Advertisement

Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 287–296 | Cite as

What helps people recover from floods? Insights from a survey among flood-affected residents in Germany

  • Philip Bubeck
  • Annegret H. Thieken
Original Article

Abstract

The number of people exposed to natural hazards has grown steadily over recent decades, mainly due to increasing exposure in hazard-prone areas. In the future, climate change could further enhance this trend. Still, empirical and comprehensive insights into individual recovery from natural hazards are largely lacking, hampering efforts to increase societal resilience. Drawing from a sample of 710 residents affected by flooding across Germany in June 2013, we empirically explore a wide range of variables possibly influencing self-reported recovery, including flood-event characteristics, the circumstances of the recovery process, socio-economic characteristics, and psychological factors, using multivariate statistics. We found that the amount of damage and other flood-event characteristics such as inundation depth are less important than socio-economic characteristics (e.g., sex or health status) and psychological factors (e.g., risk aversion and emotions). Our results indicate that uniform recovery efforts focusing on areas that were the most affected in terms of physical damage are insufficient to account for the heterogeneity in individual recovery results. To increase societal resilience, aid and recovery efforts should better address the long-term psychological effects of floods.

Keywords

Floods Resilience Recovery Natural hazards Climate change Adaptation 

Supplementary material

10113_2017_1200_MOESM1_ESM.docx (31 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 30 kb)

