Risk perception, a key component of systemic vulnerability of coastal zone

to marine inundation. Case study on the French Mediterranean coast.

Catherine Meur-Ferec, Hervé Flanquart, Peggy Hellequin, Bénédicte Rulleau

2

Outlines

1) Introduction: coastal risks, a social construction2) Systemic vulnerability and risk perception3) Perception survey on the Mediterranean coast4) Main results5) Conclusion: towards indicators of adaptation

A part of a larger Interdisciplinary French research program: Miseeva (Marine Inundation hazard exposure modeling and Social, Economic and Environmental Vulnerability Assessment in regard to global changes)

The converging dynamics that create the coastal risks1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

3

4

Systemic vulnerability, a key concept.Risk perception, an main component.

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

Palavas, France

5

Systemic vulnerability studied from 4 components Þ hazards (natural process sometimes reinforced by human action : erosion, breaches in

coastal dunes, marine inundation, etc.)Þ stakes involved (people and goods exposed to hazards)Þ management (public policies of prevention and crisis management, defence equipments

against the sea, etc.) Þ perception (knowledge and awareness of risk, attachment to the territory, adaptation

capacity...)

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability 3-Risk perception 4-The Enquiry 5- Results 6-Conclusion

Focus on the perception component of vulnerability

6

• Risk perception essential because it informs on the adaptation capacity of the society and helps to move toward a "good governance" of risks

• In France, the storm Xynthia has dramatically demonstrated a high vulnerability (29 deaths on the Vendée coast, March 2010). The problem of risk perception appears as a key issue.

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

La Faute –sur-Mer after the storm Xynthia, France, 1st March 2010

• A territory is even more vulnerable that the perception of risk by its inhabitants is "faulty” i.e, far removed from what the experts have tried to objectify (which is still subject to a large uncertainty)

• Our main hypothesis are that :- a weak knowledge and awareness of the risk (sensibility) increases vulnerability- a low residential mobility (voluntary or involuntary) reduces adaptation capacity (and increases vulnerability)- a high attachment to the territory and the property reduces adaptation capacity (and increases vulnerability)

7

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

Criel/Mer, France, 2005

8

Perception surveyon the Mediterranean coast

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

Questionnaires check. Palavas, July 2009

9

Pérols

Maugio

Palavas

Study area : coastal districts of 3 communes

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

10

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

Frontignan (Hérault)(EID Méditerranée)

11

Methodology• A questionnaire of 158 questions, most of them closed, a few open (30 mn)• Face to face, on site (door-to-door)• April and July 2009 (before Xynthia storm)• Target population: people who own or use goods exposed to the hazard of

marine inundation, i.e. residents (principal and secondary) and shopkeepers

Finally 563 questionnaires- 318 for principal residents- 164 for secondary residents- 81 for shopkeepers

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

12

MAIN RESULTS OF THE PERCEPTION SURVEY

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

Palavas, France, 2009

13

1- Marine flood risk compared to other current risks in life1st answer 2nd answer 3rd answer Total

Disease 29% 17% 8.5% 55%Car crash 16.5% 18% 10.5% 45%Water pollution 8% 8.5% 8% 24%Air pollution 5% 7.5% 5% 17.5%Flooding 6 % 5% 5% 16.5%Agression 2% 6.5% 8% 16.5%Involuntary unemployment 5% 6% 5% 16.5%War 5% 2.5% 3.5% 11%Nuclear accident 2.5% 3% 4.5% 9.5%Attack 2% 2% 2.5% 6.5%Epidemic 1% 1% 4.5% 6.5%Oil slick 0.5% 2% 2% 4.5%Riot - - 0.5% 1%Industrial accident - - 1.5% 2%Autre 1.5% 0.5% 1% 3%NSP/ no answer 14.5% 5.5% 10% -Nothing 1% 0% 0% 1%Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Flooding risk does not obnubilate the respondents

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

14

2- Among environmental risks, pollution before inundation

Even among environmental risks, sea level rise and sea flooding are not the most frightening risks.

