Collaborative Flood Risk Governance at Property Scale: the Challenges and Discourse around Property Level Flood Risk Data in England
Flooding in the UK is reported to become a more severe and localised phenomenon in the future due to climate change (EA, 2009b; Evans et al., 2004) and the population growth (DEFRA and EA, 2006a). To date, it has been estimated that one in six properties in England and Wales is at risk of flooding (EA, 2009b). Study on components of flood risk suggests that damage sustained by buildings during flood events can vary considerably depending on the characteristics of the flood hazard and individual building characteristics. Although this risk can be highly variable, no systems exist with which risk and cost of rectification can be considered in context. In this study, Property Level Flood Risk Data (PLFRD) is referred to as the combination of data describing the flood hazard and vulnerability of domestic properties. Despite the theoretical benefits of use and availability of PLFRD to a variety of stakeholder groups involved in flood risk governance in England, at the moment at the scale of individual properties, whilst flood risk management stakeholders can determine the risk of individual properties as a consequence of their physical location within flood risk maps, they cannot establish property level factors that might reduce or increase risk. Therefore, the lack of clarity and knowledge in the PLFD discourse constitutes a gap in the existing literature. This study suggests a theoretical fame work that combines governance theories and theories of scale to structure the approach to address this gap under four core concepts: discourse, distribution of power, rules of the game and actors and coalitions. The identification of the factors influencing this gap is the contribution to the knowledge of this study. A qualitative approach was developed for further investigation of the issue. This involved understanding the characteristics of the key stakeholder groups (i.e. government, insurers and the property owner) and investigating the existing opportunities and limitations in uptaking of PLFRD. The main sources of evidence were semi-structured in-depth interviews with experts, each representing the key stakeholder groups, and expert’s observations. This included interviewing representatives from Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Environment Agency, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, local governments, Individual insurers, loss adjustors, Flood Re, and community representatives. 12 pre-set themes were selected from three government documents published in 2010 and 2011 to guide the data collection and data analysis process. New themes and relations were explored where appropriate. This study offers a unique insight into factors influencing the adoption of PLFRD into professional practice, integrating government, insurers and property owners’ position and perspectives. The findings of this study suggest that during 2010 and 2011, the case for PLFRD was not strong enough to overcome the barriers mainly due to lack of evidence and understanding of the characteristics that distinguished each stakeholder group’s approach towards PLFRD. Key influencing factors and the significant distinguishing characteristics were established. Results also contributed valuable insight into the future and ongoing incentives for PLFRD related projects such as Flood Re and similar flood risk management multi-stakeholder initiatives. The findings of the study highlighted the different value of PLFRD for different stakeholders as key to its effective uptake. It also identified the factors that influence the value of PLFRD. Understanding these differences and the underlying factors can benefit the implementation of evidence-based practice in risk management and future development of a multi-stakeholder risk database.
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations