![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
In contemporary western societies, risk approaches to knowing futures provide an important basis for decisions. The paper examines conceptual approaches to risk in relation to knowledge of the future. Drawing on research conducted over the period 2003–06 into institutional discourses about flooding in the UK, it applies these ideas for understanding the challenges in tackling floods for 21st-century societies. An increasing association between flooding and climate change is identified in the UK socio-political and expert discourses entailing distinct risk issues and temporal characteristics that delimit ‘knowability’ of the future. Finally, the interrelation between flooding and climate change is examined in terms of the implications for socio-political decision-making and enactment of appropriate responses to floods.
Acknowledgements
This paper was produced with support from Cardiff University, the Economic and Social Research Council, and the Leverhulme Trust. In particular the author would like to acknowledge the support and editorial comments given by Professor Barbara Adam.
Notes
1. The empirical data were derived from interviews with social actors in, observation of and document analysis of texts from English and Welsh institutions and organizations. As such the assertions are not intended to be applicable beyond England and Wales, although there are general lessons that can be drawn from this research which may be applicable to the wider international community.
2. For example, ‘Policy actor’—‘Pol.’—refers to some connection to government or a policy role. ‘Academic’ is utilized to refer to participants identified as academics. ‘Eng.’ is an abbreviation for engineer.
3. There have been further major floods since this research was first conducted, notably in 2003 and 2007. The assertions in this paper remain pertinent against the backdrop of the more recent floods.
4. It is important to note that differing institutions have a responsibility for different types of flooding. The process of integrating flood-risk management for differing forms of flooding has been highlighted as being hindered by a complex distribution of responsibilities (House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee Inquiry, Citation2007).
5. This increasing association between flooding and climate change post-2000 in the UK has also been noted in relation to media discourses (Burgess & Carvalho, Citation2005).
6. This document represents the Government's First Response to the consultation processes conducted in Autumn 2004 (DEFRA, Citation2005).
7. This was evident in the House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee Inquiry Citation(2007). In the first evidence session with the Environment Agency in October 2007, clear connections are made between flooding and climate change.
8. Where publicly available documents are cited, the place names are not converted to pseudonyms. Pseudonyms for areas are only utilized in places where the participants have talked about locations that might lead to their identification. Where major cities, such as London, are referred to, pseudonyms are not utilized as the identification of participants from such references was felt to be highly unlikely.
9. The approach taken to incorporating climate change impacts in the UK guidance for assessing flood risk is described as ‘precautionary’. The notion of the ‘precautionary’ principle is acknowledged as a complex contested concept. In this case, ‘precautionary allowances’ refers to the estimated increases in flood risk due to climate change. These estimates are described as precautionary because the capacity to calculate the increased flood risk due to climate change is very limited. As such, there is significant uncertainty. The decision to implement guidance in the face of such uncertainty is described in the guidance documents as ‘precautionary’. The term is only utilized here in the sense that it is taken up in these documents.
10. At the time when this research began, these allowances were set at a 20% increase in flow for fluvial flooding, a 10% increase in wind speed was recommended, and allowances of 4, 5 and 6 mm/year over a 50-year period were recommended for coastal flooding. These precautionary levels were based on the IPCC Third Assessment Report high estimates for sea level rise and the United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP) (2002) scenarios for climate change impacts (DEFRA, Citation2006). They were reassessed following the Stern Review and a decision was made to extend the period for consideration to a century and raise the precautionary estimates for sea level rise, varying them for the particular time periods (i.e. for the East of England 4 mm/year 1990–2025, 8.5 mm/year for 2025–55, and so forth) (DEFRA, Citation2006). The estimates for river flow and wind speed were left the same (MAFF, Citation2001; DEFRA, Citation2006).
11. Beck Citation(1992) designates insurance cover as marking the boundary to risk society, that is, contemporary risks are distinguishable from those risks faced before through their insurability.
12. Beck Citation(1992) refers to the notion of inventing new certainties for oneself and others in the face of insecurities prevalent in the contemporary age.
13. All place names are pseudonyms.
14. If this was the case, financial markets and new technologies would pose similar problems for action. Adam Citation(2004) points to the body politics' present means of dealing with such issues as not representing responsible action but this is in a different sense to that associated with climate change. With regard to financial risks and new technologies the body politic takes significant action based on uncertain knowledge(s), whereas in relation to climate change not taking appropriate action is the difficulty.
