How Do You Effectively Communicate Flood Risks? Looking to the Future 2

by Dr. Timothy Tinker, DrPH [email protected] Dr. Gerald E. Galloway, Jr. PE, PhD [email protected]

How Do You Effectively Communicate Flood Risks? Looking to the Future

In dealing with a public and policymakers who often While we, as flood management professionals, under- demand absolute answers, explaining and getting stand our technical and operational role in managing them to act on risk messages is probably the biggest flood hazards, most of us still struggle with our risk challenge facing flood risk management professionals communication capabilities. As a result, we might be today. Conflicting messages, controversial and emotion- leaving key audiences in a precarious environment ally charged issues, and disagreement on the extent when better understanding of this communication of the risk and how to assess it present key commu- effort could prevent ineffective and potentially dam- nications challenges. This thought paper is designed aging media and public responses. Simply put, poor to open a dialogue on the topic and share our ideas communication can jeopardize the trust we have estab- as to how we might collectively better understand the lished and the credibility we need with decisionmakers, basic principles of risk communication and use these the media, and the public we serve. principles to improve the communication of risk to the audiences we serve before, during, and after a flood. Learning From Other Risk Communication Experiences Flood risk management professionals, along with other Before Hurricane Katrina struck, why did most New public officials and interest groups, recognize that Orleans residents not understand the risk they faced communication is a powerful force in helping their audi- and not do something about it? Why do those same ences to understand real versus perceived risk, build- people not see the risks they still face? Why does ing trust and credibility, and motivating action to save the public clamor to move into new developments in lives and property. Hence, there is a need, as well as California that will be under 20 feet of water when the an opportunity, to communicate about flood risk in a adjacent levees fail or are overtopped? Issues of flood way that informs without frightening, educates without risk mitigation and protection have become front-burner provoking alarm, and moves people to act. issues for some decisionmakers and media, but do not seem to be on the minds of the flood-prone public Over the last three decades, our nation has seen cam- nationwide. Recent studies and headlines questioned paigns to “buckle up” and “stop smoking” move from the safety of the nation’s levees and identified the slogan to reality. A public that finally understood the thousands of lives and billions of dollars of property risk and why the government was pushing action on value at stake, but were largely treated in a ho-hum this risk accepted its responsibilities. Lessons learned fashion by the public. This speaks to the need for bet- from numerous national public awareness and safety ter understanding how a risk communication strategy campaigns such as home smoke alarms, designated and skills can positively influence the perceptions, driver safe ride, and bicycle helmet safety campaigns decisions, and actions of the public and policy makers can be carried into flood risk communication. Common and get them to move to action. to these campaigns was their ability to legitimize and 1 elevate, through effective risk communication, the vis- message through maps (and eventually geospatial ibility of an important safety issue in the public eye as messaging without maps) that provide communities the motivation for policy action and change. In addition, with flood risk information in a variety of formats. their risk communication focused on influencing the FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers, the United States environment to support individual risk reduction deci- Geological Survey (USGS), and the National Oceanic sions and actions. and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have been working with inundation and risk maps. For example, The application of the principles outlined in the remain- Exhibit 1 shows a draft map approach by the Army der of this paper offers some first steps as we move Corps of Engineers to represent flood risk in terms of ahead to develop an effective national flood risk com- total dollars lost, percentage of property value lost, munication strategy. However, unlike the other cam- and loss of lives associated with a 1 percent flood paigns, ours must be carried out before, during, and across various New Orleans neighborhoods. They are after the natural disaster against which we are seeking true risk maps because they are based not only on the protection. probability of the flood event (1 percent) but also on the probabilities that the components of the discrete Principle #1—Communicate in Multiple Ways One segment of the target audience can be convinced Exhibit 1 This USACE draft risk map communicates multiple views of risk from of the flood hazard it faces by using only a few well- property loss to human life loss chosen words and perhaps some statistics that tell the Property Loss ($M) < 50 story. Others will have to hear the message coming at $ Loss NOE 1 50 – 200 them from multiple directions before it has any impact. NOE 2 NOE 5 NOE 200 – 350 OM 1 3 JE 3 NOE 4 350 – 500 In the campaign to ban smoking in public places, SC 2 JE 2 OM 2 OM 3 SB 2 500 – 650 SC 1 OM 4 JE 1 SB 1 multiple media (e.g., print, broadcast, electronic) were OM 5 SB 3 650 – 800 JW 1 SB 5 OW 2 OW 1 800 – 950 used first to reach the smokers with anti-smoking risk JW 4 JW 2 JW 3 950 – 1,100 SB 4 communication, and then to reach the general public 1,100 – 3,000 thereby creating an environment that pressured smok- PL 11 > 3,000 ers to stop. This included focusing on the dangers of Property Loss < 10% secondhand smoke to create the will and rationale % of Value Loss NOE 1 10% – 20% NOE 2 20% – 30% needed to get smoking officially banned in most pub- NOE 5 NOE OM 1 3 JE 3 NOE 4 30% – 40% SC 2 JE 2 OM 2 lic places. A similar strategy aimed at influencing OM 3 SB 2 40% – 50% SC 1 OM 4 JE 1 SB 1 OM 5 SB 3 50% – 60% individuals and policy could be adapted for flood risk JW 1 SB 5 OW 2 OW 1 60% – 70% JW 4 communication. JW 2 JW 3 70% – 80% SB 4 80% – 90% For nearly four decades, our communities have been PL 11 90% – 100% using maps that portray one or two zones of potential Life Loss 0 – 40 flooding and stop there. If a community was lucky, it Loss of Life NOE 1 40– 120 also obtained some elevation data about the flood that NOE 2 NOE 5 NOE 120 – 200 OM 1 3 JE 3 NOE 4 200 – 280 it faced. Some in the community were content with this SC 2 JE 2 OM 2 OM 3 SB 2 280 – 360 SC 1 OM 4 level of detail while others chafed to get more informa- JE 1 SB 1 OM 5 SB 3 360 – 440 JW 1 SB 5 OW 2 440 – 520 tion—but it was not available. The Federal Emergency OW 1 JW 4 JW 2 JW 3 520 – 600 SB 4 Management Agency’s (FEMA) Map Modernization pro- 600 – 1,000 gram is making better and more accurate information PL 11 > 1,000 available to communities, but the flood insurance rate still remains a tool with a limited approach to inform- 1% Expected Losses, 2007 HPS, 50% Pumping ing the affected communities about their risk. Through Assumes Pre-Katrina Property and Population modern technology, we are now able to distribute our Source: Interagency Performance Evaluation Task Force (IPET), May 2008. 2

