What are we concerned about?

Preparing for climate change and tackling related issues like fuel poverty needs to involve local communities to be fully effective and avoid reinforcing inequality1, 2.  

 

Derbyshire Community Climate Change conference © Climate UK

On this page:

 

 

Introduction

 

Active participation of the local community in decisions that affect them is essential for democratic and service accountability and provides other benefits such as enhancing social cohesion, ensuring the local relevance of national policy and developing a sense of ownership over results3.  In addition, to be effective, building community resilience requires approaches that build on local knowledge to reflect the characteristics of local communities, their different risk environments, and local priorities4. 

 

Building effective communities

Responding to the challenges associated with building more resilient communities can be achieved by working with existing community organisations and developing new groups. Evidence suggests that while community ties which involve professionals tend to improve resilience, those relying on narrow social networks of friends and family or very insular communities can reinforce views and practices which may erode resilience5, 6.

 

It is important to understand why some people may be reluctant to participate in efforts to build community resilience and find ways to encourage engagement. Those on low incomes, who spend less time in education and who work in manual or intermediate occupations are least likely to participate in political action and civil society associations7. Some people may not feel able to participate due to a lack of time or money, a lack of appropriate skills, knowledge and experience, a lack of available transport or due to existing responsibilities8. See NCVO research about participation. Beliefs, preferences and perceptions of self-worth can also limit how much people feel able participate in a way that seems meaningful to them9. Links to resources on participation are available from these references10, 11, 12.

 

The need for climate adaptation is often not perceived as urgent, leading to scepticism about whether local action is necessary, especially where direct experience of events (e.g. flooding or heat-waves) is lacking.  Climate change and its impacts, although generating concern, are also generally believed to be removed in space (‘not here’) and time (‘not yet’)13. Defensiveness in the face of an uncertain threat, or broader ideological positions, may lead people to deny the problem, negating the need for action14, 15, 16. People who do not believe it is necessary are highly unlikely to retain or act on information about climate risks17.  Providing flood warnings is thus not straightforward. “In improving responses to flooding it is clear that the risk communication context is as important as having an accurate warning. If people do not trust the source of the message they will not take any notice of the message”18.

 

Even where people are aware of the impacts of a changing climate this is often not translated into action.  Unless people find meaningful ways to act in response to information received about climate change, many will resist engaging as they feel powerless to act effectively19, 20, 21. Even when people know and trust the information they receive, they may not know how to respond22, 23. Also, people considered ‘vulnerable’ (e.g. older people or those on low incomes) may not see themselves as such and may not take any action nor pay attention to risk warnings24, 25, 26, 27.  If a person’s perception of the threat is high but confidence in their ability to respond is low, then fatalism, denial and wishful thinking may set in, effectively demotivating people from taking precautionary action28, 29.

 

To be effective, community resilience30 requires a wider national ‘conducive environment’ and links between individual, household and local action. For example, actions to improve green infrastructure or sustainable drainage, or those associated with building social networks are likely to require area based action. What occurs at the household level also affects the community; this is in turn influenced by the large-scale forces (e.g., economic downturn) that shape the ability of individuals to adapt31.  The complexity and diverse nature of climate adaptation situations can make it hard to identify who has responsibility for taking action, making it more likely that responses will not occur or will be inadequate32. For community resilience to be effective, individuals must have the right incentives, knowledge, resources and skills. The government’s role is to provide a supportive environment, including the right legal, regulatory and socio-economic incentives33. 

 

The following section explains some of the problems associated with raising awareness and empowering communities in relation to different climate impacts, for example flooding and heat-waves.

 

 

Flooding

 

Communities may not be aware of the likelihood of flooding in their neighbourhood. Not surprisingly, communities living in areas where climate impacts are more tangible or who have been recently affected by a weather-related event, are likely to have greater awareness than others34. However, flood risk awareness is not uniform across social groups. Lower income groups and tenants tend to have lower flood risk awareness and are often less prepared. Thus in some neighbourhoods there is both high exposure to flooding and low awareness35. People who have recently moved into an area tend to have lower flood awareness36. Neighbours are an important source of information about flood risk, so ensuring communities can access accurate information through social networks can be an important means of reaching new arrivals and other people who may not engage with more formal channels37,38.

