A general set of questions about prior experience and state of readiness for natural hazards was asked (Tables A5.1-5.2).

5.1 Interpretation of prior experience

In the high impact area of Coromandel, 20 % of respondents had experienced a previous flood event and 19 % two or more events (Table A5.1). This was significantly higher than in the other areas; the next highest was South Waikato, where only 9 % of the respondents had experienced one or more floods.

Table A5.1: Number of times your household has experienced flooding above floor level in this home while living at this address, including basements but excluding outhouses and garages.

All n=439 %
One 11.4
Two 5.2
Three 2.5
Four 1.6
Five 0.5
More than five times 0.7
South Waikato n=107 %
One 6.5
Two 0
Three 0.9
Four 0.9
Five 0
More than five times 0
Coromandel low n=47 %
One 2.1
Two 6.4
Three 6.4
Four 2.1
Five 0
More than five times 0
Coromandel bach n=72 %
One 0
Two 4.2
Three 0
Four 0
Five 0
More than five times 0
Coromandel high n=206 %
One 20.4
Two 8.3
Three 3.4
Four 2.4
Five 1.0
More than five times 1.5

Table A5.2:Worst (i.e. the biggest impact) flooding household has experienced at this property was the weather bomb

% All n=345 South Waikato n= 87 Coromandel Low n=33 Coromandel Bach n=34 Coromandel High n=186
Worst flood 73.6 80.5 51.5 38.2 80.6

5.2 Risk perceptions

In their model of hazard preparedness Paton et al. (2001) identified two important precursors of readiness-risk perceptions and hazard cognitions (the extent to which people discuss and think about hazards). Table A5.3 describes the extent to which people perceive the hazard as posing a specific threat to them or to their daily activities. In regard to risk perception, the results indicate low to moderate levels of perceived potential threat from flood hazards. With regard to hazard cognitions, Table A5.3 also indicates low to moderate levels of thought and discussion about flood hazards.

Table A5.3: Level of concern of respondent about the risk of floods

All n mean* s.d.
I think about floods 401 2.80 1.37
I talk about floods 379 2.64 1.30
I get information on floods 350 2.23 1.29
I think a flood could pose a threat to my personal safety 368 2.21 1.41
I think a flood could pose a threat to my daily activities (e.g. work, leisure, property) 383 3.04 1.49

*Scale from 1='Not at all' to 5='A great deal'

South Waikato n mean* s.d.
I think about floods 94 2.31 1.32
I talk about floods 89 2.11 1.19
I get information on floods 84 1.58 0.95
I think a flood could pose a threat to my personal safety 88 2.01 1.32
I think a flood could pose a threat to my daily activities (e.g. work, leisure, property) 94 2.78 1.44
Coromandel Low n mean* s.d.
I think about floods 45 2.71 1.34
I talk about floods 42 2.50 1.94
I get information on floods 40 2.35 1.19
I think a flood could pose a threat to my personal safety 41 2.12 1.31
I think a flood could pose a threat to my daily activities (e.g. work, leisure, property) 41 3.22 1.51
Coromandel Bach n mean* s.d.
I think about floods 65 2.00 0.95
I talk about floods 57 1.96 0.84
I get information on floods 54 1.57 0.92
I think a flood could pose a threat to my personal safety 56 1.79 1.06
I think a flood could pose a threat to my daily activities (e.g. work, leisure, property) 58 2.19 1.18
Coromandel High n mean* s.d.
I think about floods 190 3.33 1.32
I talk about floods 184 3.16 1.28
I get information on floods 165 2.78 1.33
I think a flood could pose a threat to my personal safety 176 2.46 1.53
I think a flood could pose a threat to my daily activities (e.g. work, leisure, property) 183 3.41 1.48

Table A5.4: Respondent has seen any flood hazard maps for their community

% All n=430 South Waikato n=107 Coromandel Low n=43 Coromandel Bach n=69 Coromandel High n=203
Yes 44.9 9.5 26.1 8.7 80.3
Not sure 5.8 8.6 2.2 8.7 3.9
No 49.3 81.9 71.7 82.6 15.8

5.3 Perceived readiness

Another important facet of readiness is the extent to which people perceive themselves, and others, as being prepared. Analysis of perception can identify behavior and attitudes that may be counterintuitive or contrary to the goals of education initiatives. Understanding perceptions allows us to assess how people are likely to receive hazard information and use it to put readiness measures in place, and how they will respond to warnings. The data in Table A5.5 reveal that Coromandel high and low impact respondents tended to rate their own individual readiness as being greater than that of their community as a whole and, most interestingly, also greater than that of the central and local government. For South Waikato and Coromandel bach owners this was the opposite-the readiness of the central and local government was perceived as being higher than that of the respondent.

