Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Personal responsibility and flood
resilience measures
suggests that most householders will only take
action to protect themselves if they feel confident
that such action will not increase their anxiety.
More reliable and less stigmatizing ways need to
be found by which people can increase the resil-
ience and protection of homes without threaten-
ing their social identity. Harries (2008) suggests
three approaches:
.
provide tailored, independent advice to property
owners;
.
normalizationof particularmitigationmeasures;
.
normalization of the notions of flood risk mit-
igation and of proactive response.
Property-level resistance and resilience mea-
sures can be used in certain circumstances to
mitigate flood damages, reduce recovery time and
thus prepare people for future flooding. These
measures include permanent and temporaryflood-
proofing measures, the function of which is to
reduce the amount of ingress of floodwaters into
properties. Take-up of these products and mea-
sures is generally low, partly because many people
believe that it is the responsibility of government
and local authorities to provide protection from
flood risk (Pitt 2008). Cost is also a factor that puts
products out of reach for low-income households,
particularly those renting properties who also
have less incentive. Insurance companies' policies
on 'betterment' of properties following flooding
can also restrict take-up of these measures.
However, psychological variables (perceived vul-
nerability, risk perception and social trust) have
been found to be stronger predictors for mitigation
intentions than socioeconomic variables (Lin
et al. 2008).
Although the implications of recent policy shifts
from flood defence to flood risk management may
be well understood by professionals, there is in-
creasing evidence that this shift has yet to reach
the ordinary citizen, who still wants (and indeed
expects) to be protected, particularly when they
are paying taxes to governments and local author-
ities. The public are generally ignorant of policies
such as Making Space for Water in England
(Defra 2005) and the new Water Law in Saxony,
Germany (Steinfuhrer and Kuhlicke 2007).
Evidence from Italy, Germany, the UK and
Canada has shown that those living and working
in at-risk areas often place faith in structural flood
defences and show a distinct preference for struc-
tural mitigation measures. This can result in a
false sense of security and a failure of people to act
to protect themselves and their properties (Morris-
Oswald and Sinclair 2005; De Marchi et al. 2007;
Steinfuhrer and Kuhlicke 2007; Tunstall et al.
2007; Werritty et al. 2007). Following the 2007
UK floods, people demonstrated a complacent
attitude towards flooding, preferring to defer re-
sponsibility formanaging flood risk to the relevant
authorities (Pitt 2008).
It's entirely the council's responsibility to prevent
and deal with flooding.
Business, Hull (GfK NOP 2007, p. 21)
Lack of awareness of the causes of floods, denial
of risk, protection of emotional security, fear of
reduced property prices and ignorance of appropri-
ate mitigating actions may all be factors influenc-
ing the lack of personal responsibility for FRM
demonstrated by individuals and communities.
This highlights the need for better information
about future flood risk and what is and is not
possible. However, communication with the pub-
lic needs first to reassure before it begins to inform.
Anxiety management is thus seen as a barrier
to public involvement in FRM. Policy-makers
need to understand the importance of this for
householder responses to flood risk. Harries (2008)
Local context, political commitment
and governance
The importance of local contexts and governance
issues that may affect decisions on FRM has
also been highlighted in research from the USA
(Moore et al. 2004) and Europe (De Marchi
et al. 2007; Steinfuhrer and Kuhlicke 2007;
Tunstall et al. 2007). Government policies and
decision-making processes on funding for FRM
impact upon issues of inequality and social justice