References

  1. Ahern J, Galea S, Fernandez WG, Koci B, Waldman R, Vlahov D (2004) Gender, social support, and posttraumatic stress in postwar Kosovo. J Nerv Ment Dis 192(11):762–770. doi: 10.1097/01.nmd.0000144695.02982.41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blöschl G, Nester T, Komma J, Parajka J, Perdigão RAP (2013) The June 2013 flood in the Upper Danube Basin, and comparisons with the 2002, 1954 and 1899 floods. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 17:5197–5212. doi: 10.5194/hess-17-5197-2013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonanno GA, Brewin CR, Kaniasty K, Greca AML (2010) Weighing the costs of disaster: consequences, risks, and resilience in individuals, families, and communities. Psychol Sci Public Interest 11(1):1–49. doi: 10.1177/1529100610387086 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brewin CR, Andrews B, Valentine JD (2000) Meta-analysis of risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder in trauma-exposed adults. J Consult Clin Psychol 68(5):748–766. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.68.5.748 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bubeck P, Botzen WJW, Aerts JCJH (2012a) A review of risk perceptions and other factors that influence flood mitigation behavior. Risk Anal 32:1481–1495. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01783.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bubeck P, Botzen WJW, Kreibich H, Aerts JCJH (2012b) Long-term development and effectiveness of private flood mitigation measures: an analysis for the German part of the river Rhine. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:3507–3518. doi: 10.5194/nhess-12-3507-2012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bubeck P, Botzen WJW, Kreibich H, Aerts JCJH (2013) Detailed insights into the influence of flood-coping appraisals on mitigation behaviour. Glob Environ Chang 23:1327–1338. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2016) Statistik Arbeitsmarktberichterstattung: Der Arbeitsmarkt in Deutschland - Frauen und Männer am Arbeitsmarkt 2015 Nürnberg [in German]Google Scholar
  9. Burton CG (2014) A validation of metrics for community resilience to natural hazards and disasters using the recovery from Hurricane Katrina as a case study. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 105:67–86. doi: 10.1080/00045608.2014.960039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carr VJ, Lewin TJ, Kenardy JA, Webster RA, Hazell PL, Carter GL, Williamson M (1997) Psychosocial sequelae of the 1989 Newcastle earthquake: III. Role of vulnerability factors in post-disaster morbidity. Psychol Med 27(01):179–190. doi: 10.1017/S003329179600428X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cutter SL, Finch C (2008) Temporal and spatial changes in social vulnerability to natural hazards. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(7):2301–2306. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0710375105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daniel VE, Florax RJGM, Rietveld P (2009) Flooding risk and housing values: an economic assessment of environmental hazard. Ecol Econ 69:355–365. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.08.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Deutsche Bahn (2013) Wieder freie Fahrt zwischen Hannover und Berlin. Press release of 4 November 2013. German railways, Berlin [in German]Google Scholar
  14. Deutsche Bahn (2014) Wettbewerbsbericht. German Railways, Berlin [in German]Google Scholar
  15. DKKV (2015) Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013: Bewährungsprobe für das Hochwasserrisikomanagement in Deutschland. DKKV-Schriftenreihe Nr. 53, Bonn [in German]Google Scholar
  16. DWD (2013) Das Hochwasser an Elbe und Donau im Juni 2013. Wetterentwicklung und Warnmanagement des DWD – Hydrometeorologische Rahmenbedingungen. Berichte des Deutschen Wetterdienstes No. 242, Offenbach [in German]Google Scholar
  17. Elliott JR, Pais J (2006) Race, class, and Hurricane Katrina: social differences in human responses to disaster. Soc Sci Res 35(2):295–321. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2006.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Festinger L (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Grothmann T, Reusswig F (2006) People at risk of flooding: why some residents take precautionary action while others do not. Nat Hazards 38(1):101–120. doi: 10.1007/s11069-005-8604-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guha-Sapir D, Below R, Hoyois P (2015) Em-Dat: international disaster database. In: Louvain UCD (ed). Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  21. Hallegatte S, Green C, Nicholls RJ, Corfee-Morlot J (2013) Future flood losses in major coastal cities. Nat Clim Chang 3:802–806. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1979 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hebert JR, May Y, Clemow L, Ockene IS, Saperia G, Stanek EJ, Merriam PA, Ockene JK (1997) Gender differences in social desirability and social approval bias in dietary self-report. Am J Epidemiol 146. PMID: 9420529Google Scholar
  23. Hoven CW, Duarte CS, Lucas CP, Wu P, Mandell DJ, Goodwin RD, ... Musa GJ (2005) Psychopathology among New York City public school children 6 months after September 11. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62(5)545–551. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.5.545
  24. IPCC (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL, (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, pp. 1–32Google Scholar
  25. Jongman B, Ward PJ, Aerts JCJH (2012) Global exposure to river and coastal flooding: long term trends and changes. Glob Environ Chang 22:823–835. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaniasty K, Norris FH (2009) Distinctions that matter: received social support, perceived social support, and social embeddedness after disasters. In: Neria Y, Galea S, Norris F (eds) Mental health and disasters. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 175–200. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511730030.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kates RW, Colten CE, Laska S, Leatherman SP (2006) Reconstruction of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina: a research perspective. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:14,653–14,660. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0605726103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kellet J, Caravani A (2013) Financing disaster risk reduction. A 20 years story of international aid. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recover (GFDRR) and Overseas Development Institute (ODI). London, UK and Washington, USAGoogle Scholar