sections of the New Orleans levee protection system routine, non-emergency communications are ineffective will perform as designed. in times of high stress. In addition, emotions, not facts or information about risk, are the trigger for how the European Community members are also now using a public ultimately makes decisions or takes actions to variety of approaches to communicate flood risk, learn- reduce risk. Consequently, the rules that govern what ing which works best with what audience. Exhibit 2 is and how we communicate change, and in ways that an Italian flood risk map showing the inundation for the help people to hear, understand, remember, and act on 50-, 200-, and 500-year floods. It also displays three our messages. There are several risk communication levels of risk (R2, R3, and R4). The Italians define the techniques such as 27/9/3 (27 words, 9 seconds, 3 risk factor “R” on the basis of sensitivity and probabil- key messages) that flood risk management profession- ity. The risk factor used is obtained by overlaying inun- als can use to quickly and efficiently shift communica- dation with land use and urban planning, and taking tion gears in high-concern situations. Other powerful into account future urban development. risk communication techniques include AGL-4, 1N=3P, All of these new approaches are finding users and Primacy/Recency, and more. A tip-sheet on these and champions and point to the need to take advantage other techniques can be obtained by contacting Booz of these advances—just as FEMA has indicated its Allen at the e-mail address or phone number provided intention. at the end of this paper.

Principle #2—Understand How High Stress Changes Principle #3—Probability Plus Values Equals Real Risk the Rules! Risk is typically defined as “probability of an event x A central precept in risk communication is that in high- consequence,” and emphasizes the “factual/informa- stress, high-concern events (e.g., flooding or thinking tional” dimension of risk. While useful, the definition about flooding), people have difficulty processing infor- does not account for the influence that perceptions mation, tend to think negatively, are often less trusting, (e.g., fear factors) and values have in the risk space. and their perceptions may vary from reality—which Hence, we need to expand our definition and under- means the strategies and techniques that work for standing of risk as “a threat, real or perceived, to Exhibit 2 The Italians combine inundation with land use and urban planning, taking into account future urban development to communicate risk for multiple probabilities of flooding

Fluvial areas Area A – Tr 50 years Area B – Tr 200 years Area C – Tr 500 years

Areas at risk Areas at R4 risk Areas at R3 risk Areas at R2 risk

Source: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/flood_risk/flood_atlas/countries/pdf/italy.pdf 3 something we value.” In the U.S. Fire Administration’s people admitted that they did not understand second- “Tribute to Heroes” campaign, understanding the facts hand smoke. If information about risk is not known about fire risk and prevention was critical, but equally or not available, the best thing to do is to honestly important was the campaign’s appeal to what people admit it. Although saying, “I don’t know when the next value—such as protecting themselves and their fami- big flood is coming, but I know it is going to happen,” lies—and to protect the firefighters who work each day can evoke feelings of vulnerability, it also can be an to save lives. important step in gaining credibility. An audience that demands 100 percent certainty is more than likely Principle #4—Recognize and Address Audience Fear questioning the underlying values and process, not and Anger your explanation of risk. By listening and recognizing Persons who find themselves potentially at risk for an the real concerns behind the demand for certainty, you adverse and involuntarily imposed hazard are under- often can address audience fears while still acknowl- standably fearful and angry. For communities located edging uncertainty. Audiences need to be provided near hazardous waste sites, issues of health and with as much information as possible to help them safety often arouse strong emotions, including anger understand that uncertainty is part of the process, and and hostility. In these situations, acknowledging uncer- that the answers available now may not be the final tainty and expressing empathy and caring is a vital answers. In some instances, it might be helpful to first step in the risk communication process. Although indicate the level of certainty, but you should recognize uncertainty is a well-established part of risk situa- that many non-technical audiences such as the general tions, most people are afraid of unknown risks and are public and the news media do not comprehend uncer- inclined to focus on worst-case scenarios, and the con- tainty in numeric terms. A further explanation might cept of risk is very different if family members, friends, be required, such as, “You have a one in four chance or neighbors are potentially affected instead of an of having the 100-year flood occur during the life of unknown population somewhere. The involuntary nature your mortgage.” Or as shown in the NOAA inundation of assuming any unknown risk can easily exacerbate map in Exhibit 3 on page 4, it may be as important to the fears and generate much anger. Failure to acknowl- communicate flood risk considering the probability that edge and attempt to address the fear and anger of any protection systems in the region will perform as affected parties will likely result in unsuccessful risk designed, as it is assuming the protection system will communication and may even intensify their concerns. consistently work. Increasing individuals’ sense of trust, benefit, and control can help to mitigate their fear and anger. In Principle #6—Explain Complex and Technical addition to describing the actions we are taking, con- Information cerned individuals need information about the actions Numerous tools are available for the effective com- that they can take; for example, what they can do to munication of complex, scientific, or technical informa- discover if they are at risk (where are the maps and tion. For instance, the Federal Government’s “Plain how do they work), whether they might be at increased Language” initiative focuses on developing and deliver- risk, and what actions they should take to reduce risk. ing communications that audiences can understand This could include such things as flood-proofing, buying the first time they read or hear them. When these appropriate insurance, and knowing more about evacu- principles are used in communications, audiences can ation plans. not only find what they need, but also understand and use what they find to meet their needs. One of these Principle #5—Acknowledge Uncertainty principles is to avoid using acronyms and jargon. For Recognizing and admitting uncertainty is simply the example, saying, ”No matter what we do, there will still reality of most risk communication situations. For be some chance of a flood occurring,” is much clearer instance, in the early days of anti-smoking campaigns, than saying, “You have a residual flood risk.” Does the 4

