1.1 Literature review

A thorough exploration of community resilience in earthquake scenarios, as found in scholarly literature, highlights various critical aspects. Researchers emphasize the crucial role of structural components – including buildings, hospitals, schools, and other infrastructure – in coping with the consequences of seismic disturbances [25]. Evaluating the resilience of buildings is deemed essential for the overall resilience of communities, with factors like repair costs, occupancy rates, and asset values being key indicators [26]. Such evaluations often rely on metrics that include repair timelines, cost-effectiveness of retrofitting efforts, and structural adaptability to seismic events [27]. Effective earthquake disaster management involves community participation to enhance adaptive behaviours, underscored by risk awareness, education, disaster mitigation, and collaborative efforts between residents, government agencies, and other stakeholders [28]. Community resilience is about overcoming shared challenges and trauma, relying on social networks, technological innovations, and strong infrastructural support [29]. Studies in this area often examine how communities use these resources to rapidly mobilize and maintain continuity during and after seismic events [30,31]. Assessing seismic resilience in groups of buildings involves scrutinizing potential hazards, appraising the performance of individual buildings, and collectively evaluating the resilience of these clusters by incorporating seismic hazard maps and vulnerability assessments to better inform structural resilience strategies [7].

Also, research into earthquake resilience covers a broad spectrum of topics, including structural design principles, community preparedness, the resilience of healthcare systems, and the application of seismic isolation techniques [32]. Specific methodologies, such as hazard-based seismic design and probabilistic risk assessment, have identified limitations in traditional seismic resilience approaches [33]. These studies reveal significant shortcomings in traditional seismic design methods [33], emphasize the essential role of community resilience in disaster risk management [25], highlight the critical need for robust healthcare systems to respond effectively after earthquakes [34], and discuss how seismic isolation can help create communities that are sustainably resilient to such disasters by reducing the vulnerability of critical infrastructure and maintaining essential services during seismic events [35]. Also, incorporating cultural sensitivity as a foundational aspect of community engagement [36] is essential for ensuring that resilience measures resonate with local populations. Recognizing and integrating cultural values into preparedness efforts helps build trust and fosters greater acceptance of recommended safety practices by tailoring response and preparedness strategies that align with local beliefs and customs, thus enhancing community buy-in [37].

Furthermore, studies on earthquake preparedness, particularly among residents in rural areas affected by events like the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China, have been extensive [38,39,40]. These studies have pinpointed key factors that influence how individuals prepare for such disasters, including access to independent information about earthquakes, understanding of seismic risks, and confidence in personal and community response capabilities. Data from these studies underscore the role of education and prior experience in shaping individuals’ responses to disaster scenarios, illustrating how knowledge can mitigate fear and facilitate action [4,9,12,35,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51]. Findings indicate that individuals who possess a comprehensive understanding of disaster management are more likely to act decisively, such as evacuating promptly or quickly resuming their usual activities post-disaster, compared to those with limited knowledge, who may delay action while waiting for further instructions [4,9,12,35,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53].

Effective strategies for local governance to increase seismic resilience are an essential part of preparing urban and regional communities to be able to cope with the impacts of earthquakes and recover [54,55,56]. These methods are very important for earthquake-vulnerable areas because they help in reducing earthquake damage and promote sustainability. By implementing building codes that mandate seismic retrofitting and resilience measures, these governance frameworks ensure that communities are protected in the long term [57]. At the core of these strategies are preventive actions that oblige urban legislation for buildings and infrastructure to be armed or adapted so as not to collapse during seismic shocks [55]. Such actions not only save the immediate environment but also help the community become more resilient in the long haul [58]. Studies have shown that local governance frameworks, when incorporating resilience metrics, zoning regulations, and compliance enforcement, can significantly reduce earthquake damage [59,60]. The effectiveness of local governance in fostering seismic resilience can vary greatly depending on regional planning [61]. Authorities may develop diverse, customized plans that cater to their specific environmental and seismic challenges, underscoring the importance of personalized resilience strategies [62].