  29. Kienzler S, Pech I, Kreibich H, Müller M, Thieken AH (2015) After the extreme flood in 2002: changes in preparedness, response and recovery of flood-affected residents in Germany between 2005 and 2011. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 15:505–526. doi: 10.5194/nhess-15-505-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Klomp J (2016) Economic development and natural disasters: a satellite data analysis. Glob Environ Chang 36:67–88. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kreibich H, Bubeck P, Van Vliet M, De Moel H (2015) A review of damage-reducing measures to manage fluvial flood risks in a changing climate. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 20:967–989. doi: 10.1007/s11027-014-9629-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lamond JE, Joseph RD, Proverbs DG (2015) An exploration of factors affecting the long term psychological impact and deterioration of mental health in flooded households. Environ Res 140:325–334. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2015.04.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lowe D, Ebi KL, Forsberg B (2013) Factors increasing vulnerability to health effects before, during and after floods. Int J Environ Res Public Health 10:7015–7067. doi: 10.3390/ijerph10127015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Merz B, Elmer F, Kunz M, Muhr B, Schröter K, Uhlemann-Elmer S (2014) The extreme flood in June 2013 in Germany. Houille Blanche Rev Int Eau 1:5–10. doi: 10.1051/lhb/2014001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Morss RE, Mulder KJ, Lazo JK, Demuth JL (2016) How do people perceive, understand, and anticipate responding to flash flood risks and warnings? Results from a public survey in Boulder, Colorado, USA. J Hydrol 541:649–664. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.11.047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Norris FH, Murrell SA (1988) Prior experience as a moderator of disaster impact on anxiety symptoms in older adults. Am J Community Psychol 16(5):665–683. doi: 10.1007/BF00930020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Norris FH, Friedman MJ, Watson PJ (2002) 60,000 disaster victims speak: part II. Summary and implications of the disaster mental health research. Psychiatry: Interpersonal Biol Process 65(3):240–260. doi: 10.1521/psyc.65.3.240.20169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ruggiero KJ, Amstadter AB, Acierno R, Kilpatrick DG, Resnick HS, Tracy M, Galea S (2009) Social and psychological resources associated with health status in a representative sample of adults affected by the 2004 Florida hurricanes. Psychiatry 72:195–210. doi: 10.1521/psyc.2009.72.2.195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schröter K, Kunz M, Elmer F, Mühr B, Merz B (2015) What made the June 2013 flood in Germany an exceptional event? A hydro-meteorological evaluation. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:309–327. doi: 10.5194/hess-19-309-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sherrieb K, Norris FH, Galea S (2010) Measuring capacities for community resilience. Soc Indic Res 99(2):227–247. doi: 10.1007/s11205-010-9576-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Siegrist M, Gutscher H (2006) Flooding risks: a comparison of lay people’s perceptions and expert’s assessments in Switzerland. Risk Anal 26(4):971–979. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00792.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sigmon S, Pells J, Boulard N, Whitcomb-Smith S, Edenfield T, Hermann B, Lamattina S, Schartel J, Kubik E (2005) Gender differences in self-reports of depression: the response bias hypothesis revisited. Sex Roles 53:401–411. doi: 10.1007/s11199-005-6762-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thieken AH, Müller M, Kreibich H, Merz B (2005) Flood damage and influencing factors: new insights from the August 2002 flood in Germany. Water Resour Res 41:W12430. doi: 10.1029/2005WR004177 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thieken AH, Kreibich H, Müller M, Merz B (2007) Coping with floods: preparedness, response and recovery of flood-affected residents in Germany in 2002. Hydrol Sci J 52:1016–1037. doi: 10.1623/hysj.52.5.1016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Thieken AH, Mariani S, Longfield S, Vanneuville W (2014) Preface: flood resilient communities—managing the consequences of flooding. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 14:33–39. doi: 10.5194/nhess-14-33-2014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Thieken AH, Bessel T, Kienzler S, Kreibich H, Müller M, Pisi S, Schröter K (2016) The flood of June 2013 in Germany: how much do we know about its impacts? Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 16:1519–1540. doi: 10.5194/nhess-16-1519-2016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. UNISDR (2011) Revealing risk, redefining development. Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR), GenevaGoogle Scholar
  48. UNISDR (2015) Making development sustainable: the future of disaster risk management. Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR), GenevaGoogle Scholar
  49. USACE (2015) North Atlantic coast comprehensive study: resilient adaptation to increasing risk—main report. US Army Corps of EngineersGoogle Scholar
  50. Weichselgartner J, Kelman I (2015) Geographies of resilience: challenges and opportunities of a descriptive concept. Prog Hum Geogr 39:249–267. doi: 10.1177/0309132513518834 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Earth and Environmental SciencePotsdam UniversityPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations