Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract The purpose of this study certain how prepared the residents for liquefaction catastrophes. Utilizing survey techniques, this form of research is quantitative. Analyzing quantitative data is analysis minimum age of 17 years served as the study’s subjects. The outcomes demonstrated that there were differences in the community’s readiness attitudes with regard to two types of statements, which were positive and negative statements separated into five disaster preparedness indicators. The emergency response plan received a value of 68.26% for the knowledge and attitude indicators. A value of 75.14% was obtained for the emergency response plan indicator, a value of 79.86% for the early warning system indicator, a value of 56.32% for the auxiliary resource indicator, and a value of 74.28% for the social capital. According to the Likert scale interval, four out of the five indicators are in the “good” range. This is due to the fact that in the four indicators—knowledge and attitudes, emergency response plans, early warning systems, and social capital—community preparedness attitudes are consistent with the form of statements from the four indicators and are strengthened by the explanations.
Novarita et al. (Fri,) studied this question.