term, “1 percent annual chance of flood” really convey picture of a specific flood risk: “Four hours after the a message to the public? Be sure that all information levee breaks you may have 8 feet of water in your used on maps is fully explained and use supplemen- home.” Identify for your audience not only what the risk tal visuals to clarify and support key communications is but also what the benefit is of doing X. Realize that points. Information will be more useful to the audience, when individuals are making risk reduction decisions, and greater communication success will be achieved, they are weighing the trade-offs and opportunity costs if the information provided is relevant and easily under- of those decisions, so keep that in mind when crafting stood. To help audiences understand the issues, use your messages. clear, non-technical language to discuss risks and other specific information and indicate the nature, form, Principle #7—Anticipate, Prepare, and Practice for severity, or magnitude of the risk. Create a mental Media Interaction When interacting with the print, broadcast, or electronic Exhibit 3 media, it is vital to address likely questions. A crisis, NOAA flood inundation maps for elevations at 44 and 53 feet respectively easily translates elevations into relative degrees whether it is in the midst of a levee decertification or of flooding at different flood stages including the probability of during an actual flood, is not the time to begin thinking protective systems performing as designed about these questions. In fact, it is the worst time to Inundation Levels NAVD88 Stage 53 43.7 do so. Much of the success of effective risk commu- 52 42.7 51 41.7 nication about flood risk is predicated on the amount 50 40.7 49 39.7 of work that goes into the planning and preparation 48 38.7 47 37.7 46 36.7 before a crisis occurs. Hundreds of questions—some 45 35.7 44 34.7 good, some trivial, some odd—emerge when a news 43 33.7 42 32.7 story is breaking. The more questions that can be Major Flooding Begins 41 31.7 anticipated and answered ahead of time the better. 40 30.7 39 29.7 38 28.7 This is especially true for information regarding high- 37 27.7 36 26.7 visibility issues such as flood risk. Key questions to 35 25.7 34 24.7 begin asking and answering currently include— Moderate Flooding Begins 33 23.7 32 22.7 ■■ 31 21.7 What information about risk must be conveyed 30 20.7 29 19.7 in terms of pre-flood, flood, and post-flood Flooding Begins 28 18.7 communications?

Inundation Levels NAVD88 Stage ■■ 53 43.7 What difficult questions about risk can you anticipate 52 42.7 51 41.7 from the audiences you interact with regularly (e.g., 50 40.7 49 39.7 policymakers, media)? What do you say to “what is 48 38.7 47 37.7 46 36.7 risk”? 45 35.7 44 34.7 ■■ 43 33.7 How can you help the media meet their information 42 32.7 Major Flooding Begins needs before a risk becomes a crisis and the crisis a 41 31.7 40 30.7 39 29.7 disaster? 38 28.7 37 27.7 ■■ 36 26.7 What are potential obstacles to effective risk commu- 35 25.7 34 24.7 nications and how can they be minimized? Moderate Flooding Begins 33 23.7 32 22.7 ■■ 31 21.7 What are the opportunities for effective risk communi- 30 20.7 29 19.7 cations and how can they be maximized?

