‘Do the resilient things.’ Residents' perspectives on responsibilities for flood risk adaptation in England

Karin A W Snel,Thomas Hartmann,Sally J Priest,Patrick A Witte,Stan C M Geertman

doi:10.1111/jfr3.12727

Abstract

AbstractResidents should take adaptive action to reduce flood risk—this claim increasingly resonates in the academic debate on flood risk management (FRM). Hence, it must be assumed that a change in the division of responsibilities between actors involved is an imperative, that is, beyond the public authorities, residents should become more responsible for their own flood resilience. However, residents' perspectives on their own and other's responsibility for adaptive action has not yet been explored extensively. In this contribution, we distinguish between four notions of responsibility in analysing the perspectives of residents regarding flood risk adaptation measures undertaken by public authorities, insurance companies and residents themselves. A qualitative study in England shows how residents perceive responsibilities for flood risk adaptation across the various notions and actors, including themselves. We found that residents have clear expectations and perceptions on how they think responsibility is divided among stakeholders and how they would like it to be. Additionally, the discourse on responsibility division in FRM raises questions and causes mismatches between the formal legal parameters and residents' perceptions. With the insights into residents' perceptions, opportunities arise to better inform and encourage them to take flood risk adaptation measures and thereby improve flood resilience.

Highlights

Floods are increasingly causing damage to private residential buildings
The rationale for residents' involvement in managing flood risk is multifold (Begg, 2018), but the relevant academic literature generally agrees on the following arguments for residents' responsibility (Snel, Witte, et al, 2020): (1) the risk of flooding is increasing significantly due to climate change, which necessitates an all-hands-on-deck approach, including residents; (2) sharing responsibility between public authorities and residents contributes to solving underlying problems like governmental capacity issues and lack of public funding; (3) the implementation of adaptation measures by residents reduces the financial damage caused by floods (Grothmann & Reusswig, 2006); and (4) only property owners can decide to adapt their homes, as no governmental organisation can implement measures on private properties (Snel, Witte, et al, 2020)
To implement successful flood risk management (FRM), the engagement of a large number of stakeholders is necessary, for example, from public authorities, market stakeholders, and residents (Mees et al, 2016; Raška et al, 2020). Regardless of their experience with floods, residents recognise that they have a legal responsibility to minimise flood damage to their own homes. Even though this does not fully align with formal legal responsibility divisions in England, it does show that residents are aware of the role they can play in FRM

Summary

Introduction

Floods are increasingly causing damage to private residential buildings. The approaches to protecting people and properties against floods have changed over the last century. The rationale for residents' involvement in managing flood risk is multifold (Begg, 2018), but the relevant academic literature generally agrees on the following arguments for residents' responsibility (Snel, Witte, et al, 2020): (1) the risk of flooding is increasing significantly due to climate change, which necessitates an all-hands-on-deck approach, including residents; (2) sharing responsibility between public authorities and residents contributes to solving underlying problems like governmental capacity issues and lack of public funding; (3) the implementation of adaptation measures by residents reduces the financial damage caused by floods (Grothmann & Reusswig, 2006); and (4) only property owners can decide to adapt their homes, as no governmental organisation can implement measures on private properties (Snel, Witte, et al, 2020) These arguments justify greater attention to and recognition of individual responsibilities in FRM among academia and policy, resulting in the call for more residents' responsibility in flood resilience

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion