Геология и Геофизика Юга России

2221-3198

Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки Федеральный научный центр "Владикавказский научный центр Российской академии наук"

1207

10.46698/VNC.2025.67.58.001

Геофизика

Социальная уязвимость и пространственная адаптация: пример исследования готовности местных сообществ реагировать на стихийные бедствия в городе Силчар, штат Ассам, Индия

Натх

А.

Aditinath1@gmail.comЗаалишвили

В.Б.

vzaal@mail.ruГанапати

Г.П.

seismogans@yahoo.com

Кафедра социальной работы, Ассамский университет, Силчар 788011, Ассам, ИндияГеофизический институт Владикавказского научного центра РАН, Россия, 362002, г. Владикавказ, ул. Маркова, 93аЦентр по смягчению последствий и управлению стихийными бедствиями, Технологический институт Веллора (VIT), Индия, 632 014, Веллор, Тамил Наду

30062025

2128141

2025

Геология и геофизика Юга России

Актуальность работы. Настоящее исследование направлено на оценку осведомленности и готовности сообщества Силчара, Ассам, к стихийным бедствиям с использованием опроса домохозяйств. Цель исследований. Оценка адаптации местного населения к стихийным бедствиям имеет важное значение для снижения последствий стихийных бедствий. Снижение риска стихийных бедствий на уровне уязвимых сообществ (Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction, CBDRR) важно для расширения их прав и возможностей, когда необходимо эффективное реагирование на стихийные бедствия подобных Ассаму (Индия). Учитывая подверженность штата Ассам наводнениям, землетрясениям и оползням, крайне важно внедрять программы CBDRR, которые способствуют формированию у населения культуры готовности к стихийным бедствиям. Благодаря совместному обучению стратегиям предотвращения, смягчения и адекватного реагирования на стихийные бедствия, население может лучше справляться с чрезвычайными ситуациями, что приводит к долгосрочной устойчивости и улучшению реагирования на стихийные бедствия в будущем. Это помогает в создании эффективных планов по подготовке к бедствиям. Методы работы. Метод опроса населения показывает реальный уровень знаний и наиболее уязвимые категории. Первоначальный опрос был проведен в районах высокого риска Ассама, Индия, определенных с помощью карты множественных опасностей. Анкета из 50 вопросов была разработана для оценки осведомленности населения о стихийных бедствиях и оценки готовности города Силчар к чрезвычайным ситуациям. Она включала вопросы с несколькими вариантами ответов по общим знаниям, реагированию на чрезвычайные ситуации, материальному обеспечению, планам связи и профилактическим мерам. Результаты работы показывают, что важно повышать осведомленность людей о стихийных бедствиях и повышать уровень их готовности. Выявлены пробелы в осведомленности населения. Предлагается сосредоточиться на этих вопросах, чтобы помочь сообществам лучше справляться со стихийными бедствиями. Отмечена важность кампаний по повышению осведомленности общественности, систем раннего оповещения и образовательных программ для решения этих проблем в округе Качар штата Ассам. Наконец, результаты этого исследования показывают районы, где следует заметно улучшить подготовку к чрезвычайным ситуациям. Полученная информация необходима для определения областей, где необходимо внедрение соответствующих индивидуальных программ обучения для снижения уязвимости к стихийным бедствиям.