Flooding Begins 28 18.7

Source: http://newweb.erh.noaa.gov/ahps2/inundation/inundation.php?wfo=rah&gage=tarn7 5

What Booz Allen Brings Booz Allen Hamilton has been at the forefront of been recognized as a consultant and an employer of management consulting for businesses and choice. In 2007, for the third consecutive year, Fortune governments for more than 90 years. Providing magazine named Booz Allen one of “The 100 Best consulting services in strategy, operations, organization Companies to Work For,” and for the past eight years, and change, and information technology, Booz Allen Working Mother has ranked the firm among its “100 is the one firm that helps clients solve their toughest Best Companies for Working Mothers.” problems, working by their side to help them achieve To learn more about the firm, visit the Booz Allen Web their missions. Booz Allen is committed to delivering site at www.boozallen.com. To learn more about the results that endure. best ideas in business, visit www.strategy-business.com, With 19,000 employees on six continents, the firm the Web site for strategy+business, a quarterly journal generates annual sales of $4 billion. Booz Allen has sponsored by Booz Allen.

About the Authors:

Dr. Tim Tinker, DrPH is a Senior Associate with water resources research and analysis, he recently Booz Allen Hamilton’s Organization and Strategy chaired an Interagency Levee Policy Review Committee capability focused on Strategic Communications. for FEMA. Dr. Galloway was a presidential appointee He is developing a new Center of Excellence for to the Mississippi River Commission and in 1993 – Risk and Crisis Communication for the firm. As a 1994, led a White House study of the causes of the nationally and internationally recognized expert in 1993 Mississippi River Flood. During a 38-year career risk and crisis communications, Dr. Tinker works in in the military, he served in various assignments in both public and private sectors such as homeland the United States and overseas, retiring in 1995 as security, defense, emergency preparedness, public a brigadier general and Dean of Academics at the health, health care, energy, environment, and others, U.S. Military Academy. He was 2007 President of the to successfully help clients anticipate, prepare, and American Water Resources Association. He is a gradu- practice science-based and system-wide risk and crisis ate of the Military Academy and holds masters degrees communication. He can be reached at 703/902-4519 from Princeton and Pennsylvania State Universities and or [email protected]. the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, and a doctorate in Geography from the University of Dr. Gerald E. Galloway, Jr. PE, PhD is a Glenn L. North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Galloway is a reg- Martin Institute Professor of Engineering and Affiliate istered professional engineer and a member of the Professor of Public Policy at the University of Maryland. National Academy of Engineering. He can be reached He is also a Visiting Scholar at the U.S. Army Corps at 301/405-1341 or [email protected]. of Engineers Institute of Water Resources. Active in

Downloadable digital versions of this article and other Booz Allen Hamilton publications are available from www.boozallen.com. Worldwide Offices

Asia Australia New Zealand North America Bangkok Aberdeen, MD San Antonio Beijing Annapolis Junction, MD San Diego Brisbane Arlington, VA San Francisco Canberra Atlanta Stafford, VA Hong Kong Boston Tampa, FL Melbourne Chantilly, VA Washington, D.C. Seoul* Charleston, SC Shanghai Chicago Sydney Cleveland Tokyo Colorado Springs Latin America Wellington Dallas Buenos Aires Dayton, OH Rio de Janeiro Detroit Santiago Eatontown, NJ São Paulo Europe Falls Church, VA Amsterdam Herndon, VA Andean Region Berlin Honolulu Served by Copenhagen Houston Dallas Dublin Huntsville, AL Mexico City Düsseldorf Leavenworth, KS Frankfurt Lexington Park, MD Helsinki Linthicum, MD Istanbul* Los Angeles Middle East London McLean, VA Abu Dhabi Madrid Newark Beirut Milan New York City Cairo Moscow Norfolk, VA Dubai Munich O’Fallon, IL Riyadh Oslo Omaha Paris Parsippany, NJ Rome Pensacola, FL Stockholm Philadelphia Vienna Rockville, MD Warsaw Rome, NY Zurich Salt Lake City

* An associated firm

The most recent list of our office addresses and telephone numbers can be found by clicking the Worldwide Offices link under About Booz Allen on www.boozallen.com.