Navigating the Turbulent Waters of Disaster Preparedness: A Public Trust and Political Strategy Analysis Based on Risk Perception and Budget Accountability

Abstract

Public trust in disaster preparedness is a fragile but essential element of effective risk management, especially when government budget allocations appear misaligned with actual mitigation efforts. This study examines how factors such as personal disaster experience, political ideology, and regional risk context influence public trust in disaster preparedness funding and inform political campaign strategies. We conducted a mixed-method study, including a comprehensive literature review and a survey of 486 residents in a disaster-prone country, Türkiye. The survey measured trust in government budget allocation for disasters, perceived transparency, and the priority given to disaster preparedness in voting decisions, alongside respondents’ disaster experience (survivor vs. non-survivor), ideological leanings, and regional risk level. Notably, the study found that conservative respondents showed slightly higher trust in government transparency—a pattern likely shaped by alignment with Türkiye’s incumbent conservative government at the time. We applied parametric statistical analyses—t-tests, one-way ANOVA, Pearson correlations, linear regression, and Z-tests—to examine group differences and relationships among these variables. Disaster experience emerged as a significant determinant of trust: respondents who had personally experienced disasters reported markedly lower trust in the government’s use of the disaster budget (survivors’ mean ≈ 1.12 vs. non-survivors’ ≈ 2.82 on a 5-point scale, t = –17.50, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d ≈ 2.0). Perceptions of government transparency were uniformly low across the political spectrum (grand mean ~1.5/5), with minor yet significant variation. A linear regression showed low explanatory power (model R 2 ~0.04) but suggested that low trust and high skepticism were associated with slightly increased prioritization of disaster issues in elections. Regionally, respondents in high-risk, earthquake-prone cities consistently placed extremely high importance on disaster preparedness at the polls (mean priority ≈ 4.65/5 in top-risk cities), with no statistically significant difference by region ( p = 0.44) that is consistent with scientific assessments that place cities like Istanbul at elevated seismic risk due to their proximity to the North Anatolian Fault ( Allmann & Wiemer, 2021 ). The findings highlight a pronounced trust deficit among disaster survivors and pervasive skepticism across ideologies. Political actors are advised to improve transparency and accountability, tailor messages to community context, and avoid exploitative fear appeals. By proactively building trust—through clear budget disclosure, community engagement, and credible commitment—leaders can better align public perceptions with disaster preparedness goals, ultimately enhancing resilience and political legitimacy.