CBDRRSilcharhousehold surveyvulnerability assessmentdisaster preparedness

CBDRRСилчаробследование домохозяйствоценка уязвимостистихийное бедствие

Introduction Assessing local community adaptation to natural disasters is crucial for identifying effective strategies to mitigate risks and promote sustainable development. [Svalova, 2022; Badov et al., 2022]. By conducting comprehensive assessments of local community adaptation to natural disasters, policymakers and practitioners can develop targeted interventions to enhance resilience and reduce the impacts of future events. Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR) activities engage vulnerable communities in learning disaster preparedness and risk reduction methods. This collaborative approach equips them to systematically prevent, prepare for, and respond to potential disasters. A strong local response fosters a culture of preparedness within the community. This translates to better long-term disaster resilience, as future generations are equipped to manage emergencies more effectively. India, with its vast size and varied geography, is one of the most disaster-prone countries globally, facing threats like floods, earthquakes, and cyclones. Assam, a state in the north-eastern part of India, is highly susceptible to multiple hazards and has a long history of natural disasters. Due to its specific geography and climate, Assam, as well as the entire Northeast region of India, constantly face threats from natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, and landslides (fig. 1). Assam is heavily affected by flooding in India, as about 40% of its land is at risk of being submerged by large rivers like the Brahmaputra. Assam is home to the Brahmaputra, a powerful river with a massive catchment area in the Himalayas. This, combined with Assamʼs location in Indiaʼs northeast where the monsoon rains are heaviest, leads to a huge volume of water flowing through the state. Additionally, Assamʼs flat plains with minimal elevation make it difficult for excess water to drain effectively, leading to widespread flooding. Northeast India is situated in a high-risk earthquake zone (Zone V) within the Indian subcontinent. Due to its geological conditions, the region is prone to seismic activity, often accompanied by secondary hazards such as landslides, flooding, and a series of smaller earthquakes. Exogenous processes are especially activated due to a climate change and have a complex manner of appearance due to their cross-influence [Burdzieva et al., 2023, 2024; Gabaraev et al., 2023; Yaitskaya et al., 2023; Zaalishvili et al., 2024]. And seismic factor governs not only seismic impact on constructions but mainly activate exogenous processes [Karavaev et al., 2022; Chernov et al., 2022]. Most of Assam is situated within the Brahmaputra River Valley, except for its southern districts. The valley’s northern and eastern borders are defined by the Himalayan Frontal Thrust (HFF). In the eastern region, the HFF is accompanied by the arc of the Lohit and Naga Thrusts. This region has experienced significant seismic activity, including major earthquakes in 1897 and 1950. The 1897 earthquake is particularly notable for its dramatic accounts of ground displacement during the event. Earthquake with a magnitude 7.5 struck in Cachar district in the year 1896 is the highest in the study area. The increasing demand for agricultural land and rampant deforestation have contributed to the destabilization of hillsides in the region. During the monsoon season, this often leads to devastating landslides. Guwahati city, for example, has experienced several such incidents in its hilly areas due to inadequate urban planning. The relentless demand for land has driven communities to build homes in environmentally vulnerable zones, increasing their risk of landslides (https://www.asdma.gov.in/hazardous.html). <img class="frame-202" src="Геол_журн__№2_2025__-web-resources/image/168910.png" alt="168910.png" /> Fig. 1. Location and multi-hazard map of the study area Household surveys are vital for understanding public disaster awareness. They allow researchers to reach a representative sample of the population and gather specific information about their knowledge of hazards, preparedness measures, and response procedures. It helps identify areas where knowledge is lacking, measure preparedness levels, and pinpoint vulnerable populations. The awareness knowledge is crucial for developing effective disaster preparedness programs, improving communication during emergencies, and building more resilient communities. Several studies emphasize the importance of community-level preparedness. [Shannon, 2015], in a study of a midwestern US county, found that a significant portion of residents reported limited personal preparedness and lacked familiarity with local emergency systems. This underscores the need to focus beyond emergency services and involve local citizens in readiness programs. Similarly, [Permana et al., 2022] is integrative review highlights that disaster preparedness education enhances community preparedness, with various strategies and content (psychological first aid, evacuation routes, emergency items) contributing positively. However, they also note the need for more rigorous methods and consideration of local needs in designing such programs. Household-level preparedness is examined by [Corpuz et al., 2023] in Angeles City, Philippines. Their descriptive survey revealed a varied landscape of preparedness, with awareness of natural disasters present but a need for enhanced education and information sharing. A key finding was the importance of community engagement in disaster response and recovery. [Mahdaviazad, Abdolahifar, 2014] assessed household preparedness in Shiraz, Iran, finding encouraging levels of knowledge but areas for improvement in attitudes and practices, particularly through motivational education and inter-organizational cooperation. [DeBastiani et al., 2015], using data from the BRFSS (2006-2010) in the US, found that only a minority felt well-prepared and possessed recommended preparedness items. Their analysis identified younger age, being female, lower education, and Spanish language preference as risk factors for lower preparedness, suggesting the need for targeted interventions for vulnerable populations. The role of social capital and community resources in disaster preparedness is explored by [Nguyễn et al., 2023] in Seattle. Their study indicated that considering shared resources increased reported preparedness in racial-majority-dominated zip codes, suggesting that traditional individualistic measures might underestimate preparedness. They also found that greater bridging social capital and longer neighborhood tenure were associated with higher preparedness, advocating for “mainstreamingˮ disaster preparedness by focusing on daily resources, social capital, and collective community assets. Challenges in researching disasters are addressed by [Spence, Lachlan, 2025], who discuss methodological and data-analysis difficulties due to the unexpected and nonroutine nature of crises. They highlight the limitations imposed by disaster conditions on data collection, randomization, and generalizability, which is crucial to consider when conducting research in the aftermath of an event like the one in Silchar. Risk communication is identified as a vital strategy for enhancing disaster preparedness. [Rahman, Munadi, 2019] propose a disaster risk communication approach based on Lasswellʼs model, emphasizing the interactive exchange of information to reduce uncertainty and promote appropriate actions. They cite the “Smong storyˮ as a successful example of conveying a tsunami risk message. [Rod et al., 2011] explored responses to risk communication in a Norwegian community facing an impending rockslide-induced tsunami, finding that parents perceived the information as most useful, while those with prior disaster experience and non-parents posed communication challenges. [Mileti, OʼBrien, 1992] is study on aftershock warnings after the Loma Prieta earthquake revealed a “normalization biasˮ among non-victims, which constrained risk perception and protective response, highlighting the complexities of warning communication in different contexts. The concept of community resilience, closely linked to social vulnerability and spatial adaptation, is explored in several papers. [Zhai, Lee, 2024] examined community disaster resilience in different types of communities in Zhengzhou, China, finding variations in human capital, physical infrastructure, social capital, institutional capital, community competence, and adaptation. Their work suggests that resilience-building strategies should be tailored to specific community types. [Whittaker et al., 2020] developed a conceptual model for enhancing community disaster resilience through preparedness, drawing from past events and emphasizing social media, community empowerment, and shared responsibility. [Bergstrand et al., 2015] empirically connected social vulnerability and community resilience across US counties, finding that more vulnerable counties tend to be less resilient, with regional differences observed. This reinforces the importance of understanding both vulnerability and resilience in disaster contexts. [Zaman, Raihan, 2023] conducted a systematic review of community resilience literature, outlining current research trends in methods, dimensions, and theoretical standpoints, advocating for a comprehensive multi-phase research model for effective policymaking. [Topping et al., 2010] is special issue on building local capacity for long-term disaster resilience defines resilience as the capacity to survive, retain essential functions, and adapt post-disaster. They introduce the concept of “smartˮ resilience, which coordinates both “softˮ (preparedness, response) and “hardˮ (mitigation) strategies. [Green et al., 2006], drawing from a livelihoods framework after Hurricane Katrina, focused on the vulnerability-resilience continuum, emphasizing the need to understand community needs and social relationships to improve resilience during recovery. [King, 2000] argues for the necessity of awareness and education for predictable natural disasters, as individuals and communities are often isolated during hazard events, and highlights inadequate preparedness levels. The current research on disaster preparedness in Assam lacks in-depth, recent data specifically for Silchar. While household surveys are recognized as valuable tools, existing studies may focus on broader regions or not utilize surveys. This research gap limits our understanding of Silcharʼs unique preparedness landscape. By conducting a household survey in Silchar, this research can address this gap by providing a comprehensive picture of the communityʼs current preparedness levels and informing targeted local response strategies tailored to Silcharʼs specific needs. Materials and Methods The multi-hazard map of Assam State was used to identify high-risk areas that were then selected for this study. Questionnaire to test the disaster awareness and preparedness level of people in the multi hazard areas was planned by using multiple choice questions. The focus of the questions is relevance to the Study Area and its hazard proneness. This questionnaire is designed to test a householdʼs knowledge and readiness for emergencies. It covers various aspects like recognizing common disasters in their area, proper responses during events like earthquakes or gas leaks, and knowledge of essential supplies to have on hand. It even investigates into communication plans and preventative measures to make their home safer. By answering these questions, one can identify areas where their household might need improvement and take steps to be better prepared for whatever comes in future. This survey asks questions to see how ready a household is for emergencies. It checks what they know in a few important areas. Questions about “General Preparedness Knowledgeˮ ask about common dangers and how to prevent them. “Emergency Response Knowledgeˮ questions look at how well they can react safely during different disasters. “Emergency Supply Knowledge” questions check if they know what important things to have in an emergency kit and for first aid. Questions on “Communication and