentscientific.com/sites/default/files/7544-A-2017.pdf
19. Weitzel, E., Glaesmer, H., Hinz, A., Zeynalova, S., Henger, S. et al (2022). What builds resilience? Sociodemographic and social correlates in the population-based life-adult-study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15):1-11, DOI: 3390/ijerph19159601