The devastating effects of Hurricane Harvey on the south coast of the US have raised new questions about how Americans deal with flood risk. Drawing on her research on how New York responded to the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, Rebecca Elliott argues that giving people in flood prone areas more information about flood risk is not enough; policymakers need to ..

Elliott, Rebecca

LSE Research Online

It’s	not	a	lack	of	information	that	stops	manyAmericans	from	adapting	to	flood	risks;	it’s	a	lack	ofcash.The	devastating	effects	of	Hurricane	Harvey	on	the	south	coast	of	the	US	have	raised	newquestions	about	how	Americans	deal	with	flood	risk.	Drawing	on	her	research	on	how	New	Yorkresponded	to	the	aftermath	of	Hurricane	Sandy,	Rebecca	Elliott	argues	that	giving	people	in	floodprone	areas	more	information	about	flood	risk	is	not	enough;	policymakers	need	to	understand	thatmany	simply	lack	the	financial	resources	needed	to	adapt	to	the	flood	risks	they	face.	Floods	have	long	been	the	costliest	disasters	in	the	US.	Now,	with	Hurricanes	Harvey	and	Irma	inthe	news,	how	can	American	communities	help	but	have	to	reckon	with	flood	risk?	After	seeing	the	devastationcaused	by	such	events,	shouldn’t	we	expect	to	see	individuals	and	communities	around	the	US	working	quickly	tomeasure	their	exposure	to	flood	risk,	proactively	reduce	it,	and	take	steps	to	prepare	for	the	human	and	economicconsequences	of	future	flood	disasters?Social	science	gives	us	many	reasons	to	be	pessimistic.	A	long	tradition	of	research	in	cognitive	psychology	hasoutlined	a	number	of	“heuristics,”	or	intuitive	shortcuts,	people	tend	to	use	when	interpreting	risk	probabilities.	Forinstance,	“optimism	bias”	leads	us	to	recognize	risks,	but	to	think	that	others	are	more	at	risk.	“Myopia”	leads	usto	think	in	short	timescales	rather	than	consider	the	longer-term,	which	is	often	what	prudent	disaster	planningrequires.	This	may	be	why	policyholders	tend	to	cancel	their	flood	insurance	after	a	few	years	if	they	haven’texperienced	recent	floods.	Recent	research	has	also	found	that	local	perceptions	of	flooding	follow	ideologicalpatterns	resembling	those	of	climate	change,	with	conservatives	more	likely	to	reject	evidence	that	floods	haveincreased	in	the	past	or	will	increase	in	the	future.	History	gives	us	even	more	reasons	to	be	pessimistic.	Floodsremain	costly—indeed,	have	gotten	costlier—in	large	part	because	we	have	not	learned	the	lessons	of	pastdisasters	and	have	continued	to	build	in	floodplains,	putting	more	people	and	property	at	risk.Yet	despite	all	this	evidence	that	people	are	generally	pretty	bad	at	perceiving	and	internalizing	risk	information,some	of	the	most	frequent	policy	advice	is	to	“improve	risk	communication.”	If	we	experts	can	just	overcome	thebiases	and	ideological	hang-ups	of	the	public,	people	will	finally	“get	it”	and	do	what	it	takes	to	reduce	their	risk.	Idon’t	disagree	with	this	advice.	But	based	on	my	research	in	New	York	City	in	the	aftermath	of	Hurricane	Sandyin	2012,	I	do	think	it’s	partial.	The	“give	them	more	and	better	information”	strategy	assumes	that	attitudes	predictbehavior,	but	social	scientists	have	long	known	that	there	is	often	a	gap	between	them.	People	express	attitudesthat	imply	one	course	of	action,	but	then	take	another.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: It’s not a lack of information that stops many Americans from adapting to flood risks; it’s a lack of cash. Page 1 of 3		Date originally posted: 2017-09-07Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/09/07/its-not-a-lack-of-information-that-stops-many-americans-from-adapting-to-flood-risks-its-a-lack-of-cash/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/“Walk	this	way	|	Hurricane	Sandy	Brooklyn	New	York	Aftermath”	by	Michael	Tapp	is	licensed	under	CC	BY	2.0Using	ethnographic	and	interview	methods,	I	set	out	to	see	how	New	Yorkers	were	actually	responding	to	floodrisk	after	Sandy.	After	the	storm,	a	survey	of	homeowners	in	flood	prone	areas	of	the	City	found	that	86	percent	ofrespondents	believed	they	live	in	a	high	flood	risk	area.	Yet	despite	that	pervasive	understanding	of	risk,	thebehavior	that	followed	was	highly	variable.	Across	the	city,	some	homeowners	elevated	their	homes	above	theexpected	flood	elevation,	but	others	refused.	Some	homeowners	in	Staten	Island	mobilized	for	a	communitybuyout,	while	others	in	Queens	told	me,	“You’re	wasting	your	breath…	we’re	never	going	to	move	away.”	