Coping with risk: analysis on the importance of integrating social perceptions on flood risk into management mechanisms – the case of the municipality of Águeda, Portugal

Abstract

The paper reflects on how populations prone to flood risk perceive such hazards and the way this perception has or has not been incorporated into the measures and mechanisms of flood risk management. The frequent occurrence of flooding, as well as the population's vulnerability and exposure to this risk, shows that the municipality of Águeda is a paradigmatic case for analysis of these issues. Similar to the rest of the country, the municipality of Águeda has been neglecting the multidimensional nature of flood risk. The data collected present some disparity between the proposals and technical perspectives regarding the management and mitigation of flood risk and the perception of local populations. In addition, neither knowledge of social perception of flood risk nor of the local communities is being integrated in a substantial and pro‐active way, whether in the processes of policy‐making or in the implementation of these policies. Empirical evidence equally shows that there is a clear tendency towards acceptance and coping with flood risk by the population in the municipality of Águeda. This seems to be connected to the local populations' recognition that though it is impossible to eliminate risk, there are at the same time advantages to occupying the floodplains.

Keywords:

• flood risk
• risk assessment
• risk perception
• risk management
• integration of lay and expert perspectives

Notes

1. The empirical evidence presented was collected in the ambit of the European Project CLIMED: Effects of climate change and climate variability on water availability and water management practices in Western Mediterranean (ICA3‐CT‐1999‐30026).

2. For instance, the terrorist attacks that began in the 1970s, the energy crisis of 1973 and above all the succession of technological and environmental accidents such as Seveso in 1976 and Chernobyl in 1986.

3. On the social construction of risk and the social perceptions and practices throughout history, one can read the works of Theys (1987), Beck (1992) and Giddens (1990, 1991). These authors stated that social changes, which are the result of the move from modernity to high modernity or post‐modernity, have created the conditions to make obsolete the political and social traditions inherited from modernity, therefore increasing the feeling of uncertainty and intolerability towards risk.

4. Effectively, for the first time in the course of history, the feeling of insecurity seems to have largely surpassed the reality of objective threats. Theys (1987) seeks to examine this fact through four factors: (1) the decrease in levels of violence and insecurity tends to make those that remain even more unbearable; (2) the increase in social protection systems has produced greater demands for extending such protection to all domains of life; (3) the sacralization of science and modern technology has made us develop the expectation that they are capable of completely eliminating danger and thus accidents are considered abnormal and scandalous; (4) the rise in the number of institutions and techniques associated with safety has also increased the feeling of alienation and contributed to the disbelief in and debasement of science and technique whenever a failure occurs.

5. Renn (2004, 406) alerts us to the diversity of models of social risk perception. Regarding natural and technological risk, Renn stated that there can be identified five models: risk as a fatal threat, risk as unavoidable fate, risk as a proof of hardship, risk as a game of luck and chance and risk as alarm factor.

6. The works of Gilbert White (1945, 1964, among others) were fundamental to understand natural hazards and the way people relate with them, particularly in the case of floods. Gilbert White's studies were also important to reshape US flood management policies.

7. See also Cutter, Mitchell, and Scott (2000) for a more detailed explanation.

8. For a more detailed explanation of these factors, read the above‐mentioned works and also Renn's article (2004).

9. The authors are actually quoting an earlier work of Burton, Kates, and White (1978).

10. Lima (2004) stated that apart from their perception of public irrationality, technicians, scientists and politicians also see lay social actors as extremely emotional (i.e. they panic easily in risk situations); selfish (where the so‐called Nimby – not in my backyard – effect plays a decisive role) and taking dubious positions regarding risk situations, technicians and scientists, according to their interests.

11. Since this knowledge alone has the ability to compare relative risks and mitigation options.

12. For example, the Environmental Impact Studies concerning great public works; the Municipal Director Plans; the Management Plans of Protected Areas, among others.

13. The authors (Klinke and Renn 2001, 2002) proposed a novel approach to risk decision‐making and to risk management, based on risk evaluation and risk classification, including public concerns and lay perspectives. They present a set of nine criteria to evaluate risk, six risk classes, a decision tree and three management categories in order to improve the ‘effectiveness, efficiency and political feasibility of risk management procedures’ (Klinke and Renn 2002, 1091).

14. Steep slope, due to the accentuated relief of the Caramulo ridge.

15. Flood events in the municipality of Águeda are called ‘flash floods’, i.e. floods resulting from a rapid rise in river volume. According to Plate (2002), this kind of flooding is characterized by velocity and tremendously erosive forces of the water.

16. City Hall, Local Technical Office, Civil Protection Services, National Water Authority and ACOAG (commercial association).

17. The elaboration of this kind of analysis (risk maps) is cited by many authors as being extremely important, both for forecasting flood impact and implementing mitigation and management strategies.

18. The map shown represents an exercise in marking flood risk areas, based on a combination of spatial data and information from empirical analysis. We thus intend to highlight the importance of integrating various kinds of information in the production of flood risk maps.

19. The parishes of Águeda, Aguada de Cima, Borralha and Óis da Ribeira.

20. The parishes of Lamas do Vouga, Valongo do Vouga, Segadães, Travassô, Fermentelos, Espinhel, Recardães and Aguada de Baixo.

21. The parishes of Préstimo, Macieira de Alcôba, Castanheira do Vouga, Agadão and Belazaima do Chão.

22. The respondents could choose more than one answer to the question.

23. Concerning compensation subsidies for losses due to flooding, only 9% of those surveyed say that they have received financial aid, the majority of these living in the areas of the greatest risk exposure.

24. These measures are the key strategies in Portugal for flood fighting and prevention, and flood risk management. As Silva (2004) stated, these measures are essentially directed towards the storage and usage of water resources and simultaneously, through engineering works, towards controlling river volume. Recently, we have come to see a move to adopting non‐structural measures which call for the involvement and participation of the population affected.

25. For a more detailed understanding of this question, see Silva (2004).

26. As was suggested before, this attitude (among the population of Águeda) may be explained by several factors ranging from familiarity with the source of risk and the situation of risk itself to the degree of willingness to live with it, which is motivated by an understanding of the benefits of the associated risk and also (albeit to a lesser extent) by the feeling of powerlessness when faced with the inevitability of risk and recognition of its irreversible nature.