Table 1
Factors affecting evacuation decisions.
| Factor | Decisions on evacuation | Examples of sources |
|---|---|---|
| Socio-economic and demographic characteristics | ||
| Age (older people) | + | Adeola (2008) |
| Education (college level) | + | Medina and Moraca (2016) |
| Livestock ownership | + | Paul (2012) |
| Dependent family member (e.g. having children) | + | Adeola (2008); Medina and Moraca (2016) |
| Membership in NGOs | + | Mondal et al. (2021) |
| Income (poor households) | + | Medina and Moraca (2016) |
| House ownership (own house) | + | Lim et al. (2016) |
| Hazard related factors | ||
| Floodwater depth in house | + | Medina and Moraca (2016) |
| Proximity to water source | + | Lim et al. (2016) |
[i] NGOs – non-governmental organizations.
Fig. 1
Map of the study area.
Table 2
Key characteristic of the surveyed locations, year 2019.
| Category | Purbachhatnai | Gajaghanta | Belka |
|---|---|---|---|
| Area [km2] | 18 | 19 | 21 |
| Total households | 3435 | 7929 | 7608 |
| Location along the Teesta River | Upstream | Midstream | Downstream |
| Infrastructure measures* | Earthen and concrete embankment, spurs were found during the field visit, some areas were exposed to river | Earthen and concrete embankment, embankment reconstruction was going on during the field survey, few areas are exposed to river due to bank erosion | Exposed to Teesta River, no protection embankment was found in the field survey locations |
Table 3
Summary statistics of the selected variables (variables derived from questionnaire dataset, 2019).
| Category name | Variable | Variable description | Mean | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socio-demographic | Age | Age of household head (in years) | 48.93 | 14.15 |
| Education | Highest education within the households (continuous) | 7.31 | 3.90 | |
| Disabled/ill | Household has at least one disabled/chronically ill member(s): yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.37 | 0.48 | |
| Income | Monthly income of household >Tk. 10,001: yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.24 | 0.43 | |
| Livestock | Household has livestock: yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.60 | 0.49 | |
| Affiliation | Household is affiliated with NGOs: yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.19 | 0.40 | |
| Hazard related factors | Flooding experience | Maximum height of floodwater inside the house in 2017 flood (in feet) | 6.58 | 4.43 |
| Distance | House is located within 1000 m from the riverbank: yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.85 | 0.36 | |
| Early warning message | Warning | Household received last flood (in 2017) disaster warning: yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.82 | 0.39 |
| Regional variables | Purbachhatnai | Household lived in Purbachhatnai: yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.18 | 0.39 |
| Belka | Household lived in Belka: yes = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.40 | 0.49 |
[i] Note: 1 US Dollar equal 84.25 BDT (Source: Bangladesh Bank, April 2019); BDT – Bangladeshi Taka; NGOs – non-governmental organizations; SD – standard deviation.
Table 4
Selected socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the surveyed households, n = 377, year 2019.
| Socio-demographic profile | Percentage [%] |
|---|---|
| Age of household head (in years) | |
| <30 | 7.7 |
| 30–50 | 45.9 |
| >50 | 46.4 |
| Sex of household head | |
| Male | 94.7 |
| Female | 5.3 |
| Highest education within household | |
| No formal education | 9.0 |
| 1–5 | 24.9 |
| 6–10 | 52.3 |
| >10 | 13.8 |
| Average income of the household (in BDT per month) | |
| <6000 | 33.4 |
| 6001–10,000 | 42.7 |
| >10,001 | 23.9 |
| Occupation of household head | |
| Agriculture | 63.1 |
| Wage labour | 22.8 |
| Business | 6.6 |
| Service | 1.9 |
| Others | 5.6 |
| Construction material of the house | |
| Thatched house | 6.4 |
| Corrugated iron (CoI) | 76.9 |
| Thatches with CoI sheet | 10.3 |
| Semi wall | 6.4 |
| Ownership of agricultural lands (in acres) | |
| Without agricultural land | 48.0 |
| 0.04–0.20 acres | 7.4 |
| 0.21–1 acres | 34.0 |
| >1.01 acres | 10.6 |
| Ownership of land where the house is located | |
| Own land | 68.3 |
| Relative land | 22.7 |
| Government (Khas) land | 2.5 |
| Rented land | 6.4 |
Fig. 2
Evacuation centres (multiple responses considered) reported by the households (n = 377, year 2019).
Table 5
Logistic regression results for factors associated with evacuation behaviour (1 = evacuated; 0 = not evacuated, n = 377, year 2019).
| Variables | B | SE | Exp(B) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | −0.034*** | 0.009 | 0.967 |
| Education | −0.084* | 0.033 | 0.919 |
| Disabled/ill | −0.774** | 0.267 | 2.168 |
| Income | −0.753* | 0.309 | 0.471 |
| Livestock | −0.213 | 0.251 | 0.808 |
| Affiliation | −0.061 | 0.314 | 0.941 |
| Flooding experience | −0.074* | 0.035 | 1.077 |
| Distance | −0.178 | 0.342 | 1.194 |
| Warning | −1.270*** | 0.326 | 0.281 |
| Purbachhatnai | −1.400*** | 0.363 | 0.247 |
| Belka | −1.548*** | 0.345 | 0.213 |
| Constant | −3.050*** | 0.772 | 21.119 |