Advertisement

Impacts of Flooding and Flood Preparedness on Subjective Well-Being: A Monetisation of the Tangible and Intangible Impacts

  • Paul Hudson
  • W. J. Wouter Botzen
  • Jennifer Poussin
  • Jeroen C. J. H. Aerts
Review Article

Abstract

Flood disasters severely impact human subjective well-being (SWB). Nevertheless, few studies have examined the influence of flood events on individual well-being and how such impacts may be limited by flood protection measures. This study estimates the long term impacts on individual subjective well-being of flood experiences, individual subjective flood risk perceptions, and household flood preparedness decisions. These effects are monetised and placed in context through a comparison with impacts of other adverse events on well-being. We collected data from households in flood-prone areas in France. The results indicate that experiencing a flood has a large negative impact on subjective well-being that is incompletely attenuated over time. Moreover, individuals do not need to be directly affected by floods to suffer SWB losses since subjective well-being is lower for those who expect their flood risk to increase or who have seen a neighbour being flooded. Floodplain inhabitants who prepared for flooding by elevating their home have a higher subjective well-being. A monetisation of the aforementioned well-being impacts shows that a flood requires €150,000 in immediate compensation to attenuate SWB losses. The decomposition of the monetised impacts of flood experience into tangible losses and intangible effects on SWB shows that intangible effects are about twice as large as the tangible direct monetary flood losses. Investments in flood protection infrastructure may be under funded if the intangible SWB benefits of flood protection are not taken into account.

Keywords

Flooding Subjective well-being Intangible losses Tangible losses Climate change Adaptation Climate change adaptation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research leading to these results has received funding from the EU 7th Framework Program through the project ENHANCE (Grant Agreement No. 308438) and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) VIDI and VICI (016.140.067; 452.14.005) grant programs.

Supplementary material

10902_2017_9916_MOESM1_ESM.docx (43 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 43 kb)

