Simulating Behavioral Influences on Community Flood Risk under Future Climate Scenarios

Flood risk is a function of both climate and human behavior, including individual and societal actions. For this reason, there is a need to incorporate both human and climatic components in models of flood risk. This study simulates behavioral influences on the evolution of community flood risk under different future climate scenarios using an agent-based model (ABM). The objective is to understand better the ways, sometimes unexpected, that human behavior, stochastic floods, and community interventions interact to influence the evolution of flood risk. One historic climate scenario and three future climate scenarios are simulated using a case study location in Fargo, North Dakota. Individual agents can mitigate flood risk via household mitigation or by moving, based on decision rules that consider risk perception and coping perception. The community can mitigate or disseminate information to reduce flood risk. Results show that agent behavior and community action have a significant impact on the evolution of flood risk under different climate scenarios. In all scenarios, individual and community action generally result in a decline in damages over time. In a lower flood risk scenario, the decline is primarily due to agent mitigation, while in a high flood risk scenario, community mitigation and agent relocation are primary drivers of the decline. Adaptive behaviors offset some of the increase in flood risk associated with climate change, and under an extreme climate scenario, our model indicates that many agents relocate.     

Policy Learning for Flood Mitigation: A Longitudinal Assessment of the Community Rating System in Florida

Floods continue to inflict the most damage upon human communities among all natural hazards in the United States. Because localized flooding tends to be spatially repetitive over time, local decisionmakers often have an opportunity to learn from previous events and make proactive policy adjustments to reduce the adverse effects of a subsequent storm. Despite the importance of understanding the degree to which local jurisdictions learn from flood risks and under what circumstances, little if any empirical, longitudinal research has been conducted along these lines. This article addresses the research gap by examining the change in local flood mitigation policies in Florida from 1999 to 2005. We track 18 different mitigation activities organized into four series of activities under the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Community Rating System (CRS) for every local jurisdiction in Florida participating in the FEMA program on a yearly time step. We then identify the major factors contributing to policy changes based on CRS scores over the seven-year study period. Using multivariate statistical models to analyze both natural and social science data, we isolate the effects of several variables categorized into the following groups: hydrologic conditions, flood disaster history, socioeconomic and human capital controls. Results indicate that local jurisdictions do in fact learn from histories of flood risk and this process is expedited under specific conditions.     

An Analysis of the Public Perception of Flood Risk on the Belgian Coast

In recent years, perception of flood risks has become an important topic to policy makers concerned with risk management and safety issues. Knowledge of the public risk perception is considered a crucial aspect in modern flood risk management as it steers the development of effective and efficient flood mitigation strategies. This study aimed at gaining insight into the perception of flood risks along the Belgian coast. Given the importance of the tourism industry on the Belgian coast, the survey considered both inhabitants and residential tourists. Based on actual expert's risk assessments, a high and a low risk area were selected for the study. Risk perception was assessed on the basis of scaled items regarding storm surges and coastal flood risks. In addition, various personal and residence characteristics were measured. Using multiple regression analysis, risk perception was found to be primarily influenced by actual flood risk estimates, age, gender, and experience with previous flood hazards.     

Does federal flood hazard mitigation assistance affect community rating system participation?

With the inexorable march of climate change, increased flooding is inevitable. Understanding the feedback between federal flood mitigation policies and the ways in which local governments build flood resilience is a significant gap in the literature. In particular, the effect that federal flood mitigation grants have on the intensity of local flood mitigation is nonexistent. This work measures flood risk mitigation by using the level of participation in FEMA's Community Rating System (CRS). Communities that participate in the CRS and undertake mitigation are awarded points; more points imply a higher level of participation. Since its inception in 1990, CRS communities have received considerably more federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grants compared to non-CRS communities. This study assesses the effect of federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grants on the level of participation in the CRS program. We use data on Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs and CRS participation data between 2010 and 2015. We link these data to flood risk and socioeconomic information. Our results indicate (i) federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grants do not appear to significantly influence the level of CRS participation, (ii) the effect of flood risk and socioeconomic factors on the level of CRS participation are mixed, and (iii) the current level of CRS participation is influenced by the previous level of CRS participation, which is not tied to federal pre-disaster flood mitigation grant. These findings add to the growing discussions on the drivers and barriers of local flood risk mitigation.     

