Seismic risk perception and its influence on masonry code compliance: A study of construction foremen in Jipijapa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21967871Keywords:
seismic risk perception, confined masonry, master builders, construction standards, structural safetyAbstract
Ecuador is located in the Pacific Ring of Fire, which increases the seismic vulnerability of masonry buildings, the predominant construction system in intermediate cities. In Jipijapa, such structures are frequently built by master builders without permanent technical supervision. This study analyzes the seismic risk perception of master builders in Jipijapa and its relationship with risk propensity, risk preferences, and confidence in practical experience relative to technical masonry standards. A quantitative, descriptive-correlational, and cross-sectional non-experimental design was adopted. A structured 12-item Likert survey (1–5) was administered to 72 master builders, organized into four dimensions: Risk Perception (D1), Risk Propensity (D2), Risk Preferences (D3), and Confidence in Practical Experience (D4). Descriptive results show that D1 (M = 4.47) and D4 (M = 4.44) yielded high scores, while D2 (M = 3.32) showed intermediate values. D3 was not interpreted as an aggregate construct due to its low reliability (α = 0.12) and was analyzed at the item level. Spearman correlation analysis revealed a statistically significant moderate positive association between D1 and D4 (rs = 0.491, p < .001), suggesting that higher seismic risk perception is associated with a greater reliance on experience-based control practices, even when these depart from standardized regulatory procedures. It is concluded that high seismic risk perception can coexist with greater confidence in practical experience relative to technical standards. Strengthening training programs and normative outreach targeting this occupational group is recommended.
Downloads
References
Aguiar Falconí, R. (2003). Análisis sísmico por desempeño. Centro de Investigaciones Científicas, Escuela Politécnica del Ejército, EDIESPE.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Bungacho, J., Baquero, R., & Hernández, L. (2022). Evaluación de vulnerabilidad sísmica, análisis estructural y diseño de reforzamiento de una vivienda en Quito–Ecuador. Ciencia, Ingenierías y Aplicaciones, 5, 63–79. https://doi.org/10.22206/cyap.2022.v5i2.pp63-79
Burlotos, C., Kijewski-Correa, T., & Taflanidis, A. A. (2020). The housing market value chain: An integrated approach for mitigating risk in informal residential construction in Haiti. Sustainability, 12(19), 8006. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198006
Cabrera-Tenecela, P. (2023). Nueva organización de los diseños de investigación. South American Research Journal, 3(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8050508
Carreño, M. L., Cardona, O. D., & Barbat, A. H. (2012). New methodology for urban seismic risk assessment from a holistic perspective. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 10(2), 547–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9302-2
Chaswa, E. N., Kosamu, I. B. M., Kumwenda, S., & Utembe, W. (2020). Risk perception and its influencing factors among construction workers in Malawi. Safety, 6(2), 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety6020033
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Danso, F. O., Agyekum, K., Manu, P., Adinyira, E., Ahadzie, D., & Badu, E. (2024). Examining the perception of site workers of their risk-taking behaviours on construction sites in Ghana. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(8), 2997–3023. https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-02-2022-0113
García, H., & Degrande, G. (2017). Seismic vulnerability analysis of a two-story family dwelling in confined masonry in Cuenca, Ecuador. Maskana, 8, 99–114. https://doi.org/10.18537/mskn.08.02.08
Hernández-Sampieri, R., & Mendoza, C. (2018). Metodología de la investigación: Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. McGraw Hill.
Hinsberg, K. L., Nadesan, M., & Lamanna, A. J. (2024). Communicative framework development for construction risk governance: An analysis of risk and trust perception for organizational sustainability. Sustainability, 16(13), 5794. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135794
Menéndez-Navarro, G. M., García-García, J. G., & Reyna-García, A. E. (2023). Vulnerabilidad sísmica en edificaciones de la ciudad de Portoviejo: Reflexiones del 16-A. Revista InGenio, 6(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.18779/ingenio.v6i1.565
Quinde, J., Jiménez-Pacheco, J., & Ortega-Guamán, E. (2023). Revisión de normas de diseño para mampostería confinada en Latinoamérica: propuestas para la Norma Ecuatoriana de Construcción. Revista Politécnica, 51(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.33333/rp.vol51n1.07
Sitkin, S. B., & Pablo, A. L. (1992). Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. The Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 9–38. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1992.4279564
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
Wang, Y., & Liu, C. (2023). The influence of Chinese construction workers' safety stress and risk perception on safety behaviors based on structural equation model. En Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Economic Management and Model Engineering, ICEMME, Nanjing, China. European Alliance for Innovation (EAI). https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.18-11-2022.2327148
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Daniel Suarez-Santana, Oscar Parrales-Villavicencio, Diego Sornoza-Parrales, Justin Magdalena Eguez Morales
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