Table A5-5: Level the respondent believes the following groups are prepared for future floods affecting their community

All Don't know (%) Of those who didn't answer 'Don't know'
n mean* s.d.
Your household 2.7 398 2.02 0.85
Your community 14.4 340 2.32 0.76
Central government Ministries (Civil Defence and Emergency Management, Health, Social Development etc.) 17.4 317 2.29 0.88
Regional Council (Environment Waikato) including regional civil defence 18.4 323 2.38 0.91
District council (Thames/Coromandel) including district Civil Defence 16.9 325 2.33 0.90
Lifeline service providers (roading, electricity, telecommunications etc.) 21.0 309 2.28 0.88
*Scale from 1='Very prepared' to 4='Not at all prepared'
South Waikato Don't know (%) Of those who didn't answer 'Don't know'
n mean* s.d.
Your household 4.0 95 2.29 0.77
Your community 17.7 79 2.47 0.66
Central government Ministries (Civil Defence and Emergency Management, Health, Social Development etc.) 22.1 74 2.16 0.84
Regional Council (Environment Waikato) including regional civil defence 17.5 80 2.21 0.90
District council (Thames/Coromandel) including district Civil Defence 25.9 63 2.05 0.85
Lifeline service providers (roading, electricity, telecommunications etc.) 22.4 76 2.24 0.80
Coromandel Low Don't know (%) Of those who didn't answer 'Don't know'
n mean* s.d.
Your household 0 40 1.98 0.77
Your community 4.9 39 2.18 0.68
Central government Ministries (Civil Defence and Emergency Management, Health, Social Development etc.) 16.7 35 2.23 0.77
Regional Council (Environment Waikato) including regional civil defence 25.6 32 2.56 0.95
District council (Thames/Coromandel) including district Civil Defence 11.6 38 2.37 0.91
Lifeline service providers (roading, electricity, telecommunications etc.) 14.0 37 2.32 0.94
Coromandel Bach Don't know (%) Of those who didn't answer 'Don't know'
n mean* s.d.
Your household 9.5 57 2.58 0.98
Your community 33.3 40 2.62 0.87
Central government Ministries (Civil Defence and Emergency Management, Health, Social Development etc.) 30.5 41 2.24 0.86
Regional Council (Environment Waikato) including regional civil defence 36.1 39 2.21 0.77
District council (Thames/Coromandel) including district Civil Defence 34.9 41 2.27 0.78
Lifeline service providers (roading, electricity, telecommunications etc.) 33.9 39 2.05 0.72
Coromandel High Don't know (%) Of those who didn't answer 'Don't know'
n mean* s.d.
Your household 0.5 199 1.72 0.73
Your community 8.2 178 2.23 0.76
Central government Ministries (Civil Defence and Emergency Management, Health, Social Development etc.) 11.0 162 2.36 0.92
Regional Council (Environment Waikato) including regional civil defence 11.6 167 2.46 0.92
District council (Thames/Coromandel) including district Civil Defence 8.2 178 2.44 0.92
Lifeline service providers (roading, electricity, telecommunications etc.) 17.7 153 2.34 0.93

Table A5.6: Members of household have ever done

All n=439 %
Been a member of a local community group related to flooding 13.9
Written letters to relevant authorities about flooding 15.7
Attended meetings related to flooding 41.2
None of these 44.0
South Waikato n=107 %
Been a member of a local community group related to flooding 3.7
Written letters to relevant authorities about flooding 15.0
Attended meetings related to flooding 14.0
None of these 69.2
Coromandel low n=47 %
Been a member of a local community group related to flooding 17.0
Written letters to relevant authorities about flooding 12.8
Attended meetings related to flooding 14.9
None of these 55.3
Coromandel bach =72 %
Been a member of a local community group related to flooding 2.8
Written letters to relevant authorities about flooding 0
Attended meetings related to flooding 9.7
None of these 72.2
Coromandel high n=206 %
Been a member of a local community group related to flooding 22.3
Written letters to relevant authorities about flooding 22.8
Attended meetings related to flooding 72.8
None of these 18.0

5.4 Searching for information

The data in Table A5.7 indicate that in the high impact Coromandel area, people had high levels of intention to seek information on flood risk and reduction activities, and to become involved with others to explore reduction options. Conversely, the levels of these intentions are low in all the other areas.