Planningˮ assess their planning for specific disasters and establishing a family communication plan. By covering these areas, the present survey provides a comprehensive picture of a householdʼs knowledge and preparedness for emergencies. To achieve reliable results from surveys, a well-designed questionnaire and a representative sample were required. The goals of the surveys were first defined, and clear, concise questions employing a mix of formats were chosen to maintain respondent engagement. Piloting of the questionnaires was conducted with a small group prior to widespread distribution. Subsequently, the target audience for the surveys was identified, and a sampling method that reached them was selected. Random sampling was considered ideal, although convenience sampling or stratified sampling could also be employed depending on the available resources. Finally, a large enough sample size was targeted to ensure statistically significant results. By adhering to these steps, questionnaires were crafted that provided researchers with the data they necessitated. Totally fifty questions were prepared twenty-five on Disaster Awareness and twenty-five questions on Disaster Preparedness. About one hundred households were selected minimum one sample from each household. Questionnaire check list made in excel and the data collection were done by door to door by visiting the place in person. The overall methodology of the study is presented in the Fig. 2. <img class="frame-203" src="Геол_журн__№2_2025__-web-resources/image/168928.png" alt="168928.png" /> Fig. 2. Overall methodology of the study Results and DiscussionResilience to Disaster A fifty-question survey was given to 100 households in a disaster-prone area of Assam, India, and 83 responded fully. Half the questions checked Disaster Awareness (knowledge of local disasters and how to respond), and the other half checked Disaster Preparedness (personal and family emergency plans). These questions aim to see how well people understand and prepare for disasters, covering topics like safety, planning, first aid, and community resilience (fig. 3). The study used the 83 complete responses. <img class="frame-204" src="Геол_журн__№2_2025__-web-resources/image/168934.png" alt="168934.png" /> Fig. 3. Questionnaire group for level of disaster awareness and disaster preparedness Level of Disaster Awareness The questions are in two parts: Disaster Awareness (understanding local natural disasters and their risks like floods, wildfires, landslides, and tsunamis) and Disaster Preparedness (practical emergency actions and preparations). These questions help people understand local dangers, learn safety steps, create emergency plans, improve first aid, and build community strength. By understanding risks and being prepared, people can better protect themselves during disasters. Answering these questions helps individuals see how well they understand disaster risks, safety, and preparedness. <img class="frame-205" src="Геол_журн__№2_2025__-web-resources/image/168947.png" alt="168947.png" /> Fig. 4. Disaster Preparedness and Response in Silchar Region The questions about the most common natural disaster in the region, actions to take during an earthquake, a safe shelter during a cyclone, and preventing disease after a flood were asked (fig. 4). Based on the responses, floods are the most common natural disaster in the region, accounting for 81% of the responses. When faced with an earthquake, people are most likely to evacuate immediately (40%). During a cyclone, staying in a sturdy building is recommended (73%). To prevent disease after a flood, proper sanitation is crucial (83%). Surprisingly, clear skies were perceived as a sign of an impending flood, despite being incorrect. In case of a house fire, calling the fire department is the most common response (44%). The survey results indicate that floods are the most common natural disaster in the region, followed by earthquakes and cyclones. The most common responses to these disasters include evacuation, staying in sturdy buildings, and proper sanitation. However, there is a misconception that clear skies indicate an impending flood. To improve resilience, the region should prioritize flood mitigation, promote earthquake safety measures, enhance cyclone preparedness, and address sanitation concerns. Additionally, public awareness campaigns and early warning systems are crucial. <img class="frame-206" src="Геол_журн__№2_2025__-web-resources/image/168967.png" alt="168967.png" /> Fig. 5. Questions related to promote awareness and preparedness for various emergency situations in Silchar Region The other questions were covered a wide range of potential hazards, including natural disasters, animal encounters, and household emergencies. The questions aim to assess understanding of how to protect oneself during thunderstorms, respond to snake encounters, maintain smoke alarms, stay cool during heatwaves, assist trapped individuals after earthquakes, handle flash floods while driving, prevent wildfires, prioritize essential first aid items, and respond to gas leaks. These questions aim to promote public awareness and preparedness for various emergency situations that households may encounter. By assessing knowledge in these areas, it can help identify areas where further education and awareness initiatives are needed to ensure community safety and resilience. Questions were asked to cover topics such as flood signs, fire safety, emergency kit contents, and gas leak response. The questions aim to promote awareness and preparedness for various emergency situations (fig. 5). Only one in four people correctly knew that clear skies do not mean a flood is coming. Similarly, 25% correctly chose to call the fire department in case of a house fire, while 25% recognized the importance of including all items in an emergency kit. Lastly, only 25% correctly identified turning off electrical appliances as the first step in case of a gas leak. These results highlight a significant lack of knowledge and preparedness among respondents regarding emergency procedures. The survey results show that respondents lack knowledge about emergency preparedness. People had trouble knowing the signs of floods, how to stay safe from fire, what to put in an emergency kit, and what to do if thereʼs a gas leak. The analysis of the emergency preparedness quiz reveals a significant lack of knowledge among respondents. With an average of 25% correct answers, it is clear that many individuals are not familiar with essential safety procedures. Nine Questions were asked related to safety and survival. For lightning strikes, staying indoors away from windows is the safest option, with 72% of respondents choosing this answer. When encountering snakes, calling animal control is recommended, with 45% of respondents selecting this choice. For smoke alarms, replacing batteries every six months is considered best practice, with 42% of respondents agreeing. During heatwaves, staying hydrated and using fans or air conditioning is crucial, as chosen by 60% of respondents. In the case of earthquakes, calling for help and providing support until assistance arrives is the most appropriate response, with 60% of respondents selecting this option. For flash floods, abandoning your vehicle and seeking higher ground is the recommended response, with 48% of respondents choosing this option. When preventing wildfires, disposing of cigarette butts properly and clearing vegetation around your home are important steps, with 52% and 29% of respondents choosing these options, respectively. In a first aid kit, bandages are considered the most important item, with 74% of respondents selecting this choice. For gas leaks, evacuating immediately and calling the gas company is the safest response, with 78% of respondents agreeing. The survey results show that respondents understand safety and survival practices, but there are areas for improvement, such as snake encounters and wildfire prevention. While most respondents know the safest actions for lightning strikes, heatwaves, earthquakes, and gas leaks, more education is needed on topics like snake encounters and wildfire prevention. The survey results show that floods are the most common natural disaster in Silchar, Assam. While respondents understand safety measures for common emergencies, there are knowledge gaps in areas like flood signs, fire safety, emergency kit contents, and gas leaks. To improve resilience, the region should focus on flood mitigation, earthquake safety, cyclone preparedness, sanitation, public awareness campaigns, and early warning systems. Additionally, addressing misconceptions about flood signs and promoting emergency preparedness education are crucial. Level of Disaster Readiness 25 Questions were asked in this section; to assess their preparedness level and identify areas for improvement and these were grouped into two sections: Emergency Preparedness Planning and Emergency Response Skills. The first section is focused on planning and preparing for emergencies, including creating a family preparedness plan, identifying safe meeting points, knowing evacuation routes, and maintaining emergency kits. The second section highlights practical skills and knowledge required for effective emergency response. Questions in this section cover topics such as fire safety drills, knowing local emergency services, pet preparedness, first aid and CPR training, food storage, evacuation transportation, and emergency medical procedures. The questions provided are important in connection with disasters because they help individuals assess their preparedness level, identify gaps in their emergency kits, develop effective communication plans, prepare their homes for disasters, be aware of local resources, and involve their entire family. The questions cover a range of topics, including emergency planning, home safety, communication, community preparedness, first aid, and pet preparedness. By answering these questions, one can assess their preparedness level and pinpoint areas where they may need to enhance their plans and knowledge. Seven questions were asked to ensure the households have necessary supplies and resources to survive a disaster (fig. 6). <img class="frame-207" src="Геол_журн__№2_2025__-web-resources/image/168985.png" alt="168985.png" /> Fig. 6. Responses to questions related on ensuring the households have necessary supplies and resources to survive a disaster Most respondents (59%) have an emergency kit readily available, demonstrating a positive step towards disaster preparedness. However, 10% plan to make one in the future, indicating a need for further awareness and encouragement. A considerable number (61%) have a plan for securing important documents, suggesting a good understanding of the importance of safeguarding personal information during emergencies. While 48% have a backup power source, 27% do not, highlighting a potential vulnerability in case of power outages. Half (46%) have not considered emergency food supplies, indicating a need for more education on the importance of having a stockpile of non-perishable food items. A positive trend is seen with 45% having decided for transportation during evacuations, demonstrating foresight in planning for potential displacement. The survey data suggests a general awareness of disaster preparedness among respondents, with many taking proactive steps to ensure their safety and well-being. However, there are still areas where education and encouragement are needed to improve preparedness levels. Eleven questions were asked regarding developing a plan for how to respond to a disaster, including communication strategies and evacuation procedures. Most respondents (64%) have a designated safe meeting point for their family in case of evacuation, indicating a good understanding of emergency preparedness. Mobile phone alerts are the most popular method for receiving emergency warnings (34%), followed by local authorities (29%). This suggests a reliance on technology for timely information. Considerable number (58%) are familiar with evacuation routes and shelters in their area, demonstrating preparedness for potential disasters. Mobile phone calls or text messages are the primary method for communication during emergencies (78%), highlighting the importance of reliable mobile