IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v55y2016ip2p309-317.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How well do the wider public accept integrated flood risk management? An empirical study in two Swiss Alpine valleys

Author

Listed:
  • Buchecker, Matthias
  • Ogasa, Dominika Maria
  • Maidl, Elisabeth

Abstract

The EU Floods Directive and Swiss water law both stipulate that non-structural prevention measures should be accorded a high priority in risk management. Several studies, have, however, found that, following flood events, the affected population tend to call for massive structural measures. Which factors can help to convince the local public to view integrated risk management more positively? We conducted a household survey in two Swiss Alpine valleys in which a disastrous flood event had taken place two years before. A total of 2100 standardized questionnaires were sent to all households in the Lötschen Valley and to a random sample of the households in the (larger) Kander Valley. The response rate was 30% with 647 completed questionnaires returned. The analysis showed that, after the flood event, the local populations in both valleys mostly favoured traditional measures of hazard control; but support for non-structural prevention measures also appeared to be rather high. A regression analysis revealed that the level of trust in the federal and cantonal authorities, and that of negative emotional experiences during the flood event were the main predictors for this support. Active information behaviour, in contrast, appeared to have only a marginal influence. Interestingly, however, the belief that floods will occur more frequently due to climate change and the support for ecological river management were also found to be relevant predictors. Communicating with the locals about these more graspable issues might be a promising way to increase their support for integrated flood risk management.

Suggested Citation

  • Buchecker, Matthias & Ogasa, Dominika Maria & Maidl, Elisabeth, 2016. "How well do the wider public accept integrated flood risk management? An empirical study in two Swiss Alpine valleys," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(P2), pages 309-317.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p2:p:309-317
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.07.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901115300460
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.07.021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elisabeth Maidl & David N. Bresch & Matthias Buchecker, 2021. "Social integration matters: factors influencing natural hazard risk preparedness—a survey of Swiss households," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 105(2), pages 1861-1890, January.
    2. Da Kuang & Kuei-Hsien Liao, 2022. "How does flood resistance affect learning from flood experiences? A study of two communities in Central China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 1-21, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p2:p:309-317. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.