At the community and structural level, incorporating resilience goals into the seismic design of buildings and urban planning significantly enhances the speed of recovery after earthquakes [63]. This approach combines community-centric resilience strategies with precise engineering practices to better protect and serve the population during seismic events [64]. Furthermore, developing evaluation models to assess seismic resilience is crucial. These models take into account various important factors, including recovery speed, the effectiveness of disaster relief efforts, and the demographic and economic traits of the area, aiding in the refinement of emergency plans [65]. Incorporating systems dynamics within governance frameworks can enhance the understanding and development of seismic resilience. This technique is particularly useful in modern contexts like Society 5.0, where new technologies and societal needs are merged to optimize disaster management [66]. In places like Tabriz City or regions previously impacted by disasters such as the Gorkha Earthquake, governance strategies are specifically tailored to address the unique environmental and societal challenges, ensuring effective and customized resilience measures [67].

Recent studies have highlighted the significance of interdisciplinary approaches in enhancing earthquake resilience, particularly by combining engineering practices with social sciences to improve community preparedness and structural resilience [1,68]. This interdisciplinary method emphasizes the role of social factors, such as trust in local institutions and community engagement, in reinforcing physical infrastructure efforts. For instance, research demonstrates that communities with stronger social networks and trust in disaster response agencies are more likely to adopt and maintain seismic retrofitting and emergency planning measures [69]. Similarly, some research studies suggest that involving residents in the decision-making process related to building codes and disaster readiness can foster higher compliance rates and improve the overall impact of resilience policies [70].

2.1 Study area

Montenegro’s topography presents a labyrinth of complexities when viewed through the lens of geotectonics (Figure 3a). The convergence of tectonic plates within this region sparks a perpetual state of geological flux, a phenomenon dating back to the onset of Alpine orogenesis and persisting to the present day. Through exhaustive geological and geophysical inquiries, bolstered by the insights gleaned from geological cartography and satellite imagery, the foundational geotectonic attributes of Montenegro’s terrain emerge. This rugged landscape showcases meticulous zoning of geological formations, with the dominant tectonic masses aligning themselves in a steadfast northwest-southeast trajectory. Layers of rock gracefully incline towards the northeast, while the majestic folds thrust towards the southwest, creating a tapestry adorned with a plethora of anticlinal and synclinal structures, interspersed with thrusts, minor nappe structures, and faults [71,72].

Figure 3

Study area: (a) location of Montenegro; maps of seismic re-ionization of Montenegro territory within the return periods of 200 years (b) and the return period of 500 years (c). Based on the Institute of Hydrometeorology and Seismology of Montenegro.

Delving deeper into the geological fabric of Montenegro unveils a tapestry woven from distinct structural tectonic units, as illuminated by a comprehensive study exploring the nexus between geological formations and potential calamities in the region [73].

The para-autochthonous tectonic unit, known by various monikers such as the Adriatic, Adriatic-Ionian, Dalmatian, or Southern Adriatic unit, envelops the most prominent swathes of Montenegro’s coastline. Stretching from Grbalj to Luštica and Kobilica, this unit extends its reach to the expanse between Bar and Ulcinjska Bojana, housing regional thrust systems that have been meticulously catalogued during the pursuit of oil exploration. These systems reveal a landscape teeming with overturned and reverse-overturned structures, bordered to the northeast by the formidable Budva-Cukalj zone. Surface features such as Volujica-Šasko Lake, Možura-Briska Mountain, and Bijela Mountain stand as testaments to the geological diversity, with Cretaceous carbonates and Eocene flysch sediments adorning their cores [71,72].

Meanwhile, the Budva-Cukalj zone traces a sinuous path along Montenegro’s coastal fringes, spanning from Sutomore in the northwest to the undulating slopes of Orjen, Lovćen, Sutorina, and Rumija, before traversing through Albania to Greece. Initially characterized by a rift structure, spanning a width of 40–100 km, this zone underwent a metamorphosis during the Alpine orogenesis, converging into a system of overturned isoclines, fractured and partitioned by thrusts. This region emerges as one of Montenegro’s most dynamically altered terrains, a testament to the tumultuous forces shaping its geological identity.

