J.C.J.H. Aerts

Dependence of flood risk perceptions on socioeconomic and objective risk factors

[1] This study examines flood risk perceptions of individuals in the Netherlands using a survey of approximately 1000 homeowners. Perceptions of a range of aspects of flood risk are elicited. Various statistical models are used to estimate the influence of socioeconomic and geographical characteristics, personal experience with flooding, knowledge of flood threats, and individual risk attitudes on shaping risk belief. The study shows that in general, perceptions of flood risk are low. An analysis of the factors determining risk perceptions provides four main insights relevant for policy makers and insurers. First, differences in expected risk are consistently related to actual risk levels, since individuals in the vicinity of a main river and low-lying areas generally have elevated risk perceptions. Second, individuals in areas unprotected by dikes tend to underestimate their risk of flooding. Third, individuals with little knowledge of the causes of flood events have lower perceptions of flood risk. Fourth, there is some evidence that older and more highly educated individuals have a lower flood risk perception. The findings indicate that increasing knowledge of citizens about the causes of flooding may increase flood risk awareness. It is especially important to target individuals who live in areas unprotected by dike infrastructure, since they tend to be unaware of or ignore the high risk exposure faced.

How reliable are projections of future flood damage

Abstract. Flood damage modelling is an important component in flood risk management, and several studies have investigated the possible range of flood damage in the coming decades. Generally, flood damage assessments are still characterized by considerable uncertainties in stage-damage functions and methodological differences in estimating exposed asset values. The high variance that is commonly associated with absolute flood damage assessments is the reason for the present study that investigates the reliability of estimates of relative changes in the development of potential flood damage. While studies that estimate (relative) changes in flood damage over time usually address uncertainties resulting from different projections (e.g. land-use characteristics), the influence of different flood damage modelling approaches on estimates of relative changes in the development of flood damage is largely unknown. In this paper, we evaluate the reliability of estimates of relative changes in flood damage along the river Rhine between 1990 and 2030 in terms of different flood-damage modelling approaches. The results show that relative estimates of flood damage developments differ by a factor of 1.4. These variations, which result from the application of different modelling approaches, are considerably smaller than differences between the approaches in terms of absolute damage estimates (by a factor of 3.5 to 3.8), or than differences resulting from land-use projections (by a factor of 3). The differences that exist when estimating relative changes principally depend on the differences in damage functions. In order to improve the reliability of relative estimates of changes in the development of potential flood damage, future research should focus on reducing the uncertainties related to damage functions.

Individual preferences for reducing flood risk to near zero through elevation

Climate change is expected to increase the frequency and intensity of natural disasters. Adaptation investments are required in order to limit the projected increase in natural disaster risks. Adaptation measures can reduce risk partially or completely eliminate risk. The literature on behavioural economics suggests that individuals rarely undertake measures that limit risk partially, while they may place a considerable value on measures that reduce risk to zero. This is studied for a case of adaptation to climate change and its effects on flood risk in the Netherlands. In particular, we examine whether households are willing to invest in elevating newly built structures when this is framed as eliminating flood risk. The results indicate that a majority of homeowners (52%) is willing to make a substantial investment of €10,000 to elevate a new house to a level that is safe to flooding. Differences between willingness to pay (WTP) for flood insurance and WTP for risk elimination through elevation indicate that individuals place a considerable value on the latter adaptation option. This study estimates that the “safety premium” which individuals place on risk elimination is approximately between €35 and €45 per month. The existence of a safety premium has important implications for the design of climate change adaptation policies. The decision to invest in elevating homes is significantly correlated with the expected negative effects of climate change, perceptions of flood risks, individual risk attitudes, and living close to a main river.

Pathways to resilience: adapting to sea level rise in Los Angeles: Sea level rise and flood risk in LA

Los Angeles (LA) Countys coastal areas are highly valued for their natural benefits and their economic contributions to the region. While LA County already has a high level of exposure to flooding (e.g. people, ports, and harbors), climate change and sea level rise will increase flood risk; anticipating this risk requires adaptation planning to mitigate social, economic, and physical damage. This study provides an overview of the potential effects of sea level rise on coastal LA County and describes adaptation pathways and estimates associated costs in order to cope with sea level rise. An adaptation pathway in this study is defined as the collection of measures (e.g., beach nourishment, dune restoration, flood‐proofing buildings, and levees) required to lower flood risk. The aim of using different adaptation pathways is to enable a transition from one methodology to another over time. These pathways address uncertainty in future projections, allowing for flexibility among policies and potentially spreading the costs over time. Maintaining beaches, dunes, and their natural dynamics is the foundation of each of the three adaptation pathways, which address the importance of beaches for recreation, environmental value, and flood protection. In some scenarios, owing to high projections of sea level rise, additional technical engineering options such as levees and sluices may be needed to reduce flood risk. The research suggests three adaptation pathways, anticipating a +1 ft (0.3 m) to +7 ft (+2 m) sea level rise by year 2100. Total adaptation costs vary between

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

4.3 and

Flood maps in Europe – methods, availability and use

6.4 bn, depending on measures included in the adaptation pathway.