Conclusiones

This section presents analysis of what measures the interviewees and the participants of the focus groups stated they would employ to reduce the impact of floods on their property and possessions as well as on lives before flood events. The reported measures can be broadly categorised as related to ‘4As’: Avoidance, Alleviation, Awareness and Assistance which are similar to the Scottish Government’s strategies for Sustainable Flood Risk Management (see section 2.2.4).

The participants noted that avoiding building in floodplains was preferred and some participants were unhappy that built developments in floodplains were permitted. The alleviation measures the participants mentioned can be categorised as hard measures (structural changes) and soft measures (preventive actions). For new properties to be built in a floodplain, making the property flood-poof either by building on higher ground or raising floor levels was suggested. However, for the existing properties which were prone to flooding, using sand bags or ‘sand bagging’ was cited to be the most common and preferred measure to tackle flooding, for example,

“Well, personally, I would go and try to stop the water coming in and you need sand bags. That is the only thing that we know of that will stop water coming” [Female, Stockbridge, Edinburgh]

The participants also reported other ways of flood-proofing a property which included permanent structural changes to properties like building a high wall and steps around the property, elevating entrances, installing demountable and permanent flood barriers on the doors, installing air-vent covers, installing non-return valves, installing electrical sockets higher than any flood marks or expected flood levels, using different types of construction materials than the traditional ones which might help aid the post-flooding clean-up process, modification of drainage systems and installation of flood barriers.

Participants also reported that they might dig a trench or cut the river banks at certain points and divert flood waters to fields which might reduce the impact of floods on their properties.

However, many participants mentioned that they could do something ‘only up to a certain extent’ and there was not much they could do to prevent flooding of their properties at an individual level, for example,

“So there is nothing where a large percentage of owners can do because they are all retired people and their age ranges from 70 to 95. They are not physically capable of moving stuff. So there is nothing, as I say, in our situation, there are very few people out of the total of a small community, shall we say, in that development, who are physically capable of moving or helping”. [Male, Murrayfield, Edinburgh]

Thus, diminished physical capability due to aging to act against flooding was one of the prime reasons for not taking any preventive action against flooding. Only few participants reported that they had made permanent changes to their properties. The main reason that was cited for not doing anything to flood-proof the properties was the cost of the products. However, one participant also mentioned that there were several products in the market and it was difficult to assess their suitability and effectiveness.

Thus, in addition to age, lack of affordability and lack of information were also identified as barriers to taking any preventive and protective action. However, as explained in the next section, participants also thought that the actions they could take at an individual level would not be sufficient to protect them from flooding effects and that the actions were required at agency rather than individual level.

The cited measures which can be categorised as soft measures for flood alleviation can further be categorised as related to property and possessions and related to health and lives. The soft measures related to property and possessions as reported by the participants were: purchasing insurance policies which covered damage due to flooding,

‘avoiding keeping too much stuff downstairs’, moving belongings upstairs or to the neighbours - if necessary by asking for help from family and friends, moving cars to higher ground, having a supply of collapsible bags which could be used instead of sand bags and having a supply of material which could be used to seal air-vents in case of flooding. In the event of an evacuation, they reported that they would ensure that electricity and gas supplies were switched off (to avoid the risk of internal fires which are possible if these are left on), doors, windows and ventilation vents were closed, the property was locked and valuables in the property were safe.

The soft measures related to health and lives as reported by the participants in the event of being warned of possible flooding were: ‘stop panicking’, organise alternate supplies of drinking water and electricity, stock non-perishable food, plan an evacuation route, be prepared for evacuation with drinking water supplies and necessary medication.

Further, they reported that if evacuation was required, they would make sure that the family was in a safe place and would help elderly neighbours to move to safer places and move their possessions. They also noted that particular attention needed to be given to young children and disabled people, for example,

“Certainly for young and old, they have to take priority. So when ideally you have to evacuate people out of the flood risk area before the flooding occurs, you obviously need to identify properties where elderly people are or disabled people are… people that are immobile… you need to identify properties, you need additional help to evacuate the area within the timescale you have…”[Male, 23, Colinton Mains, Edinburgh]

Many participants reported that they were aware of the flood risk in their areas and regularly observed river levels in order to get an idea about the severity of possible flooding. Most of the participants stated that it would be their first response on receiving a flood warning. However, it is noteworthy that almost all the participants stated that they had no formal flood action plan to follow in an event of likely flooding.

previous chapter. The research explored the reasons behind this and these are evident throughout the remainder of this chapter. At this juncture it can be stated that this issue can partly be addressed by incorporating the relevant information in the communications with the communities.

Thus, it was found that most participants had an in-depth understanding of the protective and preventive measures to limit the impacts of floods on their property and possessions as well as families before the floods. However, most of them had no flood action plan and some participants had asked for more information on specific topics and products. Thus, a void in the knowledge on the measures to limit impact of floods was noted in the communities which can be filled through improved communication.

However, the needs of the communities may vary from household to household and it is unlikely that the relevant agencies would have information on all the products available in the market. Furthermore, the flood action plans prepared by individuals would be more effective if these are linked to the community wide flood action plans. Ensuring so would require a dialogue with the communities. This analysis suggests that communication with the communities is required even if there is evidence that the communities are generally aware of the issues involved, for example the measures to limit impact of flooding in this instance.