Venturing further into Montenegro’s heartland unveils the High Karst, a realm encompassing the central expanse and coastal fringes. From Rumija, Lovćen, and Orjen in the southwest to Volujak, Plužine, Durmitor, Šemolj, Kolašin, Tresnjevik, and Komovi in the northwest, this domain stands as a testament to nature’s architectural prowess. Comprising the Old Montenegrin and Kučka nappe, separated by the synclinorium of Zeta, this region’s geological narrative is one of juxtaposition. The Old Montenegrin unit, with its intricate anticlinorium, cascades into a mosaic of anticlinal–synclinal sets, while the Kučka unit, adorned with carbonate rocks and Durmitor flysch sediments, paints a picture of geological splendour. Finally, the Durmitor tectonic unit, nestled in Montenegro’s northeastern reaches, represents a bastion of geological intrigue. Separated from its predecessors by reverse dislocations along the Dinarides, this unit is a treasure trove of thrusts, emblematic of the region’s geological dynamism [71,72].

Geological hazards that are caused by the tectonic movements in the Earth’s crust are called earthquakes or minor quakes. The territory of Montenegro is an area with high seismic risk, with frequent small to moderate-sized earthquakes, and occasionally very strong, devastating earthquakes (Figure 3b and c). Hence, as the particularly active seismic area, the following zones should be emphasized: seismologic zones around Ulcinj and Bar, Budva and Brajići, Boka Kotorska but also immediate surroundings of Berane, the entire region of the Skadar Lake, Maganik, etc. The maps of seismic re-ionization of Montenegro reflect possible seismic intensity degrees divide several zones of different seismic hazards: The southern, coastal region with Ulcinj, Skadar, Budva, and Boka Kotorska zones with the possible maximum intensity (in the middle ground) of nine degrees of the Mercalli (MSC) scale, Podgorica–Danilovgrad zone with the expected maximum intensity of eight degrees of MSC scale, the central part of Montenegro with the northern region including Nikšič, Žabljak, and Pljevlja with the possible maximum intensity of seven degrees of the MSC scale, and an isolated seismologic Berane zone that may generate earthquakes with a maximum intensity of eight degrees on the MSC scale (Figure 3b and c). Montenegro’s tectonic activity, driven by the convergence of major tectonic plates, results in significant seismic potential across the region. This geological dynamic underpins the frequency and intensity of earthquakes, setting the stage for understanding how specific geological structures contribute to the area’s seismic risk.

Countless seismic events have shaken the shores of Montenegro, yet many have slipped by unnoticed. Pliny, in the ancient corridors of the first century, penned an account of a cataclysmic earthquake that laid waste to Epidaurum, known today as Cavtat. The annals of history recall Duklja’s torment in 518 AD when the earth convulsed beneath its feet. Kotor, in the cruel dance of fate, witnessed ruin twice over, first in 1520 and then in 1559, both times under the relentless grip of seismic fury. Legend speaks of the harrowing day of June 13, 1563, when every corner of Boka was razed to the ground by an earthquake of indeterminate magnitude, yet monstrous in its wrath. Echoes of a similar tremor resonated through Boka in 1608. The year 1667 etched its mark in blood and rubble, as Kotor, Perast, Risan, Herceg Novi, Budva, Bar, and Ulcinj succumbed to destruction. The annals bear witness to temblors of magnitude surpassing the IX degree on the Mercalli scale, their fury unleashed upon the Montenegrin coast in 1780 and 1830, and again in 1905, 1926, and 1927. These seismic convulsions not only assailed the coastline but also reverberated through the valleys of Podgorica-Skadar and Berane (Radojičić, 2008), including the devastating quake of 1979.

The earnest pursuit of seismic understanding in Montenegro traces its origins to the nineteenth century, when scholars meticulously chronicled the tremors that scarred their land, primarily through statistical analysis. The dawn of the twentieth century heralded a new era as seismic endeavours in Serbia began to dissect macroseismic data across the Balkans, Montenegro included. The illustrious work of Jelenko Mihajlović stands as a testament to this scholarly pursuit. The genesis of Montenegro’s seismic instrumentation unfolded in March 1960, with the establishment of the Seismological Observatory in Titograd, now enshrined as Podgorica. This institution, born in the crucible of necessity, evolved into the Republic Seismological Institute following the tumult of April 15, 1979 (Ivanović, 1991). Despite these strides, substantive inquiry into Montenegro’s seismic landscape remained a rarity until the tragic cataclysm of April 15, 1979.