References

  1. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2004). Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. Journal of Public Economics, 88(7–8), 1359–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bockarjova, M., Rietveld, P., & Verhoef, E. (2009). First results immaterial damage valuation: Value of statistical life (VOSL), value of evacuation (VOE) and value of injury (VOI) in flood risk context, a stated preference study (III). VU Amsterdam: Department of Spatial Economics, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  3. Brouwer, R., & Schaafsma, M. (2013). Modelling risk adaptation and mitigation behaviour under different climate change scenarios. Climatic Change, 117(1), 11–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (2002). A simple statistical method for measuring how life events affect SWB. International Journal of Epidemiology, 31(6), 1139–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(1), 94–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dumas, P., Hallegatte, S., Quintana-Sequi, P., & Martin, E. (2013). The influence of climate change on flood risks in France: First estimates and uncertainty analysis. Natural Hazards and Earth Systems Science, 13, 808–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2005). Income and well-being: an empirical analysis of the comparison income effect. Journal of Public Economics, 89(5–6), 997–1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Frey, B. S., Luechinger, S., & Stutzer, A. (2009). The life satisfaction approach to valuing public goods: the case of terrorism. Public Choice, 138(3), 317–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Heller, K., Alexender, D. B., Gatz, M., Knight, B. G., & Rose, T. (2005). Social and personal factors as predictors of earthquake preparation: the role of support provision, network discussion, negative affect, age and education. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(2), 399–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hudson, P., Botzen, W. J. W., Feyen, L., & Aerts, J. C. J. H. (2016). Incentivising flood risk adaptation through risk based insurance premiums: trade-offs between affordability and risk reduction. Ecological Economics, 125, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hudson, P., Botzen, W. J. W., Kreibich, H., Bubeck, P., & Aerts, J. C. J. H. (2014). Evaluating the effectiveness of flood damage mitigation measures by the application of propensity score matching. Natural Hazards and Earth Systems Science, 14, 1731–1747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. IPCC (2012). Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. Field, C.B., Barros, V., Stocker, T.F., Qin, D., Dokken, D.J., Ebi, K.L., Mastrandrea, M.D., Mach, K.J., Plattner, G.K., Allen, S.K., Tignor, M., & Midgley, P.M. (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Joseph, R., Proverbs, D., & Lamond, J. (2015). Assessing the value of intangible benefits of property level flood risk adaptation (PLFRA) measures. Natural Hazards, 79(2), 1275–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Krueger, A. B., & Schkade, D. A. (2008). The reliability of subjective well-being measures. Journal of Public Economics, 92(8–9), 1833–1845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kunreuther, H., & Pauly, M. (2004). Neglecting disaster: Why don’t people insure against large losses. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 28(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kunreuther, H.C., & Pauly, M.V. (2015). Insurance decision-making for rare events: the role of emotions, NBER Working Paper, Working Paper 20886. Retrieved from: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20886, Accessed 16 May 2017.
  18. Lamond, J. E., Joseph, R. D., & Proverbs, D. G. (2015). An exploration of factors affecting the long term psychological impact and deterioration of mental health in flooded households. Environmental Research, 140, 325–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lucas, R. E. (2007). Adaptation and the set-point model of subjective well-being: Does SWB change after major life events. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(2), 75–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Luechinger, S., & Raschky, P. A. (2009). Valuing flood disasters using the life satisfaction approach. Journal of Public Economics, 93(3–4), 620–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. MacKerron, G. (2011). SWB economics from 35,000 feet. The Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(4), 705–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1983). Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19(5), 469–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mechler, R. (2016). Reviewing estimates of the economic efficiency of disaster risk management: Opportunities and limitations of using risk-based cost–benefit analysis. Natural Hazards, 81(3), 2121–212147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Oswald, A. J., & Powdthavee, N. (2008). Does SWB adapt? A longitudinal study of disability with implications for economists and judges. Journal of Public Economics, 92(5–6), 1061–1077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Poussin, J. K., Botzen, W. J. W., & Aerts, J. C. J. H. (2013). Stimulating flood damage mitigation through insurance: an assessment of the French CatNat system. Environmental Hazards, 12(3–4), 258–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Poussin, J. K., Botzen, W. J. W., & Aerts, J. C. J. H. (2014). Factors of influence on flood damage mitigation behaviour by households. Environmental Science & Policy, 40, 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Poussin, J. K., Botzen, W. J. W., & Aerts, J. C. J. H. (2015). Effectiveness of flood damage mitigation measures: Empirical evidence from French flood disasters. Global Environmental Change, 31, 74–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Powdthavee, N. (2008). Putting a price tag on friends, relatives, and neighbours: Using surveys of life satisfaction to value social relationships. The Journal of Socio-economics, 37(4), 1459–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Powdthavee, N., & van den Bergh, B. (2011). Putting different price tags on the same health conditions: Re-evolving the well-being evaluation approach. Journal of Health Economics, 30(5), 1032–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Prettenthaler, F., Kortschak, Hochrainer-Stigler, Mechler, R., Urban, H., & Steininger, K. W. (2015). Catastrophe management: Riverine flooding. In K. W. Steininger, M. Koning, B. Bednar-Friedl, L. Kranzl, W. Loibl, & F. Prettenthaler (Eds.), Economic evaluation of climate change impacts (pp. 349–366). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. UNISDR (2011). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Individual flood protection. Revealing Risk, Redefining Development. Geneva.Google Scholar
  33. van Praag, B. M. S., Frijters, P., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2003). The anatomy of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 51(1), 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wilson, M. A., & Hoehn, J. P. (2006). Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit transfer: The state-of-the art and science. Ecological Economics, 60, 335–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Earth and Environmental SciencePotsdam UniversityPotsdamGermany
  2. 2.Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental StudiesVU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Utrecht University School of Economics (USE)Utrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Water and Climate Risk, Institute for Environmental StudiesVU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations