Clare L. Johnson

Flood Risk Management in England: A Changing Landscape of Risk Responsibility?

Flood risk management (FRM) in England is undergoing a major paradigm shift as it moves from an ideology dominated by flood defence to one in which the management of all floods, their probabilities and consequences is now of central concern. This change has led to searching questions both within government, and more widely, concerning the appropriate division of responsibility between the state and its citizens, the appropriate balance between structural and non-structural risk management options, and the ‘fitness for purpose’ of the current appraisal, prioritization and decision-making processes. In this paper, the authors examine how a desire to ‘make space for water’ in England has the potential to alter the division of responsibility between the public and private domain, presenting new opportunities, potential barriers and possible solutions.

Floods as Catalysts for Policy Change: Historical Lessons from England and Wales

The tied relationship between flood disasters and the demand for a policy response is well known. What is not well known is how and why particular policy ideas emerge as policy change options. Drawing on the public policy theoretical literature, the paper evaluates the policy impact of four of the most significant flood disasters in England and Wales in the past 50 years. In so doing, it seeks to highlight which of the environmental, contextual and behavioural drivers have, in the past, been critical factors in the elevation of policy options to policy agendas. By monitoring changes in such drivers we can offer an understanding of the potential policy changes that may occur in response to flood disasters in the future.

Water supply in England and Wales: whose responsibility is it when things go wrong?

Abstract The privatisation of the UK water sector in 1989 fundamentally altered the risk landscape. Where previously it was the governments responsibility to ensure that water supply met demand, that quality met standards and that the environment was not harmed, now there is a complex landscape within which risks are managed by a variety of stakeholders. The problem is that water management is an inherently risky business, where although it is in the interest of most stakeholders to minimise the risk of water supply failure it is not the responsibility of most stakeholders. It is not, for example, either in the interest of, or the responsibility of, natural ecosystems to minimise the risk of water supply failure. This paper explores the changing nature of risk allocation and distribution in the management of domestic water supply security in England and Wales. In so doing, it examines the extent to which the institutional arrangements under the British model of privatisation have facilitated a risk redistribution culture in the event that ‘things go wrong’.

'Virtual Water' - Real People: Useful Concept or Prescriptive Tool?

Abstract The ‘virtual water’ thesis is beginning to take centre stage in the water security global discourse. From its origins as a conceptual tool for countering the gloomy Malthusian (‘water scarcity leads to water wars’) argument, it is now increasingly seen as a serious prescriptive tool for the redistribution of water from water-rich to water-poor regions of the world. The authors interrogate the thesis from a political economy and sustainable livelihoods perspective, arguing that the indiscriminate use of ‘virtual water’ as a prescriptive tool has important implications for the security, vulnerability and livelihood strategies of actors within nation-states. Adopting such an approach could turn what is a highly illuminating analytical concept—‘virtual water’—into a deleterious policy instrument. The water may very well be characterised as ‘virtual’ but the people and politics are very ‘real’.

The impact of major floods on flood risk policy evolution : Insights from Bangladesh

Abstract Building on conceptual work conducted within the UK, the authors examine the incremental and crisis‐driven nature of changes in flood risk mitigation policies in Bangladesh since the 1950s. They highlight the key factors which have influenced the incremental and catalytic changes in policy, noting in particular the role and attitudes of international agencies and donors. By exploring incremental changes as a function of coalitions, the authors illustrate the importance of these external forces in their changing alignment with key national‐level actors; firstly through an ‘engineering coalition’ and more recently through an ‘environmental coalition’. The extent to which floods act as ‘catalysts’ for changing policy is then evaluated using the four most significant inland floods, or series of floods, in Bangladesh during the time period under investigation. The findings from which endorse many of the conceptual findings in the UK, the main exception being that in Bangladesh factors unconnected with floods continue to be the dominant forces of change ‐ not least significant of which is institutional and political change, resource constraints and the international donor community. In addition, major floods have the capacity to delay policy changes, whilst simultaneously accelerating policy debate, and to destabilise established coalitions.