2.2 Socio-economic and demographic characteristics of respondents

The sample analysed in our study achieved 50% of the subjects being men and 50% women. This gives an idea of different life stages possibly affecting the disaster response as they reach from young adults at 22 to older adults at 60. The educational level of the participants ranges from secondary professional training to a PhD, which makes it possible to investigate whether disaster preparedness and resilience are influenced by high or low levels of education. The sample is mixed in terms of employment status as shown in Table 1, with the largest % being fully employed (25%), followed by retired (25%) both percentages are equivalent. This variation speaks to some diversity in economic circumstances and that could have relevance for a variety of preparations against emergencies. Only seven of the sampled women were married including only two who had been married for a long time, with 40% being single and never married, another third divorced after marriage failure when progeny or paternity claims surfaced then sending them back to their “absent husbands,” while the final fourth of interviewed people admitted that they had contemplated suicide following the financial disaster which malediction apparently afflicted true partners in this case as well – even though these lucky couples leveraged multiple tenders! The participants had a monthly income between 300€ and 1,150€; therefore, they were in distinct financial situations that may affect the feasibility of investing in disaster prevention measures. The sample was independently selected school should understand that the geographical distribution of the limited urban and rural schools from Montenegro’s natural disaster exposure horizon is potentially affecting students’ views about resilience. Together, these differences in demographic and socioeconomic composition make our sample more heterogeneous than the overall Australian population which will provide for a richer analysis of the factors affecting disaster resilience across different sub-populations (Table 1).

Incorporating demographic data enriches this analysis by revealing how factors like age, education, and employment status may shape individuals’ resilience and readiness for seismic events. This context helps to clarify variations in awareness and response capabilities within the community, making it possible to pinpoint specific groups that could benefit most from tailored resilience programs – all without needing to delve into procedural details.

2.3 Data collection and analysis

In this study, data collection involved conducting semi-structured interviews with subject matter experts and thoroughly reviewing relevant documents, with insights examined through qualitative content analysis [74]. A carefully designed interview framework provided structured guidance throughout the process, ensuring all key themes were fully covered and enabling responses to address the study’s objectives comprehensively. This approach allowed for an in-depth exploration of expert viewpoints, providing consistency across interviews and a broad perspective on each relevant topic. The insights gained from interviews provide a nuanced layer to this study on seismic resilience in Montenegro, bringing forth first-hand perspectives on local knowledge, preparedness, and response strengths. These qualitative findings enrich the analysis by spotlighting specific community needs and identifying areas where resilience strategies can be strengthened, adding a meaningful depth to the quantitative data. By addressing both structural and social aspects, the study achieves a well-rounded understanding of resilience challenges, tailoring recommendations to fit Montenegro’s unique context.

For this study, ATLAS.ti software was instrumental in conducting a thorough and systematic analysis of the collected data, streamlining the qualitative review of interview materials. This tool significantly enhanced both the depth and accuracy of our findings by supporting detailed coding, which added rigor and bolstered the validity of our conclusions. The data were carefully coded using a blend of summarizing and structuring techniques tailored for qualitative content analysis. These approaches brought unique perspectives to the data, shedding light on the intricate challenges and dynamics involved in cultural heritage protection. Through summary content analysis, we distilled the text material down to its essential elements, enabling us to spotlight the most prominent themes within the data. In addition, we tracked the frequency of key terms to provide a clearer view of the dominant concepts in the dataset. Also, the authors acknowledge the use of Grammarly Premium (1.2.96) and ChatGPT 4.0 in the process of translating and improving the clarity and quality of the English language in this manuscript.

3.1 Citizen resilience and preparedness for earthquake disasters

A frequency analysis of key terms in respondents’ discussions on earthquake resilience reveals central themes, blending both qualitative insights and quantitative indicators on priorities emphasized by participants. High-frequency terms such as “education,” “response,” “knowledge,” “training,” and “preparedness” (each cited at least four times) underline the importance placed on comprehensive education programs and practical skills that equip citizens for effective earthquake response. The terms “education” and “response” refer to the essential elements of earthquake resilience: “Education” highlights the need for citizen awareness and skill-building programs that prepare individuals for emergencies, while “response” emphasizes timely and effective actions by both citizens and institutions during an earthquake, each critical to strengthening community resilience. Specifically, “education” and “response” were mentioned five times each, closely followed by “knowledge,” “training,” and “preparedness” with four mentions, demonstrating a strong consensus on education and hands-on preparation as pillars of resilience.

Additional terms, including “adequate,” “institutions,” and “coordination” (appearing three times each), emphasize the need for structured collaboration among citizens, institutions, and government bodies. These responses suggest that successful disaster preparedness requires not only individual readiness but also cohesive institutional support. Terms like “capability” and “earthquake,” also cited three times, reinforce the importance of building both personal and collective capacities to address earthquake risks effectively.

The analysis indicates that a layered approach – prioritizing education, practical training, and institutional coordination – is essential for enhancing earthquake resilience at the community level. Quantitative data, with 62.5% of the participants focusing on education and training as foundational, support this approach to foster self-reliance in disaster response. Together, these findings offer a framework for resilience initiatives that could significantly strengthen community preparedness, highlighting the combined roles of ongoing education, hands-on training, and robust institutional networks in preparing communities to better withstand earthquake impacts (Table 2 and Figure 4).

Figure 4

Word cloud analysis of key themes in defining citizen resilience to earthquake-induced disasters.

Upon examining the answers given, we note that the main two sections mentioned were the absence of an education system and public awareness of earthquake hazards. Most responses identify the unpreparedness of society, inadequate training, and poor public communication outlets as critical to their low resilience. Five of the seven pathways mandate that empathy and solidarity must be nurtured in society, yet these components are not frequently proposed by the way of responses to the analysis.

In more detail, out of the eight analysed responses, in five responses (62.5%), the lack of an educational system in preparing citizens for earthquakes is emphasized, while in two responses (25%), the lack of information and training for citizens, especially children, is specifically highlighted. Communication with citizens is mentioned in four responses (50%) as another key segment that lags behind, while specific plans of institutions and measures to increase resilience are mentioned in only two responses (25%). Empathy and solidarity in society are mentioned in only one response (12.5%). These results also suggest that more effort is required to improve educational programs and media campaigns so that civilians are better informed about earthquakes and their consequences. In addition, the importance of active communication by institutions with citizens was pointed out to not only warn about a potential disaster but also how to act during an earthquake (Table 3 and Figure 5).

Figure 5

Word cloud analysis of key themes in assessment of citizen resilience in coping with earthquake disasters.

Examining obstacles to implementing a specific resilience action following an earthquake, it is realized that individuals and society more broadly experience a diversity of barriers to be better prepared for these disasters. Barriers most frequently mentioned are a lack of information and awareness on the dangers of earthquakes and a shortage of qualified people for deploying education and training. Also, corruption and bad governance in construction are quoted as critical influences on obstacles to improving earthquake resilience. The report also stresses ignorance, negligence (by individual and collective citizens), and disinterest. These are aspects of education and awareness that have had too little particular salience or visibility in national policy discussions about resilience. From the analysis, it is clear that the challenges of implementing individual strategies for seismic resilience are numerous and intertwined, necessitating a comprehensive strategy to combat this issue (Table 4 and Figure 6).

Figure 6

Word cloud analysis of key themes in primary obstacles to implementing resilience measures in response to earthquake.

Key barriers to preparedness and response to disasters, particularly earthquakes, were identified in an analysis of the resilience of local government. The most obvious are the clear lack of personnel to provide the required education and implementation of these resilience activities, political attention being diverted to other issues, and resources stretched too thin post-earthquake. While there is some level of readiness, it remains minimal. Furthermore, people do not know what activities the local government is doing to improve earthquake preparedness. This lack of understanding and awareness of the risks posed by earthquakes contributes to unpreparedness for responding to such disasters. Furthermore, some local governments inadvertently dismiss the inevitability of earthquakes, leading to insufficient attention and action in planning and implementing resilience measures. Structural deficiencies in control and coordination systems are also identified as limiting factors in the preparedness of local governments. This is underscored by the fact that, as shown in the analysis above, greater coordination and education at a local level are urgently needed when earthquake-created disasters strike (Table 5 and Figure 7).

Figure 7

Word cloud analysis of key themes in the assessment of local self-governments’ resilience in responding to earthquake disasters.

3.2 Knowledge and awareness about earthquakes

Supporting previous findings, the overall citizen resilience in facing earthquakes as disasters and knowledge about those are quite scarce, looking at the perceptive views of respondents. This lack is the result of insufficient learning, either through formal education (schooling) or other means, as well as inadequate nationwide programs that incorporate Earthquake Awareness directly into its components.

