Review article: Multi-Hazards and Household Preparedness Planning: Evidence, Gaps and Opportunities

Abstract. This paper presents a systematic analysis of peer-reviewed evidence on household preparedness and multi-hazard interrelationships, identifying what constitutes an effective preparedness plan and assessing how far current research integrates multi-hazard thinking. A systematic search of literature published since 2006 yielded 138 relevant studies, assessed by geographical focus, methodological approach, alignment with best practice, and engagement with multi-hazard perspectives. Fifty papers underwent in-depth qualitative analysis. Findings reveal a persistent Global North and quantitative bias in the evidence base: only 18 % of case studies originate from low- and middle-income countries, and 66 % employ solely quantitative methods. Current understandings of preparedness are therefore narrow, often excluding from low-resource contexts. From the in-depth analysis, we identify key elements of effective household preparedness planning in low-income settings, including shared assets and gender norms. We further show that 45 % of studies focus on a single hazard, with limited attention to hazard interrelationships; 62 % make no explicit reference to how multiple hazards interact to shape preparedness strategies. We conclude with recommendations for future household preparedness research that (a) adopts a broader definition of the term ‘household’, (b) considers gender, (c) considers the barriers to adoption of preparedness plans, (d) embraces qualitative and mixed-methods approaches and (e) considers multi-hazard interactions between hazards and preparedness strategies. The paper advances understanding of the limited maturity of multi-hazard preparedness research and highlights the need for evidence that links household-level practice with Priority 4 of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–30 and the mid-term call for inclusive, multi-hazard risk governance.