Increasing Resilience to Storm Surge Flooding: Risks, Trust and Social
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Increasing resilience to storm-surge flooding: risks, trust and social networks HUGH DEEMING BSc (Hons), PgCRM NOVEMBER 2008 A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Lancaster University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Prelude At the age of eight, as I recall, I was standing, on a fine sunny day, beside the back door of my home, when my attention was drawn aloft. As I gazed upward, and for the next 10-20-30 minutes, all I could see, all I could marvel at, were the clouds. For, as I watched, what started as an azure-blue Cornish sky, turned during those minutes, first to white, then to grey and then to a brooding and tempestuous black. I watched the storm gather, as the clouds blossomed, then tumbled and then crashed together, at a spot in the heavens directly over my head. And then it rained and it rained and for the next hour I hopped and I skipped, I ran and I shouted and I was soaked by my very first flood At the age of eighteen, as I recall, I was working on a farm in Somerset. One morning in July, over to the east, the sky was black and I heard Brian shout, “We’ve got 20 minutes!” The river that fronted the farm was out of my sight then, set deep within its banks, but as we sped (me, completely bemused) to chase calves from their stalls, to shoosh chickens from their sheds, to lift chairs from the flags… that river rose And it rose and it rose, and it spread and it roared, and I coaxed and I waded and I worked and I was soaked…again At the age of thirty, as I recall – I could check my old pocket book if precision were required? – the radio operator sent me to Polperro. As I drove, the rain formed a wall, or a blanket, through which driving was…tough. To speed was folly; the road was river but the village, the village was worse. The cars wedged; the curtains, brown; the gardens, flat, and the people… shocked And when it was over, and after I’d watched and after I’d waded and after I’d worked and after, I’d dried… that flood remained, like the others, in my mind Hugh Deeming 4th September 2008 ii Increasing resilience to storm-surge flooding: risks, trust and social networks Hugh Deeming BSc (Hons) November 2008 Abstract The overall aim of this research was to investigate relationships between risk perception and community resilience to low-probability sea-flood hazards. Importantly, the policy context within which the project was conducted was one of transition. A historical flood- defence paradigm was being replaced by one of flood-risk management; this shift being predicated upon inclusivity and a wish to empower individuals to acknowledge and mitigate their own flood risks. However, existing indices had identified disproportionate levels of social flood vulnerability within communities exposed to extreme sea-flood hazards. Therefore, it was important to investigate how such populations were engaging (or not) with this policy shift. Three case-study sites, Mablethorpe, Cleveleys and Morecambe (UK), were chosen for more detailed research in a mixed–method investigation. Initially, a survey was used to quantify the populations’ risk perceptions and flood resilience, by examining levels of hazard awareness and preparedness. Having quantified these phenomena in breadth, focus-groups were used to add interpretative depth to the investigation. Using social capital theory, it was possible to identify elements of the concept within these populations. However, it was found that the informal social networks that are constructed with this capital have little influence in building community resilience to flood hazards. Rather, they operate to maintain existing perceptions of risk and responsibility, with resilience appearing to be more directly related to personal hazard experience. iii Introducing climate change as a risk factor revealed important differences in the way future flood hazards are perceived. That sea flooding is regarded as ‘natural’ and surface-water flooding as being due to human mismanagement, introduces an important twin perspective on risk and how it should be discussed. The role of trust in authority was also identified as fundamental within the social construction of flood risk, with the legacy of floodplain development revealed as a principal factor in explaining the low levels of risk engagement. Recommendations are made in relation to how risk management and communication practice might be improved in light of these findings. It is also recommended that effort should be focused upon making planning policy and decision-making processes more transparent, in order to draw coastal communities into open dialogue. To be effective in promoting resilience, such dialogue must both acknowledge hazard exposure and honestly address the challenges