Some respondents point out that the general populace’s knowledge about earthquakes is rudimentary and superficial, while others argue that time constraints and the demands of daily life hinder deeper engagement with this subject. Suggestions for addressing this issue span a spectrum of approaches, ranging from educational initiatives targeting all age groups to diverse communication strategies, such as school curricula enhancements, workshops, training sessions, broadcasts, and community outreach programs.

The general assessment highlights the urgent need for enhanced educational initiatives and successful social marketing of earthquake information. Favoured measures should be vital for increasing citizen resiliency and preparedness against such natural calamities (Table 6 and Figure 8).

Figure 8

Word cloud analysis of key themes in assessment of citizens’ knowledge about earthquakes and resilience.

The quantification of the frequency of occurrence of certain themes in respondents’ answers to questions reveals the following results: (a) Lack of education about earthquakes: This theme appears in all responses and stands out as a dominant theme. Key words related to this theme in responses include “insufficient education,” “lack of information,” and “low awareness.” (b) Lack of educational programs: Also present in all responses, emphasizing the need for better distribution of educational programs about earthquakes. Keywords in this context include “scientific-educational broadcasts,” “educational approach,” and “training programs”; (c) Citizens’ unpreparedness: This theme appears in several responses, highlighting the lack of awareness and readiness of citizens to react in the event of earthquakes. Keywords related to this theme include “unpreparedness,” “lack of risk awareness”; (d) Need for continuous education: Respondents emphasize the need for ongoing education about earthquakes to increase citizens’ awareness and preparedness. Keywords related to this theme include “continuous education” and “ongoing information”; (e) Lack of time and routine: This theme appears in several responses, indicating that daily obligations and routine hinder the process of education and earthquake preparedness. Key words used about this theme include “lack of time” and “daily obligations.”

Percentages and quotation can be used to measure how often these themes are mentioned in answers by participants. For example, the theme “Lack of education about earthquakes” may be identified in 100% of the responses, and the theme “Citizens’ unpreparedness” may be identified in 25%. Detection limits of these can be useful for better analysis and planning of earthquake hazard information campaigns (Table 6 and Figure 8).

In the analysis of attitudes regarding improving citizens’ resilience to earthquakes as a natural disaster, it is observed that there is a consensus on the importance of education and information provision as a key aspect in increasing preparedness. The significance of education is emphasized as the most effective way to acquire knowledge on how to react in case of earthquakes and prepare oneself and households for possible disasters. Creating awareness about the importance of preparedness and involving citizens in activities related to resilience is an important step in building a resilient society. Alongside education, there is a prescription for creating reserves of basic food supplies at both the national and local levels, followed by providing accessible information to citizens about the status of these reserves and how they can prepare for potential catastrophes. Additional measures include mandatory educational activities through school curricula, additional courses, and seminars, as well as organizing workshops and training sessions to educate citizens on crisis response. In the overall context, it appears that the focus is on adequate education, implementing measures such as training and information provision, as well as creating awareness and involving citizens in processes to enhance earthquake resilience (Table 7 and Figure 9).

Figure 9

Word cloud analysis of key themes in resilience level of households in Montenegro in responding to earthquake disasters.

Part of the analysis on the perception regarding earthquake resilience in Montenegro through responses from participants provided diversity in attitudes and recommendations for increasing readiness, as well as a practical reaction to disasters. A few point out the need for trained staff and dedicated citizen training/support services or teams, while others suggest that earthquake response should be systematically integrated into education from a young age. They also recommend mobilization and awareness-raising activities through the media, campaigns, and institutional information diffusion. This is complemented by a call for state and local institutions to be strongly active in coordinating or supporting initiatives that help citizens improve their resilience. Overall, a variety of positions make an essential addition to both the discussion of the issue and possibilities for enhancing citizens’ earthquake resilience in Montenegro (Table 8 and Figure 10).

Figure 10

Word cloud analysis of key themes in the assessment of citizens’ awareness and influencing factors regarding preventive measures for earthquake disasters.

3.3 Institutional engagement and response preparedness

Analysis of respondents’ attitudes regarding households’ resilience to earthquakes in terms of verbal/written protection and rescue plans reveals the following: (a) lack of awareness: the majority of respondents emphasize insufficient awareness among citizens about household protection and rescue plans. Keywords related to this theme are “unawareness,” “lack of knowledge,” and “lack of risk awareness.” This theme is present in 100% of the responses; (b) lack of practical steps: respondents point out a lack of concrete and practical steps in implementing protection and rescue plans. Also, it is important to mention that “resilience” refers to the overall capacity to recover from seismic impacts, “preparedness” addresses proactive measures taken before an earthquake, and “response” relates to actions taken during and immediately after an event.

Key words related to this theme are “lack of action,” “lack of practical steps,” and “invisible measures.” This theme appears in 75% of the responses; (c) sense of security: respondents also mention a sense of security that can lead to neglecting protection and rescue plans. Key words related to this theme are “sense of comfort,” “security,” and “trust that a disaster will not happen.”

This theme is present in 50% of the answers; (d) little appeal of plans: some responses point out that written protection and rescue plans for citizens are not appealing. Keywords associated with this topic: “dreary schemes” and “schemes drear.” It comes in the second position where 50% of the responses are about this issue; (e) informal communication: the data indicate that most people think they get their information through informal communication from friends or relatives – however, almost half are missing formal education and distribution of plans. This theme emerges in 50% of the responses.

Overall, the analysis indicates a significant lack of awareness and practical steps regarding household protection and rescue plans, pointing to the need for improving education and implementing concrete measures to increase citizens’ resilience to earthquakes (Table 9 and Figure 11).

Figure 11

Word cloud analysis of key themes in the evaluation of citizens’ stockpiling of food and water supplies for earthquake preparedness.

Table 10 provides a detailed look into citizens’ views on earthquake preparedness, particularly focusing on stockpiling habits and overall readiness for seismic events. Responses vary significantly, showing different levels of preparedness between urban and rural households. Participants often refer back to their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, drawing contrasts between their ability to restock essentials then and the likely difficulties they would face in an earthquake, where widespread and immediate damage could make resupply almost impossible. Key thematic areas – such as stockpile levels, perceptions of earthquake risks, daily priorities, and lessons learned from institutions – help organize the primary factors that shape preparedness. For instance, Participant 1 mentions how the pandemic served as a valuable learning experience for local institutions, underlining the importance of building resilience before a crisis hits. Theme frequencies further illuminate common concepts, with terms like stockpiling, pandemic comparisons, and institutional learning surfacing in 45% of the responses, while low stockpile levels and daily priorities were noted by 40% of the participants. Additional significant themes include stockpiling differences between urban and rural households (35%), short-term supply reliance due to busy lifestyles (30%), and concerns over food preservation and disaster risks (25%). Less common themes are “living hand-to-mouth” (20%), complacency in earthquake zones (15%), and pandemic insights linked to inadequate preparation (10%). This thematic breakdown, along with the frequency of each term’s appearance, sheds light on citizens’ stockpiling practices and their perspectives on earthquake readiness, offering valuable insights for developing targeted programs to build resilience (Table 10 and Figure 12).

Figure 12

Word cloud analysis of key themes in the assessment of the effectiveness of oral and written disaster preparedness plans among citizens for earthquake readiness, particularly at the household level.

In the analysis of respondents’ attitudes towards citizens’ resilience to respond to disasters caused by earthquakes in terms of practising specific activities (evacuation), we observe the following results: (a) a very small number of respondents (one) emphasize the existence of previous services and exercises conducted in case of danger. However, today, there is a perceived lack of such organizations, leading to less comprehensive education and citizens’ ability to respond; (b) a very small percentage of respondents (one) state that citizens do not conduct evacuation exercises in case of earthquakes at all, and another is not familiar with conducting such activities; (c) several respondents expressed the opinion that documents and plans exist, but there are no activities such as training and education to help citizens react better in case of a disaster. This indicates a disproportionate relationship between the existence of resources and their application in practice; (d) some respondents emphasize that there was a practice of conducting exercises in the past, but today, it is very rare or non-existent. They also propose introducing exercises in various institutions such as schools, hospitals, and government agencies; (e) the majority of respondents (four) express uncertainty or lack of knowledge about conducting exercises to respond in case of earthquakes, suggesting the need for increased awareness and education on this topic. Overall, the results indicate a significant lack of awareness and ability of citizens to respond to earthquakes through evacuation exercises. This result highlights the need for improvement in training and education programs to increase citizens’ resilience to earthquakes (Table 11 and Figure 13).

