Open access


The paper presents a series of the results obtained from an extensive questionnaire survey conducted in Bucharest in 2016. The investigated topics are related to earthquake awareness and preparedness of the population currently living in the capital city of Romania, safety concerns and post-earthquake behaviour. Results are interpreted based on several criteria which characterize the target population such as age, education, income, children, as well as the type and year of construction of the building they inhabit. The questionnaire was completed by 1000 respondents and the main findings show that people are generally neither well informed nor prepared for a future major seismic event affecting Bucharest. However, the level of involvement in postearthquake situations is positive, the majority of respondents agreeing to offer humanitarian help in various forms as well as temporary shelter to people, especially relatives or friends.

[1] Lang D., Molina-Palacios S., Lindholm C. & Balan S. (2012). Deterministic earthquake damage and loss assessment for the city of Bucharest, Romania, Journal of Seismology 16, 67-88.

[2] Toma-Danilă D., Zulfikar C., Manea E.F. & Cioflan C.O. (2015). Improved seismic risk estimation for Bucharest, based on multiple hazard scenarios and analytical methods. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 73, 1-16.

[3] Pavel F. & Vacareanu R. (2016). Scenario-based earthquake risk assessment for Bucharest, Romania, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 20, 138-144.

[4] Armas I. (2006). Earthquake Risk Perception in Bucharest, Romania. Risk Analysis 26 (5), 1223-1234.

[5] Armaș I., Cretu R.Z. & Ionescu R., (2017). Self-efficiency, stress and locus of control: The psychology of earthquake risk perception in Bucharest, Romania. International Journal of Disaster Reduction 22, 71-76.

[6] Vicente R., Ferreira T.M., Maio R. & Koch H. (2014). Awareness, perception and communication of earthquake risk in Portugal: Public survey. Procedia Economics and Finance 18, 271-278.

[7] Ozkazac S. & Yuksel U.D. (2015). Evaluation of disaster awareness and sensitivity level of higher education students. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences 197, 745-753.

[8] Taykan A. (2015). Factors influencing homeowners’ seismic risk mitigation behaviour: A case study in Zeytinburnu district of Istanbul. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 13, 414-426.

[9] Santos-Reyes J., Gouzeva T. & Santos-Reyes G. (2014). Earthquake risk perception and Mexico City’s public safety. Procedia Engineering 84, 662-671.

[10] Ainuddin S, Mukhtar U & Ainuddin S. (2014). Public perception about enforcement of building codes risk reduction strategy for seismic safety in Quetta, Baluchistan. International Journal of Risk Reduction 9, 99-106.

[11]Annear M.J., Otani J., Gao X. & Keeling S (2016). Japanese perception of societal vulnerability to disaster during population ageing: Constitution of a new scale and initial findings. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 18, 32-40.

[12] Calotescu I., Pavel F., Săndulescu A.M., Sibișteanu H. &Văcăreanu R. (2016). Preliminary investigation on community resilience of Bucharest, Romania, Paper no. 142, in Proceedings, International Conference on Urban Risks ICUR, 30 June-2 July, 2016, Lisbon, Portugal.

[13] Calotescu I., Pavel F., Săndulescu A.M., Sibișteanu H. &Văcăreanu R. (2017). Evaluation of seismic damage from questionnaire results. In the 3rd International Conference on protection of historical constructions Lisbon, Portugal, 12 - 15 July, 2017.

Mathematical Modelling in Civil Engineering

The Journal of Technical University of Civil Engineering of Bucharest

Journal Information

Cited By


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 86 86 12
PDF Downloads 34 34 9