technology. While 17% have a designated caregiver, a significant majority (59%) do not, indicating a need for further planning in households with children, elderly, or pets. A significant percentage (68%) have discussed disaster preparedness with their neighbours or community members, demonstrating a community-oriented approach to emergency planning. Half (49%) have a plan for securing their home and belongings, suggesting a proactive approach to protecting property during emergencies. The survey data indicates a general awareness of disaster preparedness among respondents, with many taking proactive steps to ensure their safety and well-being. However, there are still areas where further education and encouragement are needed, particularly regarding designated caregivers and the importance of having a plan for securing home and belongings. <img class="frame-208" src="Геол_журн__№2_2025__-web-resources/image/169004.png" alt="169004.png" /> Fig. 7. Responses to questions related to developing a plan for how to respond to a disaster, including communication strategies and evacuation procedures Further questions were asked regarding making their home safer and more resilient to disasters, as well as learning basic survival skills. Most respondents (60%) have taken steps to make their homes more resilient to disasters, indicating a positive trend in proactive preparedness. A considerable number (64%) have a plan for ensuring an adequate water supply during emergencies, demonstrating a good understanding of essential needs. While 40% have conducted a home hazard hunt, 28% have not, highlighting a need for increased awareness and education about identifying potential risks. A significant portion (77%) practice fire escape drills at least once a year, demonstrating a positive approach to fire safety (fig. 7). While 21% have received training, 28% plan to, indicating a growing interest in acquiring these essential skills. A majority (61%) know how to perform basic emergency medical procedures, demonstrating a satisfactory level of preparedness for handling medical emergencies. The survey data suggests a general awareness of disaster preparedness among respondents, with many taking proactive steps to ensure their safety and well-being. However, there are still areas where further education and encouragement are needed, particularly regarding home hazard hunts and first aid training. The Disaster readiness survey results show that while many respondents have taken steps towards disaster preparedness, there are still areas for improvement. Most have emergency kits and plans for securing documents, but fewer have backup power sources or emergency food supplies. Regarding emergency planning, many have safe meeting points and communication plans, but fewer have designated caregivers or plans for securing their homes. For home safety and resilience, a majority have made their homes more resilient and have fire escape drills, but fewer have conducted home hazard hunts or received first aid training. Overall, the survey highlights the need for continued education and awareness campaigns to improve preparedness levels in Silchar city. Conclusions To evaluate a communityʼs ability to adapt to natural disasters, it is important to consider several key factors. Institutional capacity refers to the effectiveness of local government, emergency services, and community groups in managing disasters. Social capital measures the communityʼs trust, cooperation, and social connections, which can help in adaptation. Economic capacity assesses the communityʼs financial resources, access to credit, and ability to diversify livelihoods, all of which play a crucial role in resilience. The present study provides valuable insights into disaster awareness and preparedness in Silchar city, Cachar District of Assam State in India. By assessing the knowledge of residents, the study relates areas for improvement and informs the development of targeted interventions. This study used a household survey approach and a questionnaire to assess local resilience during disasters. It focused on household disaster preparedness, assessing not just peopleʼs understanding of emergency procedures but also how well-prepared households were in terms of planning and acting. The study highlights the importance of educational initiatives and family preparedness planning in enhancing community resilience. By equipping residents with knowledge and skills through education and promoting the use of emergency preparedness kits, communities can better respond to and recover from disasters. According to the household survey, the results indicate diverse levels of disaster awareness and preparedness among households in Silchar City, Assam. While many respondents demonstrated knowledge of common natural disasters and basic safety measures, significant gaps were identified in areas such as emergency preparedness planning, home safety, and first aid skills. The most common natural disaster in the region is floods, followed by earthquakes and cyclones. Despite this, there is a lack of awareness about flood signs and proper emergency procedures. To enhance disaster resilience, the region must prioritize public awareness campaigns, early warning systems, and targeted education programs. Addressing misconceptions about flood signs, promoting emergency preparedness education, and improving access to essential supplies are crucial steps. To ensure comprehensive readiness for all residents, disaster preparedness initiatives must be continuously evaluated and improved, with a focus on addressing factors like socioeconomic status and self-efficacy. The study provides valuable insights that can help households in Silchar City, Assam, become better prepared for disasters and enhance their overall resilience. By understanding the risks, taking proactive steps, and working together as a community, households can significantly improve their safety and well-being. The findings also can contribute to building a more resilient community and can inform policy decisions. By addressing these challenges, Silchar can better protect its residents from the devastating impacts of natural disasters.