Figure 13

Word cloud analysis of key themes in the evaluation of citizens’ engagement in evacuation drills for earthquake preparedness.

Analysing the opinions of respondents on what local authorities should undertake to increase citizens’ resilience to earthquakes, there is a consensus on the importance of education and training. The overall focus is on raising awareness and preparing citizens for possible earthquakes. Various activities are proposed, including educational workshops, compulsory education in schools, as well as collaboration with larger firms and businesses to provide adequate equipment and training for employees. In addition, it is suggested to direct resources towards elaborating plans to increase community resilience, as well as establishing special services or teams to respond to earthquakes. In the overall context, the proposed activities aim to educate and enhance citizens’ preparedness, which would significantly contribute to increasing resilience to earthquakes (Table 12 and Figure 14).

Figure 14

Word cloud analysis of key themes in strategies to enhance citizens’ resilience in responding to earthquakes by local self-governments.

3.4 Citizen motivation and community-level factors

In the analysis of citizens’ motivation to undertake specific resilience measures in response to earthquakes, several observations emerge: (a) three respondents, accounting for 25% of the total, highlight the potential of introducing educational broadcasts as a means of motivating citizens. This is recommended as a column for informing and raising awareness of the risks; (b) 4 out of 12 respondents (33%) emphasize the importance of educating younger members of society through workshops and educational films. It is considered the most effectual and long-standing method in creating response capacity; (c) awareness of earthquake hazards motivates three respondents (25% of the total). They also recommend holding forums with rescuers to discuss experiences and provide advice to citizens; (d) two respondents representing 17% of the total point towards fear as the main motivator for action but also suggest ignorance regarding the dangers to be a significant issue. From the overall results, we can suggest that a general awareness about the risks, education on precautions and measures, and also the possibility to obtain expert advice are very important for resilience measures. In addition to the basic results presented, it is important to note a negative attitude towards the existing education and preparedness system for dealing with earthquakes in some responses. Respondents believe that existing mechanisms are not efficient enough and largely rely on instinctive reactions in dangerous situations. This suggests the need for a change in approach towards education and raising awareness about earthquakes.

Furthermore, it is essential to emphasize that citizens’ motivation to take resilience measures may vary depending on various factors, including age, educational level, living conditions, and past experiences with disasters. Some respondents believe that fear is the most important motivator, while others emphasize protecting and rescuing their loved ones as the main driver for taking action.

In addition, some responses indicate that citizens have different perceptions of earthquake risks, highlighting the need for more effort in educating and raising awareness on this important issue. While education is generally considered the most effective motivator, other factors such as dedication, solidarity, and responsibility towards the community can also contribute to increasing citizens’ resilience to earthquakes (Table 13 and Figure 15).

Figure 15

Word cloud analysis of key themes in the evaluation of factors influencing citizens’ motivation for resilience measures in earthquake disasters.

As we can derive from the respondents’ answers, opinions differ on how to improve citizens’ resilience to earthquakes as disasters in terms of knowledge, preparedness, measures taken, and planning. The proposed measures for increasing citizens’ resilience are versatile. First is the emphasis on education, with suggestions including teaching earthquake courses at all school levels and using social networks as information channels, especially for younger population. The importance of distributing earthquake response information brochures is also highlighted.

Second is the need to stress more on food stockpile readiness, both at the state level, through local administrations, and by individuals. This also includes transparent information to citizens about the state of stockpiles and potential opportunities. Other suggestions include incorporating earthquake training and education into state exams, as well as holding regular school classes on the issue.

Third, workplaces should conduct regular exercises and drills to help citizens learn the appropriate earthquake response protocols. Suggestions for improvement include hiring permanent workers to oversee volunteers during drills and conducting community education on earthquake awareness. Throughout all proposed measures, the importance of raising awareness among citizens about the importance of prevention and earthquake preparedness is emphasized, as well as strengthening institutional capacities to deal with this risk. Overall, there is a consensus that only a combination of education, training, preventive measures, and stockpile preparation will ensure greater citizen resilience to earthquakes (Table 14 and Figure 16).

Figure 16

Word cloud analysis of key themes in strategies to enhance citizens’ resilience in responding to earthquake disasters.