SomeNew	Yorkers	thought	that	new	flood	maps,	released	after	the	storm	and	which	depicted	much	larger	flood	zones,showed	what	climate	change	would	bring	to	the	city,	while	others	mounted	a	fight	against	them,	arguing	that	thezones	were	too	big—even	though	they	closely	matched	the	extent	of	the	inundation	from	Sandy.The	conclusion	I	reached	was	that	in	order	to	understand	how	people	actually	respond	to	flood	risk,	you	have	tosituate	that	risk	in	the	context	of	their	biographies—and	especially	their	financial	biographies.	In	the	US,	flood	riskis	not	simply	depicted	on	maps	and	delivered	as	information;	it’s	also	priced	and	turned	into	an	individualinsurance	premium.	Flood	insurance,	provided	by	the	National	Flood	Insurance	Program,	is	mandatory	formortgage-holders.	That	means	that	when	many	Americans	reckon	with	flood	risk,	they	necessarily	have	toconfront	new	or	increasing	household	costs,	in	addition	to	threats	to	their	property	values.A	legal	aid	attorney	I	interviewed	started	keeping	a	list	of	the	reasons	that	many	of	her	clients	were	refusing	homeelevations.	It	largely	was	not	because	they	didn’t	understand	the	benefits	of	risk	mitigation	(which	would	alsolower	their	flood	insurance	premiums).	Rather,	they	didn’t	have	the	cash	upfront	to	finance	the	work,	even	if	theycould	be	partially	or	completely	reimbursed	eventually.	Or	they	couldn’t	afford	temporary	rent—plus	a	mortgagepayment—for	the	potentially	long	time	that	they	would	be	displaced	from	their	homes	while	the	work	was	done.Or	they	cashed	out	their	retirement,	or	borrowed	from	friends	and	family,	to	make	repairs	immediately	after	thestorm	and	were	just	too	exhausted	to	face	more	instability.I	observed	similar	pressures	firsthand.	One	woman,	who	had	actually	elevated	her	home	when	she	rebuilt	afterSandy,	was	nevertheless	involved	in	political	advocacy	to	fight	the	city’s	new	flood	maps.	When	I	asked	why,when	she	seemed	to	have	already	responded	to	the	risk	on	the	new	maps,	she	said	she	wasn’t	going	to	get	agovernment	buyout	and	then	who	would	want	to	buy	her	house	if	it	was	in	the	highest	risk	flood	zone?USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: It’s not a lack of information that stops many Americans from adapting to flood risks; it’s a lack of cash. Page 2 of 3		Date originally posted: 2017-09-07Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/09/07/its-not-a-lack-of-information-that-stops-many-americans-from-adapting-to-flood-risks-its-a-lack-of-cash/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Financial	biographies	are	in	turn	determined	by	larger	political	economic	forces.	In	a	country	with	a	frayed	andfraying	social	safety	net,	the	economic	security	of	many	families	is	tied	up	in	the	most	important	asset	they’ll	everown:	their	home.	While	we	can	and	should	keep	finding	better	ways	to	communicate	flood	risk,	scholars	andpolicymakers	need	to	spend	much	more	time	and	energy	figuring	out	how	to	support	individuals	and	communitiesto	do	something	differently	in	response	to	that	risk.	Existing	pre-	and	post-disaster	mitigation	programs	need	to	beexpanded	and	made	much	easier	to	access.	In	the	most	threatened	areas,	buyouts	like	those	offered	in	StatenIsland,	which	offered	pre-storm	value	for	homes	and	included	bonuses	for	relocating	within	the	borough,	make	itpossible	for	families	to	survive	the	profound	social	dislocation	that	comes	with	such	a	decision.	This	implies	areorientation	to	how	we	tend	to	think	about	this	problem	and	its	solution:	a	shift	from	focusing	on	cognitivelydeficient	individuals	to	addressing	the	collective	failures	that	both	produce	flood	risk	and	make	it	so	hard	for	manyAmericans	to	adapt.Please	read	our	comments	policy	before	commenting.					Note:		This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	author,	and	not	the	position	of	USAPP	–	American	Politics	and	Policy,nor	of	the	London	School	of	Economics.Shortened	URL	for	this	post:	http://bit.ly/2vP4eU0	_________________________________	About	the	authorRebecca	Elliott	–	LSE	SociologyRebecca	Elliott	is	an	Assistant	Professor	in	the	Department	of	Sociology	at	the	LSE.	Her	researchinterests	span	economic	sociology,	political	sociology,	environmental	sociology,	and	knowledgeproduction	and	science	studies.	Her	current	book	project	examines	the	economic	and	politicalgovernance	of	climate	change	through	the	lens	of	flood	insurance.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: It’s not a lack of information that stops many Americans from adapting to flood risks; it’s a lack of cash. Page 3 of 3		Date originally posted: 2017-09-07Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/09/07/its-not-a-lack-of-information-that-stops-many-americans-from-adapting-to-flood-risks-its-a-lack-of-cash/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/

It's not a lack of information that stops many Americans from adapting to flood risks; it's a lack of cash.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online