 

The difference between flood awareness and exposure to flooding varies by socio-economic class and region39. In some regions there is a marked gap between who is likely to be affected and their awareness of this risk. For example, in the North East region, flood awareness is much greater in people classified as ‘middle class’ compared to ‘working class’  although the ‘working class’ group has higher exposure to flooding. This is reversed in the Southern region where people classified as ‘middle class’ have greater exposure. This is important given that ability to adapt is linked to access to resources. 

 

Figure 1: Class inequalities in flood exposure and flood awareness in England and Wales (WC – working class; MC – middle class).

 

 

Even when people are aware of their flood risk they may not believe that a flood will occur. A survey of 1,000 homeowners living in areas exposed to flooding in England and Wales found a high proportion (82%) were aware of the issue (and 18% had been directly affected). However, 78% of all those surveyed felt that the chance of flooding happening again was ‘low’ or ‘very low’40. The use of probability to express flood likelihood e.g. a ‘1 in 100 year event’ is often misunderstood, as people think that once it has happened it will not occur again for a century. People often fail to link experience of extreme weather events to climate-related future occurrences41 resulting in little learning should it reoccur. In addition, the biased assimilation of knowledge means that only information that fits with how people already understand the situation will be remembered42.

 

Many people see the responsibility for flood protection as resting fully with local authorities, the Environment Agency or other public agencies (see Government webpage on who is responsible for managing flood risks). Flood defences can lead to a false sense of security and failure to take adequate precautions43. For example, the flood defences put in place along the River Irwell in Salford, led most residents to conclude that no further actions were required and that it was not necessary to pay attention to flood warnings44. It was necessary to use a range of information brokers to change attitudes, including using local registered social landlords to encourage their tenants to sign up to flood warning schemes due to low risk perceptions and failure to sign up to flood warning initiatives45,46. (See a detailed community engagement and awareness raising case study described in this report to Salford City Council: Climate Action Project Lower Kersal and Spike Island)

 

Raising awareness needs to be matched with opportunities for people to respond that seem realistic to them47 but often people are not aware of existing solutions that would help protect their home from flooding. In a survey of homeowners living in flood risk areas, 29% of respondents said that nothing could be done to protect their home from flooding48. Despite a large number of different flood resistance and resilience technologies being available, 19% of those surveyed considered sandbags to be the only available measure.

 

Even when they are aware of measures and are able to afford them, residents can still be unwilling to invest in individual property level flood protection measures. Over a third of respondents in a survey of homeowners in flood risk areas said that they were not prepared to pay anything for flood-protection measures. Of those who would be prepared to pay something, the median sum was only between £100 and £500. As might be expected, people on lower incomes, for whom affordability might be more of an issue, were prepared to pay less for flood resilience measures than those on higher incomes49. A grant scheme (piloted and launched between 2006 and 2009 by Defra and the Environment Agency) which targeted households that had been flooded many times to provide free property-level flood protection led to a significant increase in uptake (only 39% of flooded households usually take up such measures50 but 83% in the pilot areas did so). However, participation in the scheme reinforced householders’ perception that it was the duty of the state to protect them and, by allowing others to select and pay for the measures, they did not have to feel responsible if the measures proved ineffective or poor value for money. Many participants also saw the measures as a stop-gap pending a structural solution51.

 

Community level responses may also be needed but low income communities may find these hard to develop. There is some support for those on low incomes and schemes like the Government’s partnership funding framework takes some account of levels of deprivation. However, people from deprived communities are less likely to look for opportunities and financial support, than others52. Evidence from communities exposed to coastal flooding and erosion found that older people and those with lower educational attainment were among the least likely to seek out such support. Communities with smaller populations may be unable to raise the finance required to install and maintain protection measures.

