Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
A flood event in itself can be regarded as a
significant communicator of risk. Kates (1962) in
his seminal work, Hazard and Choice Perception
in Flood PlainManagement, found a link between
experience and awareness of flood risk. Subse-
quent research and recent studies have confirmed
experience of flooding as the key factor in flood
awareness and preparedness (Environment
Agency 2004a; Tunstall et al. 2007). In the FRMRC
case studies, perceptions of flood risk and worry
about the possibility of flooding in the next
12 months (and readiness to undertake preventa-
tivemeasures) were higher for those who had been
flooded at their property. Some significant social
factors affecting levels of flood risk awareness and
the propensity to take action to minimize flood
impacts have been identified in English research
(Fielding et al. 2005). Regression analysis showed a
range of socioeconomic indicators to be significant
in increasing flood awareness. As before, previous
flood experience emerged again as by far the big-
gest factor. Those who had been resident for 1 year
or less showed markedly less awareness than
longer-term residents.
In an alternative approach, psychologists have
attempted to explain responsiveness to flood risk
communications and people's predispositions to
act to reduce their flood risk. These attempt to
improve risk communications by matching mes-
sage types to individual psychological traits. The
audience segmentation methods common in so-
cial marketing are based on this idea (e.g.
O'Neill 2004), but to date these have not proved
altogether successful and useful in the UK.
flooding, although it is likely that 'top-down'
campaigns that aim to convince people that they
are at risk are unlikely to succeed alone without
engaging local stakeholders in raising awareness.
A key preparatory action available to those at risk
in England and Wales was to register on the EA's
service, nowcalled 'FloodlineWarningsDirect', to
receive automated telephone flood warnings. This
service is now on an opt-out basis with automatic
registration for those with listed telephone lines,
with provision for de-registration and on-line reg-
istration planned for the future. According to the
EA's Response to Flooding surveys on the flood in
Carlisle in 2005 (e.g. Environment Agency 2005b),
this system is now the main source of flood
warnings. In 2008 about 350,000 households or
businesses were registered on this system
(Woolhouse 2008). However, given that there are
approximately 2 million households at risk of
flooding in England andWales, it is clear that only
a minority of households are covered to date.
Surveys show that registration has been limited
and variable; for example, in Carlisle in the 2005
flooding, one-third of those affected by the flood
had signed up in advance for the service, while in
the January 2007 flooding in the Midlands and
North-East, 59% were registered (Environment
Agency 2007a). Other surveys (Tunstall et al.
2007) have recorded lower proportions registered,
and in the FRMRC case studies proportions were
much lower, 11% in Trent and only 2% in
Chertsey.
Taking out house-and-contents insurance or
checking that policies cover flooding are other
preparatory actions commonly taken by those at
risk in England and Wales (Environment
Agency 2005a; Tunstall et al. 2007). The FRMRC
case studies and other research (Tunstall
et al. 2007) show that more substantial preventa-
tive measures (such as structural adaptations to
property including buying floodgates, installing
pumps, raising floors or building walls) were
undertaken by small minorities. Although more
common than structural adaptations, only a
minority made behavioural adaptations such as
changing furnishings and relocating household
items.
Flood warning communications
It can be argued that flood warnings are the most
significant form of flood risk communication that
takes place between professionals and the public,
given that warnings have the potential to reduce
the impact of flooding, including the risk to life,
health and stress effects, disruption to life and
damage to property.
Yet it is important to recognize that floodwarn-
ings in the UK and elsewhere often fail to reach
those at risk. As research shows, success in
