JHRR/
Articles/
2609005157
  • Open Access
  • Article

Understanding Flood Risk Perceptions and Preparedness Gaps among Migrant and Mobile Populations in Chiang Mai, Thailand: Implications for Inclusive Flood Risk Management

  • Ivyne Amukelani Mabaso and 
  • Ayse Yildiz *

Received: 31 March 2026 | Revised: 02 September 2026 | Accepted: 11 September 2026 | Published: 23 October 2026

Abstract

Urban flood risk is increasingly shaped by population mobility, yet disaster preparedness research continues to often assume stable residence, secure housing, and equal access to official warning systems. This study examines flood risk perception and preparedness among migrant and mobile populations in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Using a mixed-methods design combining a multilingual survey (206 responses; 201 with valid mobility-status data), expert interviews (n = 16), and mapping of participant-reported flood locations, it compares hidden populations (undocumented and other precarious residents), international migrants, digital nomads, and tourists/short-term visitors. Findings show that flood risk is widely recognised but preparedness action remains limited. Prior flood experience is highest among hidden populations (76.5%) and international migrants (63.8%), yet only 6.3% of respondents report being very prepared, and 32.5% have taken no preparedness measures. Preparedness is concentrated in low-cost actions, such as saving emergency contacts, while measures requiring financial resources, stable housing, or longer-term planning are far less common. Logistic regression indicates that perceived flood likelihood and institutional trust are positively associated with undertaking at least one preparedness action. However, preparedness still centres on relatively low-cost behaviours, suggesting that while awareness and trust may facilitate initial action, they do not overcome the legal, financial, housing, and informational constraints that limit more substantial forms of preparedness. The paper conceptualises this disconnect as a “feasible preparedness gap”; the distance between recognising risk and possessing the legal, financial, spatial, and informational capacity to act. It advances a Mobility-Aware Protective Action Decision Model that extends existing frameworks by incorporating legal status, housing security, information access, and social networks as key determinants of protective action. The study offers a contextually grounded yet transferable framework for analysing disaster vulnerability in mobility-intensive urban environments and provides practical insights for more inclusive flood risk governance in Southeast Asia and comparable settings.

References 

  • 1.

    UNDRR. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2022: Our World at Risk—Transforming Governance for a Resilient Future. 2022. Available online: https://www.undrr.org/gar2022-our-world-risk (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 2.

    Rentschler, J.; Salhab, M.; Jafino, B.A. Flood exposure and poverty in 188 countries. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 3527. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-30727-4.

  • 3.

    Yang, Z.; Huang, W.; McKenzie, J.E.; et al. Mortality and morbidity risks associated with floods: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ. Res. 2024, 263, 120263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2024.120263.

  • 4.

    Gu, Z.; Phakdimek, S.; Nagami, K.; et al. Relationship Between Urbanization–Induced Land Use Changes and Flood Risk: Case Study in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Water 2025, 17, 327. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17030327.

  • 5.

    Leelawat, N.; Laosunthara, A.; Srivichai, M.; et al. The 2024 Northern Thailand Floods: A Preliminary Disaster Report. J. Disaster Res. 2025, 20, sc20250319. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2025.sc20250319.

  • 6.

    IPCC. Climate Change Widespread, Rapid, and Intensifying. AR6 Working Group I Press Release, 9 August 2021. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/ (accessed on 8 January 2026).

  • 7.

    IPCC. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Summary for Policymakers. 2023. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 8.

    WMO. Climate Change and Extreme Weather Impacts Hit Asia Hard. 2024. Available online: https://wmo.int/news/media-centre/climate-change-and-extreme-weather-impacts-hit-asia-hard (accessed on 27 August 2025).

  • 9.

    World Bank Group; Asian Development Bank. Climate Risk Country Profile: Thailand. 2021. Available online: https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2021-08/15853-WB_Thailand%20Country%20Profile-WEB_0.pdf (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 10.

    Robert, A.; Yildiz, A.; Ceber, K. Governance for Disaster Risk Reduction. In Encyclopedia of Disaster Risk Reduction; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2025; pp. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-4547-0_164-1.

  • 11.

    Dadson, Y.A.; Bennett-Gayle, D.M.; Ramenzoni, V.; et al. Experiences of Immigrants During Disasters in the US: A Systematic Literature Review. J. Immigr. Minor. Health 2025, 27, 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-024-01649-8.

  • 12.

    Guadagno, L.; Fuhrer, M.; Twigg, J. (Eds.) Migrants in Disaster Risk Reduction: Practices for Inclusion; International Organization for Migration, Council of Europe: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017.

  • 13.

    Méndez, M.; Flores-Haro, G.; Zucker, L. The (in)visible victims of disaster: Understanding the vulnerability of undocumented Latino/a and indigenous immigrants. Geoforum 2020, 116, 50–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.07.007.

