« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Background
1.1 The impacts of floods have long been recognised as complex and multi-faceted. In Scotland, flooding fatalities have been rare in recent decades, but financial damage to property, disruption to communications and business losses have all featured regularly in appraisals of flood impacts (eg Scoping study into the costs of Flooding, JBA, 2005). Such appraisals are subject to considerable uncertainty, with economic impacts featuring more prominently than social impacts which are more difficult to encapsulate. Not surprisingly, there is a growing awareness by flood risk managers that social impacts have been under-represented in post-flood appraisals.
1.2 Following a series of damaging floods across parts of England and Wales (1998, 2000 and 2002) and Scotland (Perth 1993, Strathclyde, 1994, Edinburgh 2000, and Elgin 1997, 2002) flood risk management in the UK has undergone a series of radical reviews (Institution of Civil Engineers Learning to Live with Rivers, 2000; DEFRAMaking Space for Water, 2004) and the Foresight Project Future Flooding (Evans et al., 2004, Werritty with Chatterton, 2004). Collectively these reviews have proposed less reliance on hard engineering solutions, schemes which work 'with' rather than 'against' nature and more of a 'people dimension' in flood risk management. Future Flooding also stressed the need for a paradigm shift in which flood risk management relies less on state intervention and more on an acceptance of individual responsibility.
1.3 In response to substantial flood losses during the 1990s the Scottish Executive developed a policy of 'Awareness, Avoidance, Alleviation and Assistance' which also enhanced the 'people dimension' in flood risk management. In 2003, sustainable flood management become a duty for responsible authorities under section 2 of the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003. This concept was subsequently defined by the National Technical Advisory Group on Flooding (Scottish Executive, 2005) as follows:
"Sustainable flood management provides the maximum possible social and economic resilience against flooding by protecting and working with the environment, in a way which is fair and affordable both now and in the future" (emphasis added).
The inclusion of social resilience designed to "enhance community benefit with fair outcomes for everyone" is noteworthy. Further work on implementing the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003 is currently being undertaken by the Scottish Executive's Flooding Issues Advisory Group.
1.4 For the full potential benefit of these policies to be achieved, there is a need for a more robust evidence base surrounding flooding and flood risk. A number of key questions remain to be asked. What precisely are the social impacts of being flooded or living in a flood risk area? How important are less tangible issues such as feeling secure in one's own home compared to the more easily quantified economic costs? Are such feelings of insecurity felt more strongly by certain groups, such as the elderly and disabled, and what are the implications for their health and well-being?
1.5 Moving beyond the impacts of a flood on the individuals affected, what are the
likely implications for community cohesion? While a flood may initially bring neighbours close together in helping each other through the immediate aftermath, what of the longer term implications, for example if fear of future floods causes people to start moving away?
1.6 Are the communities in flood risk areas more or less affluent than the Scottish average? This is likely to have a major impact on householders' resilience to a flood, for example in terms of their ability to put flood proofing measures in place, secure alternative accommodation (temporary or permanent), replace possessions, etc. What is the take up of insurance cover and is this differentiated by social class, income and housing tenure?
1.7 Finally, what awareness of, and attitudes toward, flooding are held in communities in flood risk areas and how are they differentiated by social class, age and housing tenure? How might public policy respond to differential expectations and levels of awareness?
Objectives of the project
1.8 The project has the following objectives:
1. To assess the range of impacts that experience of recent flooding in Scotland has had on people, their attitudes and behaviours; and
2. To establish 'what works' with particular population groups and locations in relation to flood prevention campaigns and flood warning/dissemination systems.
1.9 In fulfilling these objectives, it aims to answer the following questions:
- What are the social impacts of living in a flood risk area, for both those who have been flooded and those not flooded?
- How important are social impacts, such as disruption, upset, stress and ill-health, for those in flood risk areas, compared to the economic impacts which are more easily quantified?
- Are such feelings of insecurity more strongly felt by certain social groups, such as the elderly and those on low incomes, and what are the implications for the health and well-being of those groups?
- What degrees of awareness of, and attitudes toward, flooding are held in communities and how might public policy respond to this?
- How do the key institutional stakeholders manage flood risk, and to what effect?
« Previous | Contents | Next »