Insights into the complementarity of natural disaster insurance purchases and risk reduction behavior.

While flooding is the costliest natural disaster risk, public-sector investments provide incomplete protection. Moreover, individuals are in general reluctant to voluntarily invest in measures which limit damage costs from natural disasters. The moral hazard hypothesis argues that insured individuals take fewer other preparedness measures based on their assumption that their losses will be covered anyway. Conversely, the advantageous selection hypothesis argues that individuals view insurance and other risk reduction measures as complements. This study offers a comprehensive assessment of factors related to the separate uptake of natural disaster insurance and the flood-proofing of homes as well as why people may take both of these measures together. We use data from a survey conducted in Paris, France, in 2018, after several flood events, for a representative sample of 2976 residents facing different levels of flood risk. We perform both main effects regressions and interaction analyses to reveal that home adaptation to flooding is positively associated with comprehensive insurance coverage, which includes financial protection against natural disasters. Furthermore, actual and perceived risks, as well as awareness of official information on flood risk, are found to explain some of the relationship between home adaptation and comprehensive insurance purchase. We suggest several recommendations to policymakers based on these insights which aim to address insurance coverage gaps and the failure to take disaster risk reduction measures. In particular, groups in socially vulnerable situations may benefit from subsidized insurance, low interest loans, and decision aids to implement costly adaptation measures.

Should everyone in need be treated equally? A European survey of expert judgment on social vulnerability to floods and pandemics to validate multi-hazard vulnerability factors.

Several European countries were affected by severe floods in 2021. At the same time, despite the deployment of vaccines, Europe was the COVID-19 pandemic's epicenter several times during 2021. One research aim of this study is to identify socio-demographic groups vulnerable to floods and whether the groups vulnerable to floods and pandemics overlap or are disjoint. We ran a survey in four languages (English, French, German, and Spanish) and collected the judgment of 366 experts in disaster risk management and first-responders to find out how those people caring for "people in need" (be it operational or administratively) think about which persons are more at risk than others. Another research aim is to validate multi-hazard vulnerability factors by comparing judgment on groups vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic and to floods. The main findings are that experts think that socially vulnerable groups should be rescued or treated first. Treating everyone equally is less favored by comparison. Infrastructure losses, followed by economic losses, reveal better than deaths or psychological issues whether vulnerability played a role in a disaster. Regarding vulnerability characteristics, older, homeless people, and immigrants rank highest, and most factors can be used to explain both flood and COVID-19 vulnerability, while some differ; for example, mobility impairment is less important for COVID-19. There are major discrepancies between what respondents think should be done to prioritize help to certain groups and what they have experienced is being done on the field.

Identifying barriers for nature-based solutions in flood risk management: An interdisciplinary overview using expert community approach.

The major event that hit Europe in summer 2021 reminds society that floods are recurrent and among the costliest and deadliest natural hazards. The long-term flood risk management (FRM) efforts preferring sole technical measures to prevent and mitigate floods have shown to be not sufficiently effective and sensitive to the environment. Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) mark a recent paradigm shift of FRM towards solutions that use nature-derived features, processes and management options to improve water retention and mitigate floods. Yet, the empirical evidence on the effects of NBS across various settings remains fragmented and their implementation faces a series of institutional barriers. In this paper, we adopt a community expert perspective drawing upon LAND4FLOOD Natural flood retention on private land network (https://www.land4flood.eu) in order to identify a set of barriers and their cascading and compound interactions relevant to individual NBS. The experts identified a comprehensive set of 17 barriers affecting the implementation of 12 groups of NBS in both urban and rural settings in five European regional environmental domains (i.e., Boreal, Atlantic, Continental, Alpine-Carpathian, and Mediterranean). Based on the results, we define avenues for further research, connecting hydrology and soil science, on the one hand, and land use planning, social geography and economics, on the other. Our suggestions ultimately call for a transdisciplinary turn in the research of NBS in FRM.

Risk perception of climate change and natural hazards in global mountain regions: A critical review.

Mountains are highly sensitive to climate change. Their elevated areas provide essential ecosystem services both for the surrounding mountainous regions and particularly for adjacent lowlands. Impacts of a warmer climate affect these services and have negative consequences on the supply of water, on biodiversity and on protection from natural hazards. Mountain social-ecological systems are affected by these changes, which also influence communities' risk perception and responses to changing climate conditions. Therefore, to understand individual and societal responses to climate change in mountain areas, aspects and drivers of risk perception need to be scrutinised. This article presents the findings of a literature review of recent English language publications on risk perception in connection to climate change and related natural hazards in mountain regions worldwide. Studies were selected from recorded entries in JSTOR, Science Direct, Scopus and Web of Science covering the period 2000-2019 and analysed in two steps (structured exploratory analysis, n = 249 and in-depth analysis, n = 72) with respect to the studies' research question, methodology, geographical scope and risk perception drivers. The review reveals that socio-demographic factors, like gender, age and personal experiences, have a crucial impact on individual risk perception. Some of the less tangible but nevertheless decisive factors are important in mountain regions such as place attachment and socio-cultural practices. In conclusion, there is however little information in the literature which addresses the specific situation of risk perception in mountain areas and its influence on communities' responses to environmental changes. Further, we observed a strong gap concerning the integration of indigenous knowledge in risk perception research. Many studies overlook or oversimplify local knowledge and the cultural dimensions of risk perception. Based on these results, the paper identifies several gaps in research and knowledge which may influence the design of climate risk management strategies as well as on their successful implementation.