Table A5.7: As a result of this weather bomb event the respondent intends to

All (%) n No Possibly Definitely
Seek information on flood risk to their community 390 29.5 36.7 33.8
Seek information on things to do to prepare for a possible flood 384 25.8 43.2 31.0
Become involved with a local group to discuss how to reduce flood risk to their community 382 43.7 33.0 23.3
Increase their level of insurance 365 80.0 14.5 5.5
Raise the floor level of their house 365 95.3 1.6 3.0
South Waikato (%) n No Possibly Definitely
Seek information on flood risk to their community 99 42.4 42.4 15.2
Seek information on things to do to prepare for a possible flood 96 35.4 45.8 18.8
Become involved with a local group to discuss how to reduce flood risk to their community 93 60.2 29.0 10.8
Increase their level of insurance 97 75.3 18.6 6.2
Raise the floor level of their house 95 96.8 2.1 1.1
Coromandel Low (%) n No Possibly Definitely
Seek information on flood risk to their community 41 48.8 41.5 9.8
Seek information on things to do to prepare for a possible flood 41 41.5 46.3 12.2
Become involved with a local group to discuss how to reduce flood risk to their community 39 61.5 35.9 2.6
Increase their level of insurance 39 79.5 15.4 5.1
Raise the floor level of their house 38 94.7 2.6 2.6
Coromandel Bach (%) n No Possibly Definitely
Seek information on flood risk to their community 62 46.8 46.8 6.5
Seek information on things to do to prepare for a possible flood 62 38.7 51.6 9.7
Become involved with a local group to discuss how to reduce flood risk to their community 60 76.7 21.7 1.7
Increase their level of insurance 60 85.0 13.3 1.7
Raise the floor level of their house 59 98.3 0 1.7
Coromandel High (%) n No Possibly Definitely
Seek information on flood risk to their community 181 12.2 27.6 60.2
Seek information on things to do to prepare for a possible flood 179 12.3 38.0 49.7
Become involved with a local group to discuss how to reduce flood risk to their community 184 20.7 38.0 41.3
Increase their level of insurance 163 81.0 12.3 6.7
Raise the floor level of their house 167 93.4 1.8 4.8

5.5 Insurance

Tables A5.8 and A5.9 explore issues relating to insurance. Generally there was a very high level of insurance coverage reported (over 90 %) in all areas. Over 95 % of all respondents with insurance claims reported that their insurance companies have settled in a fair way. Around a third of high impact Coromandel residents reported that their insurance premiums had gone up (the level of the rise was not requested in the questionnaire) and 20 % claim to have had 'difficulty' getting insurance cover since the event. These figures are significantly higher than in the other areas, but the other areas still reported a significant level of increased premiums (18-20 % of respondents in non-high impact areas reported premium increases). The reported portion of respondents who found it difficult to get insurance cover since the event was very low in non-high impact areas (2-3 %). Given these indications of premium rises and 'difficulty' with insurance cover, further work to quantify and better describe these changes would be worthwhile.

Insured versus uninsured losses, and the impact of these losses on the local and regional economy are discussed in more detail in Section 3.

Table A5.8: Which of the following the respondent personally has and pays for themselves/jointly

All (%) n Yes No Don't know
House Insurance 422 92.9 6.2 0.9
Contents Insurance 422 91.9 7.3 0.7
South Waikato (%) n Yes No Don't know
House Insurance 104 89.4 9.6 1.0
Contents Insurance 105 90.5 8.6 1.0
Coromandel Low (%) n Yes No Don't know
House Insurance 42 95.5 2.3 2.3
Contents Insurance 39 90.7 7.0 2.3
Coromandel Bach (%) n Yes No Don't know
House Insurance 67 98.5 1.5 0
Contents Insurance 67 97.0 3.0 0
Coromandel High (%) n Yes No Don't know
House Insurance 200 92.0 7.0 1.1
Contents Insurance 200 91.5 8.0 0.5