and trade-offs that this exposure adds to already complex considerations surrounding community sustainability. This thesis is my own work, and includes nothing that is the outcome of work done in collaboration. The work for this dissertation has not been submitted in any form for the award of a higher degree elsewhere, nor have any sections of the thesis been published, or submitted for a higher degree elsewhere iv Acknowledgements This thesis represents a culmination of the seven years that I have spent at university. The initial learning and then the research and writing process that has fuelled its production, has been an adventure, a roller-coaster ride that I could never have envisaged. Along the way I have received invaluable support and assistance from countless people, many of whom I am now proud to regard as my friends. This is my opportunity to thank them. Primarily I wish to thank my supervisors, Gordon Walker, Fiona Tweed and Nigel Watson, for their help and guidance and for their ceaseless encouragement to “just keep going”. Fiona, where would I have been without the ‘pedant’s pencil’ and your logical brain? Gordon I wish to thank particularly. Not only for his purchase of a very important ice- cream, but for providing a mixed blessing. The funding and the travel and publication opportunities, which constituted my involvement with the EU ARMONIA and SCENARIO projects, were invaluable, regardless of whatever I said to the contrary. Helen, Jon and Lucy, thank you for your stoic support. Kate, thank you for reintroducing me to life and for coping so admirably with the mania that is ‘writing up’ To Harvey, how could I have done it without knowing that twice everyday you’d be ensuring I had my quota of fresh air and exercise? Importantly, I wish to thank the residents of Mablethorpe, Cleveleys and Morecambe, for their time and for their willingness to entertain the requests of a fledgling academic. Finally, to my parents, you have my love! Hugh v Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………….……………….1 1.1 THE RESEARCH BASIS…………………………………………………………………4 1.1.1 Flood hazard research from the social perspective …………………….....4 1.1.2 The limitations of flood risk research to date………………………………..6 1.2 THE RESEARCH APPROACH…………………………………………………………..9 1.3 THE RESEARCH AIM…………………………………………………………………..14 1.3.1 The Research Objectives…………………………………………….………14 1.4 THE RESEARCH CONTEXT…………………….……………………………………..17 1.4.1 Some key terms and concepts defined. ……………………....... ………...17 1.4.1.1 Community / Network…………………………………….................18 1.4.1.2 Hazard………………………………………………………………....20 1.4.1.2.1 Extreme events in a changing climate……………….…22 1.4.1.3 Exposure………………………………………………………………23 1.4.1.4 Vulnerability…………………………………………………………...24 1.4.1.5 Resilience……………………………………………………………..25 1.4.1.6 Mitigation………………………………………………………………26 1.4.1.7 Risk…………………………………………………………………….27 1.4.2 Contextualising the definitions……………………………………………….27 1.5 THE POLICY CONTEXT: ‘MAKING SPACE FOR WATER’, THE CIVIL CONTINGENCIES ACT AND THE ‘RESILIENCE AGENDA’……………………..…...30 1.5.1 European Policy and the National ‘Making Space for Water’ Strategy……….………………………………………………………………..30 1.5.2 The Civil Protection Context………………………………………………….31 1.5.2.1 Local Implementation………………………………………………...32 1.6 SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………….34 2 RISK PERCEPTION AND RISK COMMUNICATION……………………..39 2.1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………..39 2.2 RISK……………………………………………………………………………………..39 2.2.1 Quantified risk …………………………………………………………………40 2.2.2 Risk Perception……………………………………………………………….44 2.2.3 Psychometric Models…………………………………………………………47 2.2.3.1 Heuristics……………………………………………………………...49 2.2.3.2 Bounded Rationality ………………………………………………..54 vi 2.2.4 Cultural and Social Theory…………………………………………………..56 2.3 RISK COMMUNICATION………………………………………………………………..61 2.3.1 Contextual and Human Effects………………………………………………63 2.3.1.1 Environmental Cues………………………………………………….63 2.3.1.2 Social Networks………………………………………………………64 2.3.1.3 Age……………………………………………………………………..65 2.3.1.4 Ethnic Minority, Disability and Transient Grouping……………….67 2.3.1.5 Gender…………………………………………………………………69 2.3.1.6 Socio-economic Status (SES)……………………………………….70 2.4 RISKS, RISK PERCEPTION AND COASTAL FLOODING: THE RESEARCH CHALLENGE….………………………………………………….. 72 3 COMMUNITY, SOCIAL NETWORKS AND SOCIAL CAPITAL………….75 3.1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………...75 3.2 SOCIAL CAPITAL...................................................................................... ……. .75 3.2.1 What is Social Capital?............................................................................77 3.2.2 Trust…………………………………………………………………………….81 3.2.3 Reciprocity………………………………………………………………. ……83 3.3 BONDING, BRIDGING AND LINKING SOCIAL CAPITAL……………………………. 84 3.3.1 Bonded networks………………………………………………………..........84