Flood Catastrophe Model for Designing Optimal Flood Insurance Program: Estimating Location‐Specific Premiums in the Netherlands

As flood risks grow worldwide, a well‐designed insurance program engaging various stakeholders becomes a vital instrument in flood risk management. The main challenge concerns the applicability of standard approaches for calculating insurance premiums of rare catastrophic losses. This article focuses on the design of a flood‐loss‐sharing program involving private insurance based on location‐specific exposures. The analysis is guided by a developed integrated catastrophe risk management (ICRM) model consisting of a GIS‐based flood model and a stochastic optimization procedure with respect to location‐specific risk exposures. To achieve the stability and robustness of the program towards floods with various recurrences, the ICRM uses stochastic optimization procedure, which relies on quantile‐related risk functions of a systemic insolvency involving overpayments and underpayments of the stakeholders. Two alternative ways of calculating insurance premiums are compared: the robust derived with the ICRM and the traditional average annual loss approach. The applicability of the proposed model is illustrated in a case study of a Rotterdam area outside the main flood protection system in the Netherlands. Our numerical experiments demonstrate essential advantages of the robust premiums, namely, that they: (1) guarantee the program's solvency under all relevant flood scenarios rather than one average event; (2) establish a tradeoff between the security of the program and the welfare of locations; and (3) decrease the need for other risk transfer and risk reduction measures.     

Flood Risk Management: Exploring the Impacts of the Community Rating System Program on Poverty and Income Inequality

Flooding remains a major problem for the United States, causing numerous deaths and damaging countless properties. To reduce the impact of flooding on communities, the U.S. government established the Community Rating System (CRS) in 1990 to reduce flood damages by incentivizing communities to engage in flood risk management initiatives that surpass those required by the National Flood Insurance Program. In return, communities enjoy discounted flood insurance premiums. Despite the fact that the CRS raises concerns about the potential for unevenly distributed impacts across different income groups, no study has examined the equity implications of the CRS. This study thus investigates the possibility of unintended consequences of the CRS by answering the question: What is the effect of the CRS on poverty and income inequality? Understanding the impacts of the CRS on poverty and income inequality is useful in fully assessing the unintended consequences of the CRS. The study estimates four fixed‐effects regression models using a panel data set of neighborhood‐level observations from 1970 to 2010. The results indicate that median incomes are lower in CRS communities, but rise in floodplains. Also, the CRS attracts poor residents, but relocates them away from floodplains. Additionally, the CRS attracts top earners, including in floodplains. Finally, the CRS encourages income inequality, but discourages income inequality in floodplains. A better understanding of these unintended consequences of the CRS on poverty and income inequality can help to improve the design and performance of the CRS and, ultimately, increase community resilience to flood disasters.     

A Review of Risk Perceptions and Other Factors that Influence Flood Mitigation Behavior

In flood risk management, a shift can be observed toward more integrated approaches that increasingly address the role of private households in implementing flood damage mitigation measures. This has resulted in a growing number of studies into the supposed positive relationship between individual flood risk perceptions and mitigation behavior. Our literature review shows, however, that, actually, this relationship is hardly observed in empirical studies. Two arguments are provided as an explanation. First, on the basis of protection motivation theory, a theoretical framework is discussed suggesting that individuals’ high‐risk perceptions need to be accompanied by coping appraisal to result in a protective response. Second, it is pointed out that possible feedback from already‐adopted mitigation measures on risk perceptions has hardly been considered by current studies. In addition, we also provide a review of factors that drive precautionary behavior other than risk perceptions. It is found that factors such as coping appraisal are consistently related to mitigation behavior. We conclude, therefore, that the current focus on risk perceptions as a means to explain and promote private flood mitigation behavior is not supported on either theoretical or empirical grounds.     

An Agent‐Based Model of Evolving Community Flood Risk

Although individual behavior plays a major role in community flood risk, traditional flood risk models generally do not capture information on how community policies and individual decisions impact the evolution of flood risk over time. The purpose of this study is to improve the understanding of the temporal aspects of flood risk through a combined analysis of the behavioral, engineering, and physical hazard aspects of flood risk. Additionally, the study aims to develop a new modeling approach for integrating behavior, policy, flood hazards, and engineering interventions. An agent‐based model (ABM) is used to analyze the influence of flood protection measures, individual behavior, and the occurrence of floods and near‐miss flood events on community flood risk. The ABM focuses on the following decisions and behaviors: dissemination of flood management information, installation of community flood protection, elevation of household mechanical equipment, and elevation of homes. The approach is place based, with a case study area in Fargo, North Dakota, but is focused on generalizable insights. Generally, community mitigation results in reduced future damage, and individual action, including mitigation and movement into and out of high‐risk areas, can have a significant influence on community flood risk. The results of this study provide useful insights into the interplay between individual and community actions and how it affects the evolution of flood risk. This study lends insight into priorities for future work, including the development of more in‐depth behavioral and decision rules at the individual and community level.     

