Abstract
South Dunedin is an area of the coastal city of Dunedin, in the South Island of Aotearoa / New Zealand, and is exposed to several natural hazards including flooding, erosion and tsunami. In 1923, 2015 and 2024, there were major flood events that cost millions of dollars in damages. Future predictions estimating that the frequency and intensity of hazard events will increase over the next century, leading to discussions about the future of South Dunedin. Risk research suggests that populations exposed to hazards will tend to have mixed perceptions and tolerance for risk. While a high level of perception should lower tolerance and encourage risk mitigation, the opposite is often the case. Several influencing factors have been identified in past literature, including cognitive and emotional heuristics as well as the appraisal of risks and benefits, yet their exact contribution is unknown. This research aims to fill this gap by investigating the reasons for risk tolerance in coastal communities. To address the research goal, this thesis adopts a constructivist research paradigm to explore how South Dunedin residents construct their perception of risk by using a mixed method approach. A survey was conducted on 20 participants from target suburbs, with five respondents also volunteering for a semi-structured interview. Results indicate that participants perceived a high level of risk but had high tolerance for it, mirroring findings of past studies. Furthermore, a combination of cognitive and emotional factors was identified as influencing this tolerance. The findings of this research suggest that participants utilised a combination of interacting cognitive and emotional processes to perceive, evaluate, and tolerate the risks. Emotion was identified as a potential influencer of what information participants used and how much impact it had on their tolerance for risk. Furthermore, the high perception and tolerance of risk may have been partially explained by the inclusion of risk evaluation, possibly demonstrating how participants evaluated the benefits to be greater than the high level of risk.