Table A5.9: The respondent's insurance situation

All (%) n Does not apply Yes No
My insurance company has settled my claim in a fair way 356 57.6 38.5 3.9
My insurance rates have gone up since the event 334 38.3 28.1 33.5
I have found it difficult to get insurance cover since the event 314 47.8 10.8 41.4
I cannot afford insurance cover 293 53.9 9.9 36.2
South Waikato (%) n Does not apply Yes No
My insurance company has settled my claim in a fair way 87 72.4 21.8 5.7
My insurance rates have gone up since the event 81 50.6 19.8 29.6
I have found it difficult to get insurance cover since the event 75 58.7 2.7 38.7
I cannot afford insurance cover 75 52.0 14.7 33.3
Coromandel Low (%) n Does not apply Yes No
My insurance company has settled my claim in a fair way 37 73.0 21.6 5.4
My insurance rates have gone up since the event 37 48.6 18.9 32.4
I have found it difficult to get insurance cover since the event 33 60.6 3.0 36.4
I cannot afford insurance cover 33 57.6 3.0 39.4
Coromandel Bach (%) n Does not apply Yes No
My insurance company has settled my claim in a fair way 48 89.6 6.3 4.2
My insurance rates have gone up since the event 49 57.1 18.4 24.5
I have found it difficult to get insurance cover since the event 49 65.3 2.0 32.7
I cannot afford insurance cover 46 71.7 0 28.3
Coromandel High (%) n Does not apply Yes No
My insurance company has settled my claim in a fair way 178 37.1 60.1 2.8
My insurance rates have gone up since the event 161 23.6 36.6 39.8
I have found it difficult to get insurance cover since the event 152 32.9 19.7 47.4
I cannot afford insurance cover 134 46.3 12.7 41.0

Table A5.10: Volunteer organisations the respondent is involved in

%) All n=439 South Waikato n=107 Coromandel Low n=47 Coromandel Bach n=72 Coromandel High n=206
Neighbourhood watch 30.5 19.6 23.4 20.8 41.3
Friends of the River 0.9 0 0 0 1.5
Volunteer fire brigade 3.9 2.8 8.5 4.2 3.4
Lions 3.2 6.5 6.4 1.4 1.5
Rotary 1.4 0.9 4.3 4.2 0
Other 18.0 19.6 25.5 6.9 19.1
None 46.2 57.0 40.4 58.3 36.9

5.6 Perceived responsibility

Misunderstandings in regard to perceived responsibility are also evident in Table A5.11, which indicates that respondents perceived the District Council and the Regional Council as being more responsible than themselves for their protection. Further work is required to assess the basis for this perception (e.g., the extent to which respondents differentiate structural mitigation from the need for them to deal with immediate personal consequences). Although this correlates with legislative roles and responsibilities for flood management for local government, it shows that the communities do not accept high levels of responsibility for protecting themselves and instead look to others to provide protection.

Table A5.11: Who's responsibility the respondent thinks it is to protect them from floods

All n mean* s.d.
Central government 355 3.42 1.31
Regional Council 381 3.98 1.09
District Council 401 4.17 1.04
Individual households 346 3.51 1.24
There is no use preparing as we can't do much anyway 271 2.28 1.35
*Scale from 1='Not at all' to 5='A great deal'
South Waikato n mean* s.d.
Central government 76 3.30 1.22
Regional Council 89 3.89 1.06
District Council 95 4.20 1.04
Individual households 80 3.44 1.18
There is no use preparing as we can't do much anyway 61 2.30 1.33
Coromandel Low n mean* s.d.
Central government 42 3.36 1.46
Regional Council 44 3.93 1.25
District Council 44 4.11 1.67
Individual households 41 3.68 1.33
There is no use preparing as we can't do much anyway 36 2.19 1.58
Coromandel Bach n mean* s.d.
Central government 55 2.75 1.31
Regional Council 58 3.84 1.06
District Council 62 3.92 1.09
Individual households 56 3.61 1.09
There is no use preparing as we can't do much anyway 41 2.02 1.35
Coromandel High n mean* s.d.
Central government 176 3.67 1.23
Regional Council 184 4.07 1.07
District Council 193 4.24 1.00
Individual households 163 3.44 1.30
There is no use preparing as we can't do much anyway 129 2.39 1.30

5.7 Sense of community

Communities with a high level of social involvement are likely to have a higher level of readiness (Mileti 1999). Feelings of belonging and attachment for people and places encourage involvement in community mitigation (Bishop et al. 2000). However, this process may be linked more closely to the sense of shared fate that exists within a given vulnerable area. Levels of sense of community were reported at moderate to high levels (Table A5.12). The highest level being in the Coromandel high and low impacts areas, followed by South Waikato and finally by Coromandel bach owners with a moderate level of sense of community.

