This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Climate change is increasing flood risk across the U.K. As floods become more frequent and intense, communities are increasingly encouraged to become resilient and "live with water." Yet in some flood-prone areas, residents are rejecting these calls, concerned that resilience is less about helping communities and more about transferring responsibility from institutions to citizens.
Resilience is often considered to be a positive idea. It suggests that people can adapt to uncertainty, prepare for disruption, and recover quickly when floods strike. But my research suggests many communities are deeply uncomfortable with this messaging.
Some reject it altogether. My research with three flood action groups in northwestern England drew on 17 semistructured interviews and extensive participant observation over a five-year period. One resident told me rather bluntly: "Resilience offers hope.
But for me it's false hope. A way of telling people, you'll flood. What are you going to do about it?" Debates about resilience reveal more fundamental concerns: who should bear responsibility for managing the consequences of climate change?
And how much can reasonably be expected of citizens and communities? For much of the 20th century, flood management was dominated by efforts to protect people and property through engineered defenses, embankments and complex drainage systems. Though this approach continues to this day, governments and policymakers now also encourage people to "live with water," accepting that some degree of flooding is inevitable.
Property owners are advised to install flood doors, change flooring and fit water-resilient furniture and kitchens. They're also encouraged to s for when the waters rise. On the surface, this seems sensible.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