Flood Risk Acceptability and Economic Value of Evacuation

The economic value of evacuation and its relationship with flood risk acceptability in Japan were studied by applying the contingent valuation method (CVM). Flood risk acceptability here refers to the extent to which people accept the occurrence of floods, in terms of scale and frequency. The economic value of evacuation refers to people's willingness to pay (WTP) for avoiding evacuation inconvenience because of its inconvenience and the potential for certain losses as a result of evacuation. Our main finding was that over half of the people (56%) who actually evacuated in a real flood situation reported inconvenience. The greatest inconveniences were the shortages of information and food. Evacuation inconvenience can be regarded as an important factor causing the low rate of evacuation in Japan. The WTP for avoiding current inconvenience was approximately half of the estimated economic value of evacuation, implying that the current budget for evacuation is too small and should be increased to improve the conditions of evacuation sites. The economic value of evacuation can be taken into consideration in the risk assessment process in order to evaluate the efficiency of risk reduction measures. Flood risk acceptability and home ownership are two major statistically significantly determinants of the WTP. Considering that those who accept flood risk have a lower WTP for flood risk control (ex ante measures) than those who reject it, it is reasonable to think that there may be a tradeoff between the public WTPs for ex ante or ex post measures.     

Why Near‐Miss Events Can Decrease an Individual's Protective Response to Hurricanes

Prior research shows that when people perceive the risk of some hazardous event to be low, they are unlikely to engage in mitigation activities for the potential hazard. We believe one factor that can lower inappropriately (from a normative perspective) people's perception of the risk of a hazard is information about prior near‐miss events. A near‐miss occurs when an event (such as a hurricane), which had some nontrivial probability of ending in disaster (loss of life, property damage), does not because good fortune intervenes. People appear to mistake such good fortune as an indicator of resiliency. In our first study, people with near‐miss information were less likely to purchase flood insurance, and this was shown for both participants from the general population and individuals with specific interests in risk and natural disasters. In our second study, we consider a different mitigation decision, that is, to evacuate from a hurricane, and vary the level of statistical probability of hurricane damage. We still found a strong effect for near‐miss information. Our research thus shows how people who have experienced a similar situation but escape damage because of chance will make decisions consistent with a perception that the situation is less risky than those without the past experience. We end by discussing the implications for risk communication.     

Adoption of Individual Flood Damage Mitigation Measures in New York City: An Extension of Protection Motivation Theory

This study offers insights into factors of influence on the implementation of flood damage mitigation measures by more than 1,000 homeowners who live in flood‐prone areas in New York City. Our theoretical basis for explaining flood preparedness decisions is protection motivation theory, which we extend using a variety of other variables that can have an important influence on individual decision making under risk, such as risk attitudes, time preferences, social norms, trust, and local flood risk management policies. Our results in relation to our main hypothesis are as follows. Individuals who live in high flood risk zones take more flood‐proofing measures in their home than individuals in low‐risk zones, which suggests the former group has a high threat appraisal. With regard to coping appraisal variables, we find that a high response efficacy and a high self‐efficacy play an important role in taking flood damage mitigation measures, while perceived response cost does not. In addition, a variety of behavioral characteristics influence individual decisions to flood‐proof homes, such as risk attitudes, time preferences, and private values of being well prepared for flooding. Investments in elevating one's home are mainly influenced by building code regulations and are negatively related with expectations of receiving federal disaster relief. We discuss a variety of policy recommendations to improve individual flood preparedness decisions, including incentives for risk reduction through flood insurance, and communication campaigns focused on coping appraisals and informing people about flood risk they face over long time horizons.     

Perceptions of Risk and Vulnerability Following Exposure to a Major Natural Disaster: The Calgary Flood of 2013

Many studies have examined the general public's flood risk perceptions in the aftermath of local and regional flooding. However, relatively few studies have focused on large‐scale events that affect tens of thousands of people within an urban center. Similarly, in spite of previous research on flood risks, unresolved questions persist regarding the variables that might influence perceptions of risk and vulnerability, along with management preferences. In light of the opportunities presented by these knowledge gaps, the research reported here examined public perceptions of flood risk and vulnerability, and management preferences, within the city of Calgary in the aftermath of extensive flooding in 2013. Our findings, which come from an online survey of residents, reveal that direct experience with flooding is not a differentiating factor for risk perceptions when comparing evacuees with nonevacuees who might all experience future risks. However, we do find that judgments about vulnerability—as a function of how people perceive physical distance—do differ according to one's evacuation experience. Our results also indicate that concern about climate change is an important predictor of flood risk perceptions, as is trust in government risk managers. In terms of mitigation preferences, our results reveal differences in support for large infrastructure projects based on whether respondents feel they might actually benefit from them.     

