The Politics of Disaster Prevention

Despite the importance of effective disaster policy, governments typically fail to produce it. The main explanation offered by political scientists is that voters strongly support postdisaster relief but not policies that seek to prevent or prepare for disaster. This study challenges that view. We develop novel measures of preferences for disaster prevention and postdisaster relief. We find strong support for prevention policies and candidates who pursue them, even among the subgroups that are the most opposed. Support for prevention has the hallmarks of “real” attitudes: consistency across wordings and response formats, including open-ended probes; steadfastness in the face of arguments; and willingness to make trade-offs against disaster relief, increased taxes, and reduced spending on other programs. Neither cognitive biases for the here and now nor partisan polarization prevent robust majority support for disaster prevention. We validate these survey findings with election results, which suggest voters act on these preferences.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Politics
Published
2024-12-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1086/734257
Primary Topic
Climate Change Communication and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Politics of Disaster Prevention

Tali Mendelberg, Martin Gilens, Nicholas Short
The Journal of Politics
Climate Change Communication and Perception
article

The Politics of Disaster Prevention

Tali Mendelberg, Martin Gilens, Nicholas Short
article en

Abstract

Despite the importance of effective disaster policy, governments typically fail to produce it. The main explanation offered by political scientists is that voters strongly support postdisaster relief but not policies that seek to prevent or prepare for disaster. This study challenges that view. We develop novel measures of preferences for disaster prevention and postdisaster relief. We find strong support for prevention policies and candidates who pursue them, even among the subgroups that are the most opposed. Support for prevention has the hallmarks of “real” attitudes: consistency across wordings and response formats, including open-ended probes; steadfastness in the face of arguments; and willingness to make trade-offs against disaster relief, increased taxes, and reduced spending on other programs. Neither cognitive biases for the here and now nor partisan polarization prevent robust majority support for disaster prevention. We validate these survey findings with election results, which suggest voters act on these preferences.

The Journal of PoliticsVol. 88(2)
Georgia Institute of Technology (US), University of California, Los Angeles (US), Princeton University (US)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Climate Change Communication and Perception
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The Politics of Disaster Prevention — Tali Mendelberg, Martin Gilens, et al. · The Journal of Politics (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS