Approaches in research on flood risk perception and their importance in flood risk management: a review

Ewa Lechowska

doi:10.1007/s11069-021-05140-7

Abstract

The study of flood risk perception factors can be considered by using different paradigms. In an attempt to understand risk perception, two basic paradigms can be distinguished: rationalist and constructivist. The rationalist approach tends to focus on modeling, characterizing, and predicting behavioral results regarding various threats. According to the constructivist paradigm, threats are perceived as socially constructed. This review paper aims to assess the importance of the rationalist and constructivist approaches in research on flood risk perception and flood risk management more broadly by answering the questions: (1) Which paradigm dominates the research of flood risk perception?, (2) What is the relationship between rationalistic and constructivistic factors (e.g., stimulation, weakening, strengthening, etc.)?, (3) which factors are more effective in moderating attitudes toward flood risk? The paper concludes by pointing out the desired direction of research on flood risk perception from the perspective of improving flood risk management. In contemporary empirical works managing the perception of flood risk, a rationalistic approach that psychometrically searches for cognitive models dominates. Often, statistically obtained dependencies are mutually exclusive. Studies on perception that apply the constructivist approach are in an early stage of development, nevertheless providing consistent results. They indicate that the social, political, cultural, religious, and historical contexts shape the perception of flood risk. On the basis of the aforementioned information, research on flood risk in a constructivist approach should be expanded, as it provides a clear, often underappreciated catalog of contextual factors shaping risk perception and, importantly, simultaneously moderating the influence of rationalist factors on flood risk perception.

Highlights

Traditional approaches to flood risk management (FRM) that focus on physical flood protection or improvements in flood monitoring and forecasting have tended to overlook the social dimensions of floods, such as the public’s understanding of risk
Toward the end of the time period ana‐ lyzed, there is a decline in the interest of researchers in flood risk perception (Fig. 4)
The frequency ratio for considering the aforementioned factors in the analyzed papers is 85.5%. Other factors, such as the indirect experiences, cultural–historical contexts, and religious and political contexts expressed the constructiv‐ ist paradigm, are to a lesser extent considered in studies of flood risk perception (the fre‐ quency ratio for their inclusion is 14.5% (Fig. 5)

Summary

Introduction

Traditional approaches to flood risk management (FRM) that focus on physical flood protection or improvements in flood monitoring and forecasting have tended to overlook the social dimensions of floods, such as the public’s understanding of risk. Risk percep‐ tion, which involves assessing the public’s perceived probability of a hazards and the probability of consequences (most often—negative consequences) (Bubeck et al 2012, Becker et al 2013, Grothmann and Reusswig 2006), is often equated with the awareness of the existence of a hazard and the resulting worry (Lechowska 2018). Risk perception is a key social component in flood risk management (Bradford et al 2012). In order to assess the usefulness of the applied research approaches for improving FRM, the study included empirical works that, with reference to the level of flood risk perception, look for determinants of risk attitudes. For as Raaijmak‐ ers et al (2008) flood risk perception can be considered as the relationship between the three specific risk characteristics: awareness, worry, and preparedness

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion