Less is More? Evaluating Technical Aspects and User Experiences of Smart Flood Risk Assessment Tools

Patrick A Witte,Karin A Snel,Stan C M Geertman

doi:10.17645/up.v6i3.4257

Abstract

<p>In light of several recent large-scale flooding events worldwide, the urgency of involving residents in the flood risk management debate is growing. However, this has so far proven to be problematic, mainly because of lacking or ineffective communication between stakeholders. One way to better involve residents in the flood risk management debate is by developing smart applications, dedicated to facilitate and increase the insights of residents into the flood risk and vulnerability of their private properties. However, what is lacking thus far is a systematic evaluation of the technical aspects and the user experiences of such tools. The goal of this article is to explore and evaluate the technical, analytical, and communicative qualities of smart flood risk assessment tools. To this end, a new smart application named FLOODLABEL is used, aiming to inform residents of flood-prone areas about potential flood risks and associated protection measures of their dwellings. Based on this, the article concludes that a smart application like FLOODLABEL can be beneficial for informing residents about flood risks and potential protection measures. However, it also shows that a one-size-fits-all approach is not suitable for informing residents on flood risks, inter alia because how residents perceive risks is not homogeneous. This research is therefore just the first step towards a more systematic evaluation method of smart applications.</p>

Highlights

Urban areas worldwide are facing increasing flood risks due to sea‐level rise, increasing heavy rainfall, and ris‐ ing groundwater levels
In light of several recent large‐ scale flooding events worldwide, the growing insight is that traditional structural protection measures need to be complemented by non‐structural measures, such as homeowners adapting their properties against flood‐ ing (Bradford et al, 2012; O’Neill et al, 2016)
The communicative support is determined by analysing statements that question whether certain parts of the tool are understandable, whether the entire tool is clear in terms of text and figures, whether the tool is easy to use and easy to understand, and whether it provides useful information on what happens behind the scenes

Summary

Introduction

Urban areas worldwide are facing increasing flood risks due to sea‐level rise, increasing heavy rainfall, and ris‐ ing groundwater levels. In light of several recent large‐ scale flooding events worldwide, the growing insight is that traditional structural protection measures need to be complemented by non‐structural measures, such as homeowners adapting their properties against flood‐ ing (Bradford et al, 2012; O’Neill et al, 2016). The background of this insight is the conviction that dam‐ age costs can be substantially reduced by increasing the. This shift envisions more involvement of resi‐ dents in the sense that they are expected to adjust their homes to prevent flood damage and to take responsibility in minimising the risk that their property might flood

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion