Integrating vulnerability analysis and risk assessment in flood loss mitigation: An evaluation of barriers and challenges based on evidence from Ireland

Abstract

This cover sheet may not be removed from the document.Please scroll down to view the document.©2013. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Integrating Vulnerability Analysis and Risk Assessment in Flood Loss Mitigation: An evaluation of barriers and challenges based on evidence from IrelandDespite well established critiques from hazards geographers, political ecologists and other social scientists, flood hazards policy and decision-making remain dominated by a technocratic approach to risk. Environmental hazards are understood through an ecological modernisation lens that emphasises quantifying biophysical risk and technological fixes. Flood induced losses are not distinguished from flood events with prevention becoming the overall goal of decision-making and policy. Risk is viewed as an egalitarian force impacting everyone equally and socio-economic vulnerability is rarely considered in local decision-making. Drawing on empirical research from three of Ireland's coastal cities this paper presents evidence for the persistence of the technocratic approach and examines several reasons for its perseverance. The results of qualitative research including semi-structured interviews with local decisionmakers and content analyses of local and national policies illustrate that the persistence of the technocratic approach can be explained by several barriers and challenges to the integration of vulnerability research into public policy. The lack of an agreed methodology to present socio-economic vulnerability in applied and policy ready formats is a significant limitation. However the conceptual barriers to integrating perspectives on vulnerability into a decision-making and policy system that structurally and discursively frames flood risk almost exclusively in terms of physical exposure may represent an even greater challenge.

Environmental knowledge and human experience: using a historical analysis of flooding in Ireland to challenge contemporary risk narratives and develop creative policy alternatives

“…Flood prevention through structural interventions was often seen as essential to economic prosperity due to the risk that flood events might be viewed negatively by potential investors (Jeffers, 2013b). Despite an official shift in policy that encourages a move away from reactive structural interventions in response to major flood events, prevention through an engineering fix remains the preferred means of managing flood risk (Jeffers, 2013a).…”

“…This flood and subsequent river flooding in November of the same year prompted reviews of policy and practice at both local and national levels. there are doubts about the success of this change (Jeffers, 2013a(Jeffers, , 2011a) and challenges to its implementation remain (Scott, el. al., 2013).…”

“…The research on which this paper is based formed part of a larger project which investigated vulnerability to flood hazards and climate change adaptation in Ireland's coastal cities (Jeffers, 2013a(Jeffers, , 2013b(Jeffers, , 2011a(Jeffers, , 2011b. This wider project drew on a range of data collection methods including semi-structured interviews with local decisionmakers and an analysis of records of decision-making such as the minutes of City It is recognised as inevitable that the record produced does not include every flood experienced in each city as some events may not have been reported, may not be included in the www.floodmaps.ie database or may not have been returned by the search function of The Irish Times database.…”

Finding key vulnerable areas by a climate change vulnerability assessment

“…The suggested framework can reduce the subjectivity and clarify the assessment process because the variables, weights, and integration method are explicit (''Appendix''). Therefore, all operators can obtain the same results as those reported in this study, and readers can understand the exact results and methods used (Jeffers 2013;Wang et al 2013). Equations (2) and (3) reflect the direct impact of weights on variables by following the basic concept of vulnerability (Adger and Vincent 2005).…”

A Proposed Methodology for Prioritizing Project Effects to Include in Cost-Benefit Analysis Using Resilience, Vulnerability and Risk Perception

“…Is there an essential difference?" There is no common methodology for vulnerability analysis, which is why it has largely failed to become incorporated into decision-making tools to date [29]. In fact, the debate about vulnerability definitions has emerged from three different intellectual approaches [30]: studies that focus on risk/hazard relationships; application of political-ecological-economical frameworks; and vulnerability research inspired in ecological concept of resilience.…”