Well-being Effects of Natural Disasters: Evidence from China's Wenchuan Earthquake.

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Zou Wang, Fei Wang
{"title":"Well-being Effects of Natural Disasters: Evidence from China's Wenchuan Earthquake.","authors":"Zou Wang,&nbsp;Fei Wang","doi":"10.1007/s10902-022-00609-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study finds that the Wenchuan earthquake in 2008, one of China's most catastrophic earthquakes, substantially decreased victims' subjective well-being even after incorporating the offsetting effects of post-disaster relief programs. This net well-being impact lasted for nearly 10 years and was on average equivalent to a loss of 67% of the average equivalized household income. Although the post-disaster measures largely restored income, health, and employment, they failed to prevent well-being losses due to family dissolution, as reflected in the higher rates of divorce and widowhood after the earthquake. We find that rural populations, older adults, the less educated, and residents without social insurance were more vulnerable to the earthquake shock. This study uses six waves of a nationally representative dataset of China and a difference-in-differences approach to identify the short- and long-term causal well-being effects of the Wenchuan earthquake. Deeper analyses on mechanisms and heterogeneity suggest that post-disaster policies should focus more on aspects beyond economic factors and on the well-being of disadvantaged populations in particular.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10902-022-00609-z.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"24 2","pages":"563-587"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9741708/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-022-00609-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This study finds that the Wenchuan earthquake in 2008, one of China's most catastrophic earthquakes, substantially decreased victims' subjective well-being even after incorporating the offsetting effects of post-disaster relief programs. This net well-being impact lasted for nearly 10 years and was on average equivalent to a loss of 67% of the average equivalized household income. Although the post-disaster measures largely restored income, health, and employment, they failed to prevent well-being losses due to family dissolution, as reflected in the higher rates of divorce and widowhood after the earthquake. We find that rural populations, older adults, the less educated, and residents without social insurance were more vulnerable to the earthquake shock. This study uses six waves of a nationally representative dataset of China and a difference-in-differences approach to identify the short- and long-term causal well-being effects of the Wenchuan earthquake. Deeper analyses on mechanisms and heterogeneity suggest that post-disaster policies should focus more on aspects beyond economic factors and on the well-being of disadvantaged populations in particular.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10902-022-00609-z.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

自然灾害的幸福感效应:来自中国汶川地震的证据。
本研究发现,2008年汶川地震是中国最具灾难性的地震之一,即使在纳入灾后救援计划的抵消效应后,受害者的主观幸福感也大幅下降。这种对幸福感的净影响持续了近10年,平均相当于平均等效家庭收入的67%。虽然灾后措施在很大程度上恢复了收入、健康和就业,但它们未能防止因家庭解体而造成的福祉损失,这反映在地震后离婚率和丧偶率的上升上。我们发现,农村人口、老年人、受教育程度较低的人和没有社会保险的居民更容易受到地震的冲击。本研究使用具有全国代表性的中国数据集的六波数据,并采用差异中的差异方法来确定汶川地震的短期和长期因果幸福感效应。对机制和异质性的深入分析表明,灾后政策应更多地关注经济因素以外的方面,特别是弱势群体的福祉。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,提供地址为10.1007/s10902-022-00609-z。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
6.50%
发文量
110
期刊介绍: The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信