 

 

 

Heat

 

Evidence suggests that sensitive individuals, such as those in ill-health and older populations, do not necessarily see high temperatures as a threat to their well-being53.  People tend to be much more self-reliant in the case of heat than in the event of flooding, but evidence suggests that older people carry out very little pre-emptive preparation and instead only rely on responding to hot weather when it occurs54. There is also a tendency for older people to feel that they should ‘put up with’ the heat and ‘get on with things’ because ‘little can be done about the weather’55. Similarly a survey of 450 households of older people with a range of additional vulnerabilities and health problems for Islington Borough Council’s Climate Resilience Islington South Project (CRISP), found that people generally underplayed the importance of changing their behaviour during hot weather. A small but significant proportion (10-15%) had little knowledge of what actions to take, were isolated from the local community and lacked other support networks, making them particularly vulnerable56.

 

An individual’s lack of awareness of the dangers of high temperatures becomes most important when they are isolated from help or where the help and advice they receive is inappropriate. Stronger social networks tend to improve the resilience of older people to heat-waves but only where those networks provide the right information, especially during a heat-wave event57, 58. Social networks can sometimes reinforce people’s sense that they are not at risk59.  A study in the USA found that as well as social isolation, people’s ability to adapt to heat was also limited by other factors including: the location of property and bedrooms (for example, in flats on the top floor of a large building), ill health, immobility, the environment around the property and perceptions of the incidence of crime and vandalism60.

 

It should also be recognised that raising awareness needs to be matched with opportunities for people to respond to that improved awareness.

 

Back to the top

References

  1. Twigger-Ross, C. & Colbourne. L (2009) Improving Institutional and Social Responses to Flooding
  2. Science Report: SC060019 - Work Package 5
  3. Preston, I. et al (2014) Climate Change and Social Justice: A Evidence Review, JRF
  4. Burns, D., Heywood, F., Taylor, M., Wilde, P., & Wilson, M. (2004) Making community participation meaningful. A Handbook for Development and Assessment The Policy Press, Bristol.
  5. Scottish Government (2013) Building Community Resilience, Scottish Guidance on Community Resilience
  6. Wolf, J., Adger, W.N., Lorenzoni, I., Abrahamson, V. and Raine, R. (2010) ‘Social capital, individual responses to heat waves and climate change adaptation: An empirical study of two UK cities’. Global Environmental Change, 20(1), pp. 44–52
  7. Preston, I. et al (2014) Climate Change and Social Justice: A Evidence Review, JRF
  8. Pattie, C., Seyd, P.  and Whiteley P. (2004) Citizenship in Britain Cambridge: Cambridge University Press p.86
  9. Pathways through Participation Strengthening participation: learning from participants
  10. Adger W. Neil , Dessai, S. Goulden, M., Hulme, M. Lorenzoni, I., Nelson, D.R.,  Naess, L.O., Wolf, J. and Wreford, A.  (2009) Are there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change 93:335–354
  11. David Wilcox, Guide to Effective Participation
  12. Involve: making participation count
  13. Danny Burns, Frances Heywood, Marilyn Taylor, Pete Wilde and Mandy Wilson Making Community Participation Meaningful
  14. Adger W. Neil , Dessai, S. Goulden, M., Hulme, M. Lorenzoni, I., Nelson, D.R.,  Naess, L.O., Wolf, J. and Wreford, A.  (2009) Are there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change 93:335–354
  15. Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2006). Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: The case of belief in global climate change. Environment and Behavior, 38(1), 48-71
  16. Swim, J., Clayton, S., Doherty, T., Gifford, R., Howard, G., Reser, J., Stern, P.& Weber, E. (2009) Psychology and global climate change: Addressing a multi-faceted phenomenon and set of challenges. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
  17. Morton, T.A ; Rabinovich, A ; Marshall, T ; Bretschneider, P (2011). The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Global Environmental Change 21 (1), 103-109.
  18. Moser, S. C. and L. Dilling (2004). Making climate hot: Communicating the urgency and challenge of global climate change. Environment 46(10): 32-46.
  19. Twigger-Ross, C. & Colbourne. L (2009) Improving Institutional and Social Responses to Flooding (p15) Science Report: SC060019 - Work Package 5
  20. Kalkstein Adam J. & Scott C. Sheridan (2007) The social impacts of the heat–health watch/warning system in Phoenix, Arizona: assessing the perceived risk and response of the public, Int J Biometeorol (2007) 52:43–55
  21. Macnaghten, P., Grove-White, R., Jacobs, M., & Wynne, B. (1995). Public Perceptions and Sustainability in Lancashire. Lancaster: Lancashire County Council, 1995
  22. Ballard, D.I., Reason, P.W., Coleman, G. (2010); Using the AQAL Framework to Accelerate Responses to Climate Change, Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, Vol 5 (1).
  23. Zsamboky, M., Fernandez-Bilbao, A., Smith, D., Knight, J. & Allan, J. (2011) “Impacts of climate change on disadvantaged UK coastal communities”, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
  24. Williams Katie , Jennifer L.R. Joynt, Catherine Payne, Diane Hopkins, Ian Smith (2012) The conditions for, and challenges of, adapting England’s suburbs for climate change. Building and Environment 55 (2012) 131e140
  25. Abrahamson, V. , Wolf, J.,  Lorenzoni, I., Fenn, B., Kovats, S., Wilkinson, P., W. Adger, N, Raine, R. (2009) Perceptions of heatwave risks to health: interview-based study of older people in London and Norwich, UK Journal of Public Health, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 119–126
  26. Wolf, J, Adger, WN and Lorenzoni, I (2010) Heat waves and cold spells: An analysis of policy response and perceptions of vulnerable populations in the UK. Environment and Planning A, 42 (11). pp. 2721-2734
  27. Bichard E and Kazmierczak A (2012) Are homeowners willing to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change? Climatic Change 112: 633-654
  28. Zsamboky, M., Fernandez-Bilbao, A., Smith, D., Knight, J. & Allan, J. (2011) “Impacts of climate change on disadvantaged UK coastal communities”, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
  29. Grothmann, T. & Patt, A.  (2003) Adaptive Capacity and Human Cognition, Presentation at the Open Meeting of the Global Environmental Change Research Community, Montreal, Canada, 16-18 October, 2003, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research , Department of Global Change and Social Systems
  30. Grothmann, T. and Reusswig, F.  (2006) People at Risk of Flooding: Why Some Residents Take Precautionary Action While Others do not, Natural Hazards (2006) 38: 101–120
  31. Community resilience here is taken to imply risk awareness, knowledge of effective responses, access to resources to enable a response and motivation to act
  32. Smit, B. and Wandel, J. (2006) ‘Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability’, Global Environmental Change 16 (3): 282-292.