The Impact of Perceived Flood Exposure on Flood‐Risk Perception: The Role of Distance

Natural hazards, such as major flood events, are occurring with increasing frequency and inflicting increasing levels of financial damages upon affected communities. The experience of such major flood events has brought about a significant change in attitudes to flood‐risk management, with a shift away from built engineering solutions alone towards a more multifaceted approach. Europe's experience with damaging flood episodes provided the impetus for the introduction of the European Floods Directive, requiring the establishment of flood‐risk management plans at the river‐basin scale. The effectiveness of such plans, focusing on prevention, protection, and preparedness, is dependent on adequate flood awareness and preparedness, and this is related to perception of flood risk. This is an important factor in the design and assessment of flood‐risk management. Whilst there is a modern body of literature exploring flood perception issues, there have been few examples that explore its spatial manifestations. Previous literature has examined perceived and real distance to a hazard source (such as a river, nuclear facility, landfill, or incinerator, etc.), whereas this article advances the literature by including an objectively assessed measure of distance to a perceived flood zone, using a cognitive mapping methodology. The article finds that distance to the perceived flood zone (perceived flood exposure) is a crucial factor in determining flood‐risk perception, both the cognitive and affective components. Furthermore, we find an interesting phenomenon of misperception among respondents. The article concludes by discussing the implications for flood‐risk management.     

Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research

Flood hazards are the most common and destructive of all natural disasters. For decades, experts have been examining how flood losses can be mitigated. Just as in other risk domains, the study of risk perception and risk communication has gained increasing interest in flood risk management. Because of this research growth, a review of the state of the art in this domain is believed necessary. The review comprises 57 empirically based peer‐reviewed articles on flood risk perception and communication from the Web of Science and Scopus databases. The characteristics of these articles are listed in a comprehensive table, presenting research design, research variables, and key findings. From this review, it follows that the majority of studies are of exploratory nature and have not applied any of the theoretical frameworks that are available in social science research. Consequently, a methodological standardization in measuring and analyzing people's flood risk perceptions and their adaptive behaviors is hardly present. This heterogeneity leads to difficulties in comparing results among studies. It is also shown that theoretical and empirical studies on flood risk communication are nearly nonexistent. The article concludes with a summary on methodological issues in the fields of flood‐risk perception and flood‐risk communication and proposes an agenda for future research.     

Flood Protection Diversification to Reduce Probabilities of Extreme Losses

Recent catastrophic losses because of floods require developing resilient approaches to flood risk protection. This article assesses how diversification of a system of coastal protections might decrease the probabilities of extreme flood losses. The study compares the performance of portfolios each consisting of four types of flood protection assets in a large region of dike rings. A parametric analysis suggests conditions in which diversifications of the types of included flood protection assets decrease extreme flood losses. Increased return periods of extreme losses are associated with portfolios where the asset types have low correlations of economic risk. The effort highlights the importance of understanding correlations across asset types in planning for large‐scale flood protection. It allows explicit integration of climate change scenarios in developing flood mitigation strategy.     

Provision of a Wildfire Risk Map: Informing Residents in the Wildland Urban Interface

Wildfires in the wildland urban interface (WUI) are an increasing concern throughout the western United States and elsewhere. WUI communities continue to grow and thus increase the wildfire risk to human lives and property. Information such as a wildfire risk map can inform WUI residents of potential risks and may help to efficiently sort mitigation efforts. This study uses the survey-based contingent valuation (CV) method to examine annual household willingness to pay (WTP) for the provision of a wildfire risk map. Data were collected through a mail survey of the East Mountain WUI area in the State of New Mexico (USA). The integrated empirical approach includes a system of equations that involves joint estimation of WTP values, along with measures of a respondent's risk perception and risk mitigation behavior. The median estimated WTP is around U.S. $12 for the annual wildfire risk map, which covers at least the costs of producing and distributing available risk information. Further, providing a wildfire risk map can help address policy goals emphasizing information gathering and sharing among stakeholders to mitigate the effects of wildfires.     

