Options
Bradford, R. A.
Preferred name
Bradford, R. A.
Official Name
Bradford, R. A.
Research Output
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Publication
Risk perception – issues for flood management in Europe
2012, Bradford, R. A., O'Sullivan, J. J., van der Craats, I. M., Krywkow, J., Rotko, P., Aaltonen, J., Bonaiuto, M., De Dominicis, S., Waylen, K., Schelfaut, K.
Public perception of flood risk and flood risk information is often overlooked when developing flood risk management plans. As scientists and the public at large perceive risk in very different ways, flood risk management strategies are known to have failed in the past due to this disconnect between authorities and the public. This paper uses a novel approach in exploring the role of public perception in developing flood risk communication strategies in Europe. Results are presented of extensive quantitative research of 1375 questionnaire responses from thirteen communities at risk across six European countries. The research forms part of two research projects funded under the 2nd ERA-Net CRUE Funding Initiative: URFlood and FREEMAN. Risk perception is conceptualised as a pillar of social resilience, representing an innovative approach to the issue. From this process recommendations are identified for improving flood risk management plans through public participation.
Publication
Enhancing flood resilience through improved risk communications
2012-07-20, O'Sullivan, J. J., Bradford, R. A., Bonaiuto, M., De Dominicis, S., Rotko, P., Aaltonen, J., Waylen, K., Langan, S. J.
A framework of guiding recommendations for effective
pre-flood and flood warning communications derived
from the URFlood project (2nd ERA-Net CRUE Research
Funding Initiative) from extensive quantitative and qualitative
research in Finland, Ireland, Italy and Scotland is presented.
Eleven case studies in fluvial, pluvial, coastal, residual
and “new” flood risk locations were undertaken. The recommendations
were developed from questionnaire surveys
by exploring statistical correlations of actions and understandings
of individuals in flood risk situations to low, moderate
and high resilience groupings. Groupings were based
on a conceptual relationship of self-assessed levels of awareness,
preparedness and worry. Focus groups and structured
interviews were used to discuss barriers in flood communications,
explore implementation of the recommendations and
to rank the recommendations in order of perceived importance.
Results indicate that the information deficit model for
flood communications that relies on the provision of more
and better information to mitigate risk in flood-prone areas
is insufficient, and that the communications process is very
much multi-dimensional. The recommendations are aimed at
addressing this complexity and their careful implementation
is likely to improve the penetration of flood communications.
The recommendations are applicable to other risks and are
transferrable to jurisdictions beyond the project countries.