  • 14.

    Yildiz, A.; Sirmali, G.; Shaw, R.; et al. An Integrated Framework for Flood Risk Management: Addressing Local Challenges and Resilience in Rize, Türkiye. J. Flood Risk Manag. 2026, 19, e70252. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.70252.

  • 15.

    UNDRR. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. 2015. Available online: https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-framework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030 (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 16.

    Yildiz, A.; Shaw, R. Perspectives on future directions of risk-informed education: Lessons from Japan and Türkiye. J. Risk Res. 2024, 27, 613–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2024.2368187.

  • 17.

    Wilson, S.N.; Tiefenbacher, J.P. The barriers impeding precautionary behaviours by undocumented immigrants in emergencies: The Hurricane Ike experience in Houston, Texas, USA. Environ. Hazards 2012, 11, 194–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2011.649711.

  • 18.

    Bubeck, P.; Botzen, W.J.W.; Aerts, J.C.J.H. A review of risk perceptions and other factors that influence flood mitigation behavior. Risk Anal. 2012, 32, 1481–1495. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01783.x.

  • 19.

    Wachinger, G.; Renn, O.; Begg, C.; et al. The risk perception paradox—Implications for governance and communication of natural hazards. Risk Anal. 2013, 33, 1049–1065. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01942.x.

  • 20.

    Lechowska, E. What determines flood risk perception? A review of factors of flood risk perception and relations between its basic elements. Nat. Hazards 2018, 94, 1341–1366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3480-z.

  • 21.

    Lindell, M.K.; Perry, R.W. The protective action decision model: Theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Anal. 2012, 32, 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.x.

  • 22.

    Paton, D. Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: How trust influences its effectiveness. Int. J. Glob. Environ. Issues 2008, 8, 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijgenvi.2008.017256.

  • 23.

    Yildiz, A.; Dickinson, J.; Priego-Hernández, J.; et al. Children’s disaster knowledge, risk perceptions, and preparedness: A cross-country comparison in Nepal and Turkey. Risk Anal. 2023, 43, 747–761. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13960.

  • 24.

    Tierney, K. The Social Roots of Risk: Producing Disasters, Promoting Resilience; Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA, USA, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804791403.

  • 25.

    UN-Habitat. ASEAN Sustainable Urbanisation Report. 2023. Available online: https://unhabitat.org/asean-sustainable-urbanisation-report (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 26.

    Wisner, B.; Blaikie, P.; Cannon, T.; et al. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and Disasters, 2nd ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2004.

  • 27.

    Khai, T.S. Unsafe at Home and Vulnerable Abroad: The Struggle of Forgotten Myanmar Asylum Seekers and Migrants in Thailand Post-Coup D’état. Soc. Sci. 2025, 14, 245. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14040245.

  • 28.

    Suphanchaimat, R.; Putthasri, W.; Prakongsai, P.; et al. Evolution and complexity of government policies to protect the health of undocumented/illegal migrants in Thailand—The unsolved challenges. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 2017, 10, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.2147/rmhp.s130442.

  • 29.

    Cannon, T. Reducing People’s Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: Communities and Resilience; Research Paper No. 2008/34; UNU-WIDER: Helsinki, Finland, 2008. Available online: https://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/reducing-people%E2%80%99s-vulnerability-natural-hazards (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 30.

    Doust Mohammadi, M.M.; Salmani, I.; Farahmandnia, H. Social vulnerabilities among immigrants and refugees in emergencies and disasters: A systematic review. Front. Public Health 2024, 11, 1235464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1235464.

  • 31.

    Poussin, J.K.; Botzen, W.J.W.; Aerts, J.C.J.H. Effectiveness of flood damage mitigation measures: Empirical evidence from French flood disasters. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2015, 31, 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.12.007.

  • 32.

    Grothmann, T.; Reusswig, F. People at Risk of Flooding: Why Some Residents Take Precautionary Action While Others Do Not. Nat. Hazards 2006, 38, 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-005-8604-6.

  • 33.

    Kreibich, H.; Thieken, A.H.; Petrow, T.; et al. Flood loss reduction of private households due to building precautionary measures—Lessons learned from the Elbe flood in August 2002. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2005, 5, 117–126. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-5-117-2005.

  • 34.

    Yildiz, A.; Teeuw, R.; Dickinson, J.; et al. Children’s perceptions of flood risk and preparedness: A study after the May 2018 flooding in Golcuk, Turkey. Prog. Disaster Sci. 2021, 9, 100143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2021.100143.

  • 35.

    Roder, G.; Hudson, P.; Tarolli, P. Flood risk perceptions and the willingness to pay for flood insurance in the Veneto region of Italy. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 37, 101172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101172.

  • 36.

    Yildiz, A.; Dickinson, J.; Priego-Hernández, J.; et al. Effects of disaster education on children’s risk perception and preparedness: A quasi-experimental longitudinal study. Geogr. J. 2024, 190, e12556.

  • 37.

    Alam, E. Landslide Hazard Knowledge, Risk Perception and Preparedness in Southeast Bangladesh. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6305. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166305.

  • 38.

    Alam, E.; Islam, M.K. Enhancing landslide risk reduction strategies in Southeast Bangladesh. Jàmbá J. Disaster Risk Stud. 2023, 15, a1541. https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v15i1.1541.

  • 39.

    Alam, E.; Mallick, B. Climate change perceptions, impacts and adaptation practices of fishers in southeast Bangladesh coast. Int. J. Clim. Chang. Strateg. Manag. 2022, 14, 191–211. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijccsm-02-2021-0019.

  • 40.

    Mamun, A.A.; Roy, S.; Islam, A.R.M.T.; et al. Smallholder Farmers’ Perceived Climate-Related Risk, Impact, and Their Choices of Sustainable Adaptation Strategies. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11922. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111922.

  • 41.

    Bamberg, S.; Masson, T.; Brewitt, K.; et al. Threat, coping and flood prevention—A meta-analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 54, 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.08.001.

  • 42.

    Slovic, P. Perception of Risk. Science 1987, 236, 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507.

  • 43.

    van Valkengoed, A.M.; Steg, L. Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2019, 9, 158–163. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0371-y.

  • 44.

    Cutter, S.L.; Boruff, B.J.; Shirley, W.L. Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards. Soc. Sci. Q. 2003, 84, 242–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6237.8402002.

  • 45.

    Kuhlicke, C.; Seebauer, S.; Hudson, P.; et al. The behavioral turn in flood risk management, its assumptions and potential implications. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 2020, 7, e1418. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1418.

  • 46.

    Loewenstein, G.F.; Weber, E.U.; Hsee, C.K.; et al. Risk as feelings. Psychol. Bull. 2001, 127, 267–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267.

  • 47.

    United Nations Network on Migration in Thailand. Thailand Migration Report 2024. 2024. Available online: https://thailand.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl1371/files/documents/2024-12/thailand-migration-report-2024.pdf (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 48.

    Donner, W.; Rodríguez, H. Population composition, migration, and inequality: The influence of demographic changes on disaster risk and vulnerability. Soc. Forces 2008, 87, 1089–1114. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0143.

  • 49.

    Hall, A. Migrant Workers and Social Protection in ASEAN. J. Popul. Soc. Stud. 2012, 21, 12–38.

  • 50.

    Jiwasiddi, A.; Schlagwein, D.; Cahalane, M.; et al. Digital nomadism as a new part of the visitor economy: The case of the “Digital Nomad Capital” Chiang Mai, Thailand. Inf. Syst. J. 2024, 34, 1493–1535. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12496.

  • 51.

    Reichenberger, I. Digital nomads—A quest for holistic freedom in work and leisure. Ann. Leis. Res. 2018, 21, 364–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/11745398.2017.1358098.

  • 52.

    Richter, S.; Richter, A. Digital Nomads. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2020, 62, 77–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-019-00615-1.

  • 53.

    Woldoff, R.A.; Litchfield, R.C. Digital Nomads: In Search of Meaningful Work in the New Economy; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190931780.001.0001.

  • 54.

    Zhai, Y. The motivations of Chinese digital nomads in moving to Chiang Mai, Thailand. Master’s Thesis, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand, 2024. https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.the.2024.425.

  • 55.

    Piao, M.; Kondo, A.; Qian, H. Factors related to immigrants’ disaster preparedness: A scoping review. Health Emerg. Disaster Nurs. 2025, 12, 44–53. https://doi.org/10.24298/hedn.2023-0008.

  • 56.

    Aikawa, M.; Akiyoshi, K. Examining the Content of Disaster-Related Information Disseminated to a Migrant Population. Int. J. Inf. Divers. Incl. 2024, 8, 36–60.

  • 57.

    Fischer-Preßler, D.; Bonaretti, D.; Bunker, D. Digital transformation in disaster management: A literature review. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2024, 33, 101865.

  • 58.

    van Deursen, A.J.A.M.; Helsper, E.J. The third-level digital divide: Who benefits most from being online? In Communication and Information Technologies Annual; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2015; Volume 10, pp. 29–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/s2050-206020150000010002.

  • 59.

    UNDRR. Disaster Risk Reduction in Thailand: Status Report 2020. 2020. Available online: https://www.undrr.org/media/48642/download?startDownload=20250916 (accessed on 16 September 2025).

  • 60.

    Forino, G.; von Meding, J.; Brewer, G.J. A Conceptual Governance Framework for Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction Integration. Int. J. Disaster Risk Sci. 2015, 6, 372–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-015-0076-z.

