No abstract

Insurance and compensation are cited as critical elements of resilience to natural and non-natural hazards alike. As a strategy of risk management, it emphasises peace of mind, financial recompense and the swift restoration of a 'business as usual' status for civil, social and commercial life. Yet despite the contribution of insurance to risk management, the synergies with progressive or adaptive articulations of resilience are not sufficiently explicated. This paper explores the fundamental contradictions of insurance as a form of resilience through a study of flood risk management. It demonstrates how insurance regimes serve to structurally embed risky behaviour and inhibit change after detrimental events. As such, transformative interpretations of resilience conflict with the long-standing principles and operational norms of insurance that privilege normality. The paper concludes that, despite its currency within resilience discourses, insurance is maladaptive and that insurance regimes reinforce exposure and vulnerability through underwriting a return to the 'status-quo' rather than enabling adaptive behaviour.

Flood resistance (FRe) and resilience technologies hold considerable potential to limit the damage caused by flooding. Resistance technologies generally aim to keep water out of buildings, while resilient measures may allow ingress but create the conditions for a quicker recovery of individuals, communities and buildings. However, despite their potential contribution to flood risk management (FRM), their use remains uncommon. This paper draws on pan‐European research of local communities at risk and their representatives, and professional stakeholders working at a more strategic scale, to explore the barriers to use and describe the co‐production of new best practice. It interrogates the issues in terms of level of awareness, degree of acceptance and the integration into decision making. We found that even where awareness was high, there was a reluctance to use these measures. This is due to issues related to comparability, costs, installation, performance and maintenance. The research also revealed that FRM policy and practice has struggled to incorporate this emergent approach and that many individuals at risk are reluctant to take responsibility and protect their properties in this way. In response, this paper details how good practice guidance – the ‘Six Steps approach’ – was co‐produced with key stakeholders to facilitate the wider contribution of FRe to FRM.

Abstract:In 2012, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) moved from a vulnerability to a risk-based conception of climate change adaptation. However, there are few examples of work that translates this approach into climate change adaptation practice, in order to demonstrate the practical utility of following a risk-based approach to adapting to climate change. The paper explores critically the differing conceptions of vulnerability and risk across the literature relating to disaster risk management and climate change adaptation. The paper also examines a selection of spatially focused climate change vulnerability and risk assessment methodologies in this context. In doing so, we identify issues with the availability of spatial data to enable spatial risk-based climate change assessments. We argue that the concept of risk is potentially favorable in helping cities to understand the challenges posed by climate change, identify adaptation options, and build resilience to the changing climate. However, we suggest that change is needed in the way that practitioners and policymakers engage with risk-based concepts if they are to be embed into climate change adaptation activities.

This article discusses the findings of an Arts and Humanities Research Council project researching how music festival communities in Scotland can address issues of environmental sustainability and climate change. It investigates how music festival communities are constructed with a focus on what role, if any, they might play in responding to the global challenge of environmental sustainability. Using music festivals in Scotland as a case study, we employed a variety of research methods to interrogate different constituents in music festival communities about their views and behaviours regarding climate change and environmental sustainability. These included festival audiences via onsite questionnaires; festival organisers and promoters via interviews and focus groups; and musicians via creative practice-led research. We conclude that rather than necessarily being a site for progressive or utopian socio-cultural experimentation (as they are occasionally portrayed in festival literature), music festival communities engage in complex and often contradictory behaviours when it comes to responding to – and making sense of – their own complicity in social challenges such as climate change.