Table A5.12: How the respondent feels about living in their community

All n mean* s.d.
I feel 'at home' in this community 413 4.07 1.03
I am satisfied living in this community 409 4.01 1.04
I am a useful member of this community 390 3.34 1.26
I have the same values and beliefs as my neighbours 389 3.38 1.19
I feel I don't belong in this community 370 1.36 0.25
I am interested in knowing what goes on in this community 401 3.87 1.09
I would be happy to leave this community 371 1.71 1.15
I know my neighbours and/or other community members 408 3.96 1.11
I have no active involvement in this community 382 2.03 1.17
*Scale from 1=Doesn't apply' to 5='Applies strongly'
South Waikato n mean* s.d.
I feel 'at home' in this community 104 3.89 1.02
I am satisfied living in this community 100 3.88 1.00
I am a useful member of this community 98 3.51 1.51
I have the same values and beliefs as my neighbours 99 3.28 1.18
I feel I don't belong in this community 90 1.43 0.93
I am interested in knowing what goes on in this community 101 3.76 1.13
I would be happy to leave this community 91 2.00 1.27
I know my neighbours and/or other community members 101 3.90 1.07
I have no active involvement in this community 94 1.96 1.12
Coromandel Low n mean* s.d.
I feel 'at home' in this community 45 4.31 0.82
I am satisfied living in this community 45 4.22 0.85
I am a useful member of this community 44 3.77 1.03
I have the same values and beliefs as my neighbours 45 3.49 1.10
I feel I don't belong in this community 44 1.25 0.75
I am interested in knowing what goes on in this community 44 4.09 0.94
I would be happy to leave this community 44 1.70 1.05
I know my neighbours and/or other community members 45 4.02 1.12
I have no active involvement in this community 43 1.98 1.26
Coromandel Bach n mean* s.d.
I feel 'at home' in this community 61 3.34 1.25
I am satisfied living in this community 59 3.31 1.28
I am a useful member of this community 54 2.33 1.29
I have the same values and beliefs as my neighbours 55 2.89 1.24
I feel I don't belong in this community 56 1.46 0.83
I am interested in knowing what goes on in this community 59 3.46 1.16
I would be happy to leave this community 56 1.59 1.08
I know my neighbours and/or other community members 60 3.50 1.30
I have no active involvement in this community 60 2.07 1.29
Coromandel High n mean* s.d.
I feel 'at home' in this community 196 4.33 0.86
I am satisfied living in this community 199 4.23 0.91
I am a useful member of this community 188 3.46 1.22
I have the same values and beliefs as my neighbours 185 3.56 1.17
I feel I don't belong in this community 174 1.33 0.80
I am interested in knowing what goes on in this community 191 4.00 1.04
I would be happy to leave this community 174 1.61 1.05
I know my neighbours and/or other community members 196 4.12 1.04
I have no active involvement in this community 179 2.07 1.13

5.8 Self-efficacy

Another key determinant of intention formation is people's judgment regarding their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to achieve objectives or to act in specific ways (self-efficacy). The data in Table A5.13 indicates moderate levels of self-efficacy in all response areas.

Table A5.13: What the respondent thinks about life in their community

All n mean* s.d.
I feel I have control over the things that happen in my life and in the community 381 3.21 1.12
There is no way I can solve some of the problems I have by myself 376 2.86 1.31
I can't do much to change what happens in my life or in the community 377 2.54 1.17
Somehow problems in my life usually solve themselves 359 2.62 1.17
*Scale from 1='Disagree strongly' to 5='Agree strongly'
South Waikato n mean* s.d.
I feel I have control over the things that happen in my life and in the community 95 3.14 1.06
There is no way I can solve some of the problems I have by myself 97 2.75 1.18
I can't do much to change what happens in my life or in the community 93 2.44 1.11
Somehow problems in my life usually solve themselves 92 2.79 1.09
Coromandel Low n mean* s.d.
I feel I have control over the things that happen in my life and in the community 42 3.24 1.12
There is no way I can solve some of the problems I have by myself 43 2.60 1.24
I can't do much to change what happens in my life or in the community 43 2.58 1.16
Somehow problems in my life usually solve themselves 42 2.71 1.18
Coromandel Bach n mean* s.d.
I feel I have control over the things that happen in my life and in the community 54 3.20 1.20
There is no way I can solve some of the problems I have by myself 52 2.69 1.26
I can't do much to change what happens in my life or in the community 55 2.53 1.30
Somehow problems in my life usually solve themselves 54 2.52 1.13
Coromandel High n mean* s.d.
I feel I have control over the things that happen in my life and in the community 183 3.22 1.13
There is no way I can solve some of the problems I have by myself 179 3.01 1.38
I can't do much to change what happens in my life or in the community 180 2.57 1.17
Somehow problems in my life usually solve themselves 166 2.52 1.23

5.9 Response efficacy

A moderating factor is respondents' perceptions of the physical, time and collaborative resources they have at their disposal (response efficacy). Mileti (1999) discusses the relationship between socio-economic factors and levels of readiness, with households with higher social economic status and non-minorities being better prepared than others. Given the mixed socio-economic status of the respondents in this study, we could expect relatively mixed levels of response efficacy. Table A5.14 indicates only moderate constraints for all items and indicates that these factors will exercise a moderate constraint on readiness and preparation. The slightly elevated standard deviation (s.d. generally 1.2 to 1.5) of responses in Table A5.14 relative to other qualitative responses in Tables A5.11 through A5.13 (s.d. generally 0.8 to 1.2) highlights the highly mixed response to this question.

Table A5.14: Extent to which the following might each prevent the respondent from preparing for floods

All n mean* s.d.
Cost 369 3.41 1.46
Skill required to prepare 353 2.64 1.33
Other things to think about instead 338 2.19 1.22
Need for co-operation with others 362 2.99 1.45
*Scale from 1='Not at all' to 5='A great deal'
South Waikato n mean* s.d.
Cost 92 3.52 1.37
Skill required to prepare 86 2.88 1.30
Other things to think about instead 80 2.38 1.25
Need for co-operation with others 83 2.87 1.36
Coromandel Low n mean* s.d.
Cost 42 3.12 1.47
Skill required to prepare 42 2.29 1.29
Other things to think about instead 42 2.24 1.25
Need for co-operation with others 42 2.60 1.47
Coromandel Bach n mean* s.d.
Cost 50 2.62 1.37
Skill required to prepare 52 2.44 1.21
Other things to think about instead 50 2.64 1.27
Need for co-operation with others 48 2.96 1.29
Coromandel High n mean* s.d.
Cost 179 3.65 1.45
Skill required to prepare 166 2.66 1.37
Other things to think about instead 160 1.94 1.13
Need for co-operation with others 160 3.14 1.52

5.10 Outcome expectancy

In the model outlined above, the principal determinant of readiness was the respondent's outcome expectancy. Table A5.15 describes the level of outcome expectancy in the sample. These data indicate moderate levels of positive outcome expectancy in regard to the likely outcome or value of individual efforts to reduce risk. The level of expectation that a damaging flood is something that could occur in the future is high in all areas and the expectancy that they are too destructive to bother preparing for is low in all areas.

Table A5.15: Extent to which the respondent thinks that:

All n mean* s.d.
Floods are too destructive to bother preparing for 367 1.97 1.23
A flood is unlikely to occur during their lifetime 372 2.35 1.51
It is unnecessary to prepare for floods as assistance will be provided by the Council and/or the emergency services 372 1.84 1.20
A damaging flood is something that could occur in the future 396 4.17 1.10
*Scale from 1='Not at all' to 5='A great deal'
South Waikato n mean* s.d.
Floods are too destructive to bother preparing for 86 2.17 1.32
A flood is unlikely to occur during their lifetime 90 2.59 1.41
It is unnecessary to prepare for floods as assistance will be provided by the Council and/or the emergency services 90 2.03 1.24
A damaging flood is something that could occur in the future 92 4.03 1.05
Coromandel Low n mean* s.d.
Floods are too destructive to bother preparing for 43 1.58 1.03
A flood is unlikely to occur during their lifetime 44 2.20 1.61
It is unnecessary to prepare for floods as assistance will be provided by the Council and/or the emergency services 44 1.64 1.10
A damaging flood is something that could occur in the future 44 4.32 1.14
Coromandel Bach n mean* s.d.
Floods are too destructive to bother preparing for 57 1.79 1.00
A flood is unlikely to occur during their lifetime 58 2.47 1.57
It is unnecessary to prepare for floods as assistance will be provided by the Council and/or the emergency services 57 1.82 0.98
A damaging flood is something that could occur in the future 57 3.68 1.27
Coromandel High n mean* s.d.
Floods are too destructive to bother preparing for 175 2.01 1.28
A flood is unlikely to occur during their lifetime 174 2.23 1.53
It is unnecessary to prepare for floods as assistance will be provided by the Council and/or the emergency services 175 1.80 1.26
A damaging flood is something that could occur in the future 196 4.36 1.00