Main residents

Secondary residents Shopkeepers Total

Marine pollution 53.5% 56% 59.5% 55%

Air or water pollution 51.5% 49.5% 45.5% 50%

Sea level rise 47% 46% 39.5% 45.5%

Coastal flooding 43.5% 38% 50.5% 43%

Storm 26.5% 24.5% 34.5% 27%

River flooding 22% 16% 26% 21%

Tsunami 13.5% 10% 12.5% 12.5%

Industrial accident 9.5% 8.5% - 8.5%

Other / NSP - 5% - 2%

None 2% - - 2%Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

15

3- Stable projection for residence place • 45% of principal residents and 72% of secondary residents think that they

will live in the same house in 20 years.

no visible fear for their geographic stability. Coastal flooding risks don’t seem to offset coastal amenities.

secondary residents imagine a more stable future (stronger attachment to the family heritage, holiday meeting point not submitted to professional mobility, weaker knowledge of winter storms...)

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

Palavas, France, 2009Palavas, France, 2009

16

4- Confident projection for personal property value• 77% of residents think that the value of their property will increase or remain

stable in the next 20 years.

Residents don’t take into account the potential economicconsequences of coastal hazards (or they believe in the support of their government ?)

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

17

5. Confident projection for transferring their property to heirs

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

• 75 % of the respondents (43% for main residents and 85% for secondary residents) think that they will pass on their property to their children.

Strong trust in the sustainability of their propertyAgain, secondary residents appear to have more stable and confident

forecasts

18

6- strong damages expected on the coast

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

• 90% of residents think that some houses and roads will be damaged by sea level rise, in their town, in the next 20 years

• 45% even think that entire neighbourhoods will be uninhabitable in the next 20 years

• 65% think that this coast will suffer major degradations to 2100

Respondents expect very heavy damages, even in the short term. Not in accordance with confident forecasts regarding personal goods

Usual "optimism bias“ for the risks to which one is personally exposed

19

7- Collective protection strategies

• Different positions according to the stakes:- higher for public service amenities (84%),

cultural (79%) and natural (76%) heritages- also positive (73%) for economic activities, but

more correlated to the cost- still positive (52%) for individual goods (one

house) but it’s the only issue for which 42% of respondents is against collective protection

Strong will to protect collective goods and services. But the collective defence of individual houses seems to raise questions.

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

Cathedral of Maguelone, France

20

8- A very small investment in the protection of personal property • 93 % of the respondents didn’t subscribe special protection against sea flooding

(such as walls, planks, drainage systems, water proofing doors etc.). No physical interventions on personal property.

Probably because the need is not felt: 90% of the respondents have never been flooded by the sea in the ten past years.

Moreover it seems that residents don’t like to live in a place where risk is always reminded by visible protections (T. Harris, 2008).

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

21

9- Reaction if their property is threatened by the sea

• 58% would leave if the indemnification is high enough, 7% anyway whether people stay or not is highly linked to financial issues

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

• 19% of “hardliners" would stay, even without any solution

Little more for secondary residents (21%) Significantly more when the property is inherited from the family (45%) (more sentimentally attached...)

22

Conclusion : toward indicators of adaptation

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

23

• The goal is to understand and explain the behaviours and possible adaptations of a population facing risk of marine inundation

• 3 main indicators, based on numerous questions from our survey- An indicator of sensibility to this coastal risk ("spontaneous" reference to risk, situations compared to other risks, awareness of risk, etc.)- An indicator of residential mobility or lack of mobility (voluntary or involuntary)- An indicator of (psychological) attachment to the home and place.

• Crucial dimensions to explore the population’s adaptation capacity and so, a determinant component of vulnerability.

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion

24

Thank you for your attention

25

1-Introduction 2-Systemic vulnerability and Risk perception 3-The Enquiry 4- Results 5-Conclusion