4.6 Article

Flood risk perception in lands protected by 100-year levees

Journal

NATURAL HAZARDS
Volume 61, Issue 2, Pages 829-842

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-011-0072-6

Keywords

Risk perception; Flood insurance; 100-year flood; Levee; Residual risk; Delta

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation EFRI [0836047]
  2. Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning, UC Berkeley

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Under the US National Flood Insurance Program, lands behind levees certified as protecting against the 100-year flood are considered to be out of the officially recognized floodplain. However, such lands are still vulnerable to flooding that exceeds the design capacity of the levees-known as residual risk. In the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta of California, we encounter the curious situation that lands below sea level are considered not floodplain and open to residential and commercial development because they are protected by levees. Residents are not informed that they are at risk from floods, because officially they are not in the floodplain. We surveyed residents of a recently constructed subdivision in Stockton, California, to assess their awareness of their risk of flooding. Median household income in the development was $80,000, 70% of respondents had a 4-year university degree or higher, and the development was ethnically mixed. Despite the levels of education and income, they did not understand the risk of being flooded. Given that literature shows informed individuals are more likely to take preventative measures than uninformed individuals, our results have important implications for flood policy. Climate-change-induced sea-level rise exacerbates the problems posed by increasing urbanization and aging infrastructure, increasing the threat of catastrophic flooding in the California Delta and in flood-prone areas worldwide.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available