The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Stakeholder expectations of the public in local coastal flood risk management in England

Stakeholder expectations of the public in local coastal flood risk management in England
Stakeholder expectations of the public in local coastal flood risk management in England
The flood risk management (FRM) doctrine that drives coastal flood preparedness in England acknowledges that not all floods can be prevented. Subsequently, beyond flood prevention other measures such as control, acceptance, adaptation, and redistribution constitute part of both national management policy and local policy implementation. The aim of this paper is to analyse the challenges of stakeholders implementing FRM policy locally, and their expectations of the public regarding coastal flood risk. We analyse the challenges from engineering, planning and insurance perspectives, through thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews in two case studies in contrasting English regions.
In the North West case study, covering parts of the Lancashire and Cumbrian coastlines, there is a contrast between the ongoing significant investment on the Fylde Peninsula (in 2015-2021, ~£120 million will be invested on coastal protection schemes) and the Cumbrian coastline, where a strategy is still being produced. In the South, an area composed of parts of the Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight coastlines was studied. Similarly to the North West, this area encompasses contrasting coastlines of significant settlements as well as more sparsely populated coast. Both cases have a legacy of coastal defences as well as more rural stretches of coastline with a defence legacy but less contemporary spending. Thus, it was possible to compare responses across stakeholder groups and case areas experiencing locally different environmental, social and economic conditions.
A set of 45 interviewees (stakeholders with involvement or interest in coastal flood risk in the North West or South coast) were questioned regarding the costs, timing, power, responsibility, acceptability, equity, and effectiveness of FRM. Responses were coded and analysed using thematic analysis.
Results suggest in the case study areas there is a disjuncture between the stakeholders’ perceived need for increased public debate on a longer-term, more holistic vision for the coast, and a public who is considered to be largely unaware, uninvolved and not feeling responsible for coastal FRM. While the Environment Agency and Local Authorities have clear, local and regional FRM responsibilities through the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, the respondents in the North West and South case areas desire further devolution of these responsibilities to the household and the individual. Simultaneously, they perceive the public to be currently unaware of their flood risk and not very involved in its management. It may be necessary to resolve these existing public engagement issues before the public can become involved in any meaningful way in the desired long-term, integrated and holistic vision for the coast, including and beyond FRM.
Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE)
Van Der Plank, Sien
43bd2c1b-6045-4cd4-bc63-742280485724
Brown, Sally
dd3c5852-78cc-435a-9846-4f3f540f2840
Nicholls, Robert
4ce1e355-cc5d-4702-8124-820932c57076
Tompkins, Emma
a6116704-7140-4e37-bea1-2cbf39b138c3
Van Der Plank, Sien
43bd2c1b-6045-4cd4-bc63-742280485724
Brown, Sally
dd3c5852-78cc-435a-9846-4f3f540f2840
Nicholls, Robert
4ce1e355-cc5d-4702-8124-820932c57076
Tompkins, Emma
a6116704-7140-4e37-bea1-2cbf39b138c3

Van Der Plank, Sien, Brown, Sally, Nicholls, Robert and Tompkins, Emma (2019) Stakeholder expectations of the public in local coastal flood risk management in England. In Institution of Civil Engineers Coastal Management 2019. Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE).. (In Press)

Record type: Conference or Workshop Item (Paper)

Abstract

The flood risk management (FRM) doctrine that drives coastal flood preparedness in England acknowledges that not all floods can be prevented. Subsequently, beyond flood prevention other measures such as control, acceptance, adaptation, and redistribution constitute part of both national management policy and local policy implementation. The aim of this paper is to analyse the challenges of stakeholders implementing FRM policy locally, and their expectations of the public regarding coastal flood risk. We analyse the challenges from engineering, planning and insurance perspectives, through thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews in two case studies in contrasting English regions.
In the North West case study, covering parts of the Lancashire and Cumbrian coastlines, there is a contrast between the ongoing significant investment on the Fylde Peninsula (in 2015-2021, ~£120 million will be invested on coastal protection schemes) and the Cumbrian coastline, where a strategy is still being produced. In the South, an area composed of parts of the Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight coastlines was studied. Similarly to the North West, this area encompasses contrasting coastlines of significant settlements as well as more sparsely populated coast. Both cases have a legacy of coastal defences as well as more rural stretches of coastline with a defence legacy but less contemporary spending. Thus, it was possible to compare responses across stakeholder groups and case areas experiencing locally different environmental, social and economic conditions.
A set of 45 interviewees (stakeholders with involvement or interest in coastal flood risk in the North West or South coast) were questioned regarding the costs, timing, power, responsibility, acceptability, equity, and effectiveness of FRM. Responses were coded and analysed using thematic analysis.
Results suggest in the case study areas there is a disjuncture between the stakeholders’ perceived need for increased public debate on a longer-term, more holistic vision for the coast, and a public who is considered to be largely unaware, uninvolved and not feeling responsible for coastal FRM. While the Environment Agency and Local Authorities have clear, local and regional FRM responsibilities through the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, the respondents in the North West and South case areas desire further devolution of these responsibilities to the household and the individual. Simultaneously, they perceive the public to be currently unaware of their flood risk and not very involved in its management. It may be necessary to resolve these existing public engagement issues before the public can become involved in any meaningful way in the desired long-term, integrated and holistic vision for the coast, including and beyond FRM.

Text
vanderplanketal_ICE 2019_ImplementingFRMpolicylocally_acceptedpaper - Accepted Manuscript
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (428kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 6 August 2019

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 435899
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/435899
PURE UUID: 6b499799-00b0-4e5a-8c49-9a31e5b0a2c6
ORCID for Sien Van Der Plank: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-6650-4111
ORCID for Sally Brown: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-1185-1962
ORCID for Robert Nicholls: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9715-1109

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 22 Nov 2019 17:30
Last modified: 18 Feb 2021 17:31

Export record

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×