Robin Ersing

Low elevation coastal zones (LECZ) are extensive throughout the southeastern United States. LECZ communities are threatened by inundation from sea level rise, storm surge, wetland degradation, land subsidence, and hydrological flooding. Communication among scientists, stakeholders, policy makers and minority and poor residents must improve. We must predict processes spanning the ecological, physical, social, and health sciences. Communities need to address linkages of (1) human and socioeconomic vulnerabilities; (2) public health and safety; (3) economic concerns; (4) land loss; (5) wetland threats; and (6) coastal inundation. Essential capabilities must include a network to assemble and distribute data and model code to assess risk and its causes, support adaptive management, and improve the resiliency of communities. Better communication of information and understanding among residents and officials is essential. Here we review recent background literature on these matters and offer recommendations for integrating natural and social sciences. We advocate for a cyber-network of scientists, modelers, engineers, educators, and stakeholders from academia, federal state and local agencies, non-governmental organizations, residents, and the private sector. Our vision is to enhance future resilience of LECZ communities by offering approaches to mitigate hazards to human health, safety and welfare and reduce impacts to coastal residents and industries.

Introduction Despite the widespread availability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the USA, vaccine hesitancy continues to represent a significant impediment to the attainment of herd immunity and the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey analysis provides an update for clinical healthcare providers and public health officials regarding current trends in misinformation exposure, as well as common objections to COVID-19 vaccination. Methods We conducted a web-based survey of 600 adults in the state of Florida between June 3 and June 14, 2021. Access to the sample was purchased through an industry-leading market research provider (Prodege MR), and survey respondents were selected using a stratified, quota sampling approach to ensure representativeness. Balanced quotas were determined (by region of the state) for gender, age, race, education, and ethnicity. The survey responses were analyzed using basic descriptive statistics, as well as chi-square testing and a logit regression model. Findings High levels of misinformation exposure were observed among participants, with 73% reporting some exposure to misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines in the past 6 months. Exposure to misinformation was directly correlated with vaccine hesitancy. Among those who did not report any exposure to misinformation, 73.8% of respondents were vaccinated. That number fell to 62.9% with exposure to just one misinformation theme and 52.2% for six or more (χ² = 11.349; φ = 0.138; p ≤ 0.05). Politicization was also found to be a major factor in vaccine hesitancy, with 73.4% of self-identified Democrats being vaccinated, compared to only 58.5% of Republicans and 56.5% of Independents (χ² = 16.334; φ = 0.165; p ≤ 0.001). Both misinformation exposure and political affiliation were strong predictors of vaccination even after accounting for other demographic predictors. Discussion The survey results add to previous research on misinformation and vaccine hesitancy by quantifying exposure to specific misinformation themes and identifying its relationship to vaccine hesitancy. Overcoming these impediments to vaccination will require strategic and targeted messaging on the part of public health professionals, which may be aided by collaboration with political thought leaders. Understanding the volume and nature of misinformation themes the public is exposed to regarding COVID-19 vaccines may aid public health officials in targeting this vaccine messaging to more directly address reasons for vaccine hesitancy.

Despite several recent studies reporting on young people’s well-being during COVID-19, few large-scale qualitative studies have been carried out that capture the experiences of young people from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) undergoing extended social restrictions. The challenges faced by young people from LMICs during COVID-19 are likely to be amplified by their countries’ large populations, resource constraints, lack of access to health care, living conditions, socio-spatial contexts, and the pandemic’s ramifications for communities. This study explored how youths perceived their well-being after being isolated for one-and-a-half years during the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative narrative research was employed as a method of inquiry. One-hundred and sixty-six university students in Jakarta, Indonesia, between the ages of 17 and 22 wrote reflective online essays on the consequences of extended pandemic isolation on their mental health. This data collection strategy offered an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon through the narratives of those who experienced it. Seven themes expressing the youths’ perceived well-being were identified through inductive reflective thematic analysis: (1) the anguish of loneliness and estrangement; (2) a state of “brokenness” resulting from emotional agony and distress; (3) frustration, confusion, and anger; (4) the experience of conflicting emotions; (5) uncertainty about both the present and future; (6) a sense of purpose and fulfillment; and (7) turning to faith. The findings provide important insights into Indonesian youths’ well-being following extended social restrictions following the outbreak. Their collective experiences can be used to inform policy and practice regarding the nature of support mechanisms required both during and following the pandemic, and in the future if such a situation were to occur again.

Understanding the factors that influence evacuation decision-making among local residents is of critical importance to those involved in monitoring and managing weather-related hazards. This study examined both geophysical and social variables that we believe influenced individual decision-making on whether to stay home, seek out a public shelter, or leave the area entirely during Hurricane Irma. A 23-item survey was administered to a convenience sample of adults (n = 234) who resided within a coastal Florida county that received an evacuation warning during Hurricane Irma in 2017. Results suggested sources of information relied on through media, government, family, and social networks contributed to differences in evacuation behavior. Moreover, potential exposure to weather-related conditions, such as flooding and strong winds, along with the likelihood to use available social resources, also influenced decisions to stay or leave the threatened area. Finally, prior evacuation behavior was significantly associated with the decision to evacuate during Hurricane Irma. The decision to evacuate for Hurricane Irma was shown to impact decision-making to evacuate for major hurricanes in the future. If these findings are applied to future storms, a broader conclusion can be made that residents in vulnerable areas may be more likely to evacuate for major hurricanes than they were in the past. Improved understanding of evacuation decision-making can assist emergency managers in preparation and planning to reduce casualties resulting from a hurricane or other weather-related hazard.