  33. Eisenack, K &  Stecker R. (2012), A Framework for Analyzing Climate Change Adaptations as Actions, Department of Economics, University Oldenburg, 26111 Oldenburg, Germany Manuscript appears in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies to Global Change
  34. Fankhauser, S., Smith, J. B. & Tol, R. S. J. (1999) Weathering climate change: some simple rules to guide adaptation decisions Ecological Economics, 30 (1). 67-78.
  35. Zsamboky, M., Fernandez-Bilbao, A., Smith, D., Knight, J. & Allan, J. (2011) Impacts of climate change on disadvantaged UK coastal communities, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
  36. Fielding, J.L. 2012. Inequalities in exposure and awareness of flood risk in England. Disasters, 2012, 36 (3): 477 – 494.
  37. Zsamboky, M., Fernandez-Bilbao, A., Smith, D., Knight, J. & Allan, J. (2011) “Impacts of climate change on disadvantaged UK coastal communities”, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York
  38. Werritty, A., Houston, D., Ball, T., Tavendale, A. and Black, A. (2007) Exploring the Social Impacts of Flood Risk and Flooding in Scotland Scottish Executive Social Research, p. 157
  39. Preston, I. et al (2014) Climate Change and Social Justice: A Evidence Review, JRF
  40. Fielding, J.L. (2012) Inequalities in exposure and awareness of flood risk in England. Disasters, 2012, 36 (3): 477 – 494
  41. Bichard E and Kazmierczak A (2012) Are homeowners willing to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change? Climatic Change 112: 633-654
  42. Whitmarsh, L. E. (2009) Behavioural responses to climate change: Asymmetry of intentions and impacts. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 13-23.
  43. Rachlinski, J. (2000) The Psychology of Global Climate Change, University of Illinois Law Review 299-319
  44. Pielke, R.A. (1999) The nine fallacies of flood. Climatic Change 42: 413–438
  45. Kazmierczak A. and Bichard E. (2010) Investigating homeowners’ interest in property-level flood protection. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 1(2): 157-172.
  46. Bichard E and Kazmierczak A (2012) Are homeowners willing to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change? Climatic Change 112: 633-654Handmer, J, (2002) We Are All Vulnerable, Australian Jnl of Emergency Management, 18 (3), 55
  47. Ballard, D.I., Reason, P.W., Coleman, G. (2010); Using the AQAL Framework to Accelerate Responses to Climate Change, Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, Vol 5 (1).
  48. Bichard E and Kazmierczak A (2012) Are homeowners willing to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change? Climatic Change 112: 633-654
  49. Bichard E and Kazmierczak A (2012) Are homeowners willing to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change? Climatic Change 112: 633-654
  50. Harries, Tim (2008) Feeling secure or being secure? Why it can seem better not to protect yourself against a natural hazard, Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex University, Enfield, UK,  Health, Risk & Society, Vol. 10, No. 5, October 2008, 479–490
  51. Harries, Tim (2010) Household Flood Protection Grants - The householder perspective, Paper delivered to the Defra and Environment Agency Flood and Coastal Risk Management Conference 2010 – Telford International Conference Centre, 29th June 2010
  52. Zsamboky, M., Fernandez-Bilbao, A., Smith, D., Knight, J. & Allan, J. (2011) Impacts of climate change on disadvantaged UK coastal communities, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
  53. Wolf, J., Adger, W.N., Lorenzoni, I., Abrahamson, V. & Raine, R. (2010) “Social capital, individual responses to heat waves and climate change adaptation: An empirical study of two UK cities”, Global Environmental Change, 20(1), pp. 44–52.
  54. Wolf J., Adger W. N., Lorenzoni I (2010) Heat waves and cold spells: an analysis of policy response and perceptions of vulnerable populations in the UK. Environment and Planning A 42(11) 2721 – 2734
  55. Wolf, J., Adger, W.N., Lorenzoni, I., Abrahamson, V. & Raine, R. (2010) Social capital, individual responses to heat waves and climate change adaptation: An empirical study of two UK cities, Global Environmental Change, 20(1), pp. 44–52.
  56. Kolm Murray et al., 2013  Kolm Murray, J., Smith, A. and Clarke, C. (2013) Individual and community resilience to extreme weather events amongst older people in south Islington: attitudes, barriers and adaptive capacity. London: North London Cares & Preston, I. et al 2014 Climate Change and Social Justice: A Evidence Review, JRF
  57. Adger, W. N., Brooks, N., Kelly, M., Bentham, G., Agnew, M. and Eriksen, S. (2004) New indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity: Final project report. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia, Norwich.
  58. Pelling, M. and High, C. (2005) ‘Understanding adaptation: What can social capital offer assessments of adaptive capacity?’ Global Environmental Change Part A, 15(4), pp. 308–19. Elsevier
  59. Wolf, J., Adger, W.N., Lorenzoni, I., Abrahamson, V. & Raine, R. (2010) Social capital, individual responses to heat waves and climate change adaptation: An empirical study of two UK cities, Global Environmental Change, 20(1), pp. 44–52.
  60. Hayden,  M. H. , Brenkert-Smith, and Wilhelmi, O.G. (2011) Differential Adaptive Capacity to Extreme Heat: A Phoenix, Arizona, Case Study, 2011 American Meteorological Society