Badov A.D., Badov О.А., Dzakhova L.Kh., Byazrova J.B. Typology of mountain settlements in North Ossetia and the main directions of their sustainable development. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2022. Vol. 12. No. 1. pp. 119–128. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2022.95.96.009. (In Russ.)

Burdzieva O.G., Kozyrev E.N., Kortiev A.L., Revazov M.О. Features of formation of geoecological risks in the mountainous territory based on the analysis of cause-and-effect relations of geodynamic endogenous and exogenous processes. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2023. Vol. 13. No. 4. pp. 124–134. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2023.88.99.010. (In Russ.)

Burdzieva O.G., Revazov M.О., Kortiev A.L., Gogichev R.R. Influence of geodynamic processes on the geoecological load of mountain region. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2024. Vol. 14. No. 4. pp. 166–179. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2024.50.44.014. (In Russ.)

Chernov Yu.K., Zaalishvili V.B., Chernov A.Y. Some new data on the influence of various soil conditions on probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of territories. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2022. Vol. 12. No. 4. pp. 85–100. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2022.32.20.007. (In Russ.)

Gabaraev A.F., Melkov D.A., Kortiev A.L., Kozyrev E.N. Influence of geomorphological conditions of a mountain region on the intensity of hazardous geological processes. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2023. Vol. 13. No. 4. pp. 198–212. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2023.84.50.016. (In Russ.)

Karavaev V.A., Gorbunov A.S., Seminozhenko S.S. Role of weak earthquakes in the cycle of extreme exogenous processes in the mountains of the Central Caucasus. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2022. Vol. 12. No. 4. pp. 6–18. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2022.19.24.001. (In Russ.)

Svalova V.B. Geoecological risk management and problems of sustainable development of mountain territories. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2022. Vol. 12. No. 1. pp. 129–147. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2022.48.61.010. (In Russ.)

Yaitskaya N.A., Dzaganiia L.M., Brigida V.S. Geoecological hazards in context of climate change of territories of Caucasus subtropical zone. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2023. Vol. 13. No. 2. pp. 118–132. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2023.54.85.010. (In Russ.)

Zaalishvili V.B., Melkov D.A., Fidarova M.I., Shmanatov G.V. Geoecological aspects of earthquake intensity formation based on instrumental data. Geology and Geophysics of Russian South. 2024. Vol. 14. No. 2. pp. 45–60. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2024.27.90.004. (In Russ.)

10.

Bergstrand K., Mayer B., Brumback B., Zhang Y. Assessing the relationship between social vulnerability and community resilience to hazards. Social Indicators Research. 2015. Vol. 122. Issue 2. pp. 391–409. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-014-0698-3.

11.

Corpuz R.R.N., Nacu J.A., Manalo J.M., Laxamana J.T. Enhancing disaster preparedness in Angeles City: Insights, gaps, and community resilience. EPRA International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research. 2023. Vol. 9. Issue 10. pp. 1–10. DOI: 10.36713/EPRA14785.

12.

DeBastiani S.D., Strine T.W., Vagi S.J., Barnett D.J., Kahn E.B. Preparedness perceptions, sociodemographic characteristics, and level of household preparedness for public health emergencies: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2006–2010. Health Security. 2015. Vol. 13. Issue 5. pp. 317–326. DOI: 10.1089/hs.2014.0093.

13.

Green J., Gill D., Kleiner A. From vulnerability to resiliency: Assessing impacts and responses to disaster. Journal of Rural Social Sciences. 2006. Vol. 21. Issue 2. Art. No. 6.

14.

King D. You’re on your own: Community vulnerability and the need for awareness and education for predictable natural disasters. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 2000. Vol. 8. Issue 4. pp. 223–228. DOI: 10.1111/1468-5973.00143.

15.

Mahdaviazad H., Abdolahifar G. Assessing household natural disaster preparedness in Shiraz, Iran, 2011: Results of a knowledge, attitude, and practices survey. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. 2014. Vol. 8. Issue 4. pp. 349–352. DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2014.61.

16.

Mileti D.S., OʼBrien P.W. Warnings during disaster: Normalizing communicated risk. Social Problems. 1992. Vol. 39. Issue 1. pp. 40–57. DOI: 10.2307/3096912.

17.

Nguyễn L.T., Bostrom A., Abramson D.B., Moy P. Understanding the role of individualand community-based resources in disaster preparedness. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2023. Vol. 96. Art. No. 103882. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103882.

18.

Permana I., Said F.M., Umar N.S., Budhiana J. Disaster preparedness education among community: What is effective? An integrative literature review. Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2022. Vol. 10(G). pp. 1–8. DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2022.8373.

19.

Rahman A., Munadi K. Communicating risk in enhancing disaster preparedness: A pragmatic example of disaster risk communication approach from the case of Smong story. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2019. Vol. 273. Issue 1. Art. No. 012040.

20.

Rod S.K., Botan C., Holen A. Communicating risk to parents and those living in areas with a disaster history. Public Relations Review. 2011. Vol. 37. Issue 4. pp. 354–359. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.08.012.

21.

Shannon C. Understanding community-level disaster and emergency response preparedness. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. 2015. Vol. 9. Issue 3. pp. 239–244. DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2015.28.

22.

Spence P.R., Lachlan K.A. Reoccurring challenges and emerging threats. In: The handbook of international crisis and risk communication research. 2025. pp. 216–227.

23.

Topping K., Hayashi H., Siembieda W., Boswell M. Special issue on “building local capacity for long-term disaster resilience” Toward Disaster Resilient Communities. Journal of Disaster Research. 2010. Vol. 5. Issue 2. pp. 127–129.

24.

Whittaker S., Khalfan M.M.A., UlHaq I. Developing community disaster resilience through preparedness. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures. 2020. Vol. 16. Issue 1. pp. 1–18.

25.

Zaman M.O., Raihan M.M.H. Community resilience to natural disasters: A systemic review of contemporary methods and theories. Natural Hazards Research. 2023. Vol. 3. Issue 3. pp. 583–594. DOI: 10.1016/j.nhres.2023.05.003.

26.

Zhai L., Lee J.E. Exploring and enhancing community disaster resilience: Perspectives from different types of communities. Water. 2024. Vol. 16. Issue 6. Art. No. 881. DOI: 10.3390/w16060881.