Insurability and Mitigation of Flood Losses in Private Households in Germany

In Germany, flood insurance is provided by private insurers as a supplement to building or contents insurance. This article presents the results of a survey of insurance companies with regard to eligibility conditions for flood insurance changes after August 2002, when a severe flood caused 1.8 billion euro of insured losses in the Elbe and the Danube catchment areas, and the general role of insurance in flood risk management in Germany. Besides insurance coverage, governmental funding and public donations played an important role in loss compensation after the August 2002 flood. Therefore, this article also analyzes flood loss compensation, risk awareness, and mitigation in insured and uninsured private households. Insured households received loss compensation earlier. They also showed slightly better risk awareness and mitigation strategies. Appropriate incentives should be combined with flood insurance in order to strengthen future private flood loss mitigation. However, there is some evidence that the surveyed insurance companies do little to encourage precautionary measures. To overcome this problem, flood hazards and mitigation strategies should be better communicated to both insurance companies and property owners.     

The Financial Management of Catastrophic Flood Risks in Emerging-Economy Countries

This article examines the potential of pre- and post-disaster instruments for funding disaster response and recovery and for creating incentives for flood loss mitigation in countries with emerging or transition economies. As a concrete case, we discuss the disaster recovery arrangements following the 1997 flood disaster in Poland. We examine the advantages and limitations of hedging instruments, which are instruments for transferring the risk to investors either through insurance or capital market-based securities. We compare these mechanisms with financing instruments whereby the government sets aside funds prior to a disaster or taps its own funding sources after the event occurs. We show how hedging instruments can be designed to create incentives for the mitigation of damage to public infrastructure using the flood proofing of a water-treatment plant on the hypothetical Topping River as an illustrative example. We conclude that hedging instruments can be an attractive alternative to financing instruments that have been traditionally used in the poorer, emerging-economy countries to fund disaster recovery. Since very poor countries are likely to have difficulty paying the price of protection prior to a disaster, we suggest that international lending institutions consider innovations for subsidizing these payments.     

Does Communicating (Flood) Risk Affect (Flood) Risk Perceptions? Results of a Quasi‐Experimental Study

People's risk perceptions are generally regarded as an important determinant of their decisions to adjust to natural hazards. However, few studies have evaluated how risk communication programs affect these risk perceptions. This study evaluates the effects of a small-scale flood risk communication program in the Netherlands, consisting of workshops and focus group discussions. The effects on the workshop participants' ( n  = 24) and focus group participants' ( n  = 16) flood risk perceptions were evaluated in a pretest-posttest control group ( n  = 40) design that focused on two mechanisms of attitude change—direct personal experience and attitude polarization. We expected that (H1) workshop participants would show greater shifts in their flood risk perceptions compared with control group participants and that (H2) focus groups would rather produce the conditions for attitude polarization (shifts toward more extreme attitudinal positions after group discussion). However, the results provide only modest support for these hypotheses, perhaps because of a mismatch between the sessions' contents and the risk perception measures. An important contribution of this study is that it examined risk perception data by both conventional tests of the mean differences and tests for attitude polarization. Moreover, the possibility that attitude polarization could cause people to confirm their preexisting (hazard) beliefs could have important implications for risk communication.     

Quantifying Riverine and Storm‐Surge Flood Risk by Single‐Family Residence: Application to Texas

The development of catastrophe models in recent years allows for assessment of the flood hazard much more effectively than when the federally run National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) was created in 1968. We propose and then demonstrate a methodological approach to determine pure premiums based on the entire distribution of possible flood events. We apply hazard, exposure, and vulnerability analyses to a sample of 300,000 single‐family residences in two counties in Texas (Travis and Galveston) using state‐of‐the‐art flood catastrophe models. Even in zones of similar flood risk classification by FEMA there is substantial variation in exposure between coastal and inland flood risk. For instance, homes in the designated moderate‐risk X500/B zones in Galveston are exposed to a flood risk on average 2.5 times greater than residences in X500/B zones in Travis. The results also show very similar average annual loss (corrected for exposure) for a number of residences despite their being in different FEMA flood zones. We also find significant storm‐surge exposure outside of the FEMA designated storm‐surge risk zones. Taken together these findings highlight the importance of a microanalysis of flood exposure. The process of aggregating risk at a flood zone level—as currently undertaken by FEMA—provides a false sense of uniformity. As our analysis indicates, the technology to delineate the flood risks exists today.