  • 61.

    McGahern, U. Cross-border mobilities: Mobility capital and the capital accumulation strategies of Palestinian citizens of Israel. Mobilities 2023, 18, 903–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2022.2161932.

  • 62.

    Sheller, M. Mobility Justice: The Politics of Movement in an Age of Extremes; Verso: London, UK, 2018.

  • 63.

    Tilly, C. Trust Networks in Transnational Migration. Sociol. Forum 2007, 22, 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2006.00002.x.

  • 64.

    Füssel, H.M. Vulnerability: A generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2007, 17, 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.05.002.

  • 65.

    Ryan, L.; Mulholland, J. Trading places: French highly skilled migrants negotiating mobility and emplacement in London. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 2014, 40, 584–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2013.787514.

  • 66.

    Tikul, N. Low income housing adaptation strategies to flood hazard in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Interdiscip. Res. Rev. 2018, 13, 19–26.

  • 67.

    AHA Centre. Thailand, Floods and Landslide in Chiang Mai (AHA-FL-2025-000864-THA). ASEAN Disaster Information Network (ADINet). 2025. Available online: https://adinet.ahacentre.org/report/thailand-floods-and-landslide-in-chiang-mai-20250526 (accessed on 9 October 2026).

  • 68.

    Chiang Mai Flood Crisis Worsens. Bangkok Post, 5 October 2024. Available online: https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2878053/chiang-mai-flood-crisis-worsens (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 69.

    Thailand Law Online. Thai House Registration and Resident Book (Tabien Baan). Available online: https://www.thailandlawonline.com/article-older-archive/thai-house-registration-and-resident-book (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 70.

    OpenStreetMap Contributors. OpenStreetMap Data [Data Set]. 2024. Available online: https://www.openstreetmap.org (accessed on 9 October 2026).

  • 71.

    Ivankova, N.V.; Creswell, J.W.; Stick, S.L. Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods 2006, 18, 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x05282260.

  • 72.

    Heckathorn, D.D. Respondent-Driven Sampling: A New Approach to the Study of Hidden Populations. Soc. Probl. 1997, 44, 174–199. https://doi.org/10.2307/3096941.

  • 73.

    Rogers, R.W. A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change. J. Psychol. 1975, 91, 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803.

  • 74.

    Creswell, J.W.; Plano Clark, V.L. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd ed.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2018.

  • 75.

    Tashakkori, A.; Teddlie, C. SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research, 2nd ed.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.

  • 76.

    Thapa, R.; Pourmarzi, D.; Cherian, S.; et al. Ethical Conduct of Research with Migrants and Refugees: A Systematic Qualitative Review of Ethics Guidelines. J. Immigr. Minor. Health 2026, 28, 702–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-026-01894-z.

  • 77.

    USGS. M7.7 Mandalay, Burma (Myanmar) Earthquake. 2025. Available online: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us7000pn9s (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 78.

    Chowdhury, M.A.; Hasan, M.K.; Hasan, M.R.; et al. Climate change impacts and adaptations on health of Internally Displaced People (IDP): An exploratory study on coastal areas of Bangladesh. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05018.

  • 79.

    Nyam, Y.S.; Modiba, N.T.S.; Ojo, T.O.; et al. Analysis of the perceptions of flood and effect of adoption of adaptation strategies on income of informal settlements of Mamelodi in South Africa. Clim. Serv. 2024, 34, 100468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2024.100468.

  • 80.

    Gaillard, J.C.; Mercer, J. From knowledge to action: Bridging gaps in disaster risk reduction. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2013, 37, 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132512446717.

  • 81.

    GSMA. Early Warning Systems in the Philippines: Building Resilience through Mobile and Digital Technologies. 2022. Available online: https://www.gsma.com/solutions-and-impact/connectivity-for-good/mobile-for-development/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/PhilippinesEWS_R_Web.pdf (accessed on 21 August 2025).

  • 82.

    Vandrevala, T.; Morrow, E.; Coates, T.; et al. Strengthening the relationship between community resilience and health emergency communication: A systematic review. BMC Glob. Public Health 2024, 2, 79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s44263-024-00112-y.

Share this article:
Download PDF
DOI
10.53941/jhrr.2026.100028
Issue
Volume 1, Issue 1
How to Cite
Mabaso, I. A.; Yildiz, A. Understanding Flood Risk Perceptions and Preparedness Gaps among Migrant and Mobile Populations in Chiang Mai, Thailand: Implications for Inclusive Flood Risk Management. Journal of Hazards, Risk and Resilience 2026, 1 (1), 28. https://doi.org/10.53941/jhrr.2026.100028.
RIS
BibTex
Copyright & License
article copyright Image
Copyright (c) 2026 by the authors.