Following the severe flood events of 1998 and 2000, the United Kingdom's Environment Agency prioritised the need to increase public flood risk awareness.Drawing on data collected during research undertaken for the Environment Agency, this paper contributes to understanding of one aspect of flood awareness: people's recognition that their property is in an area that is potentially at risk of flooding. Quantitative analyses indicate that class is the most influential factor in predicting flood risk awareness, followed by flood experience and length of residence. There are also significant area differences. Our qualitative work explores how those defined as 'at risk' account for their lack of awareness or concern about their risk status. We conclude that the problem is often not simply a lack of awareness, but rather, assessments of local risk based on experience that underestimate the impact of rare or extreme events. We underline the importance of engaging with local perspectives on risk and making local people part of 'awareness-raising' processes.

No abstract

2Flood risk, vulnerability and environmental justice: evidence and evaluation of inequality in a UK context. AbstractFlooding has only relatively recently been considered as an environmental justice issue.In this paper we focus on flooding as a distinct form of environmental risk and examine some of the key evidence and analysis that is needed to underpin an environmental justice framing of flood risk and flood impacts. We review and examine the UK situation and the body of existing research literature on flooding to fill out our understanding of the patterns of social inequality that exist in relation to both flood risk exposure and vulnerability to the diverse impacts of flooding. We then consider the various ways in which judgments might be made about the injustice or justice of these inequalities and the ways in which they are being sustained or responded to by current flood policy and practice. We conclude that there is both evidence of significant inequalities and grounds on which claims of injustice might be made, but that further work is needed to investigate each of these. The case for pursuing the framing of flooding as an environmental justice issue is also made.

Against the backdrop of the imperatives for actors within the institutional framework of energy socio-technical systems to engage with the public, the aim of this paper is to consider interdependencies between the principles and practice of engagement and the nature of the imagined publics with whom engagement is being undertaken. Based on an analysis of 19 interviews with actors in the renewable energy industry, the paper explores how publics are imagined in the construction of the rationales, functions and mechanisms for public engagement. Three main themes are identified. First, the perceived necessity of engagement -which is not contingent on public responsiveness. Second, engagement is primarily conceptualised in terms of instrumental motives of providing information and addressing public concern. Third, preferences for engagement mechanisms were often a function of the specific characteristics attributed to imagined publics. Implications of this analysis for future engagement around siting renewable energy technologies are considered.

IntroductionFor socially and politically significant technologies, such as those enrolled in sustainability and carbon-reduction objectives, questions of`public' subjectivity are important (Flynn and Bellaby, 2007). Charged with the impetus to achieve rapid sociotechnical change, technology promoters have much to gain by having`the public' on-side rather than resistant to innovation and technology implementation. Conventionally, the need to include`the public' in policy, innovation, and implementation processes has been approached through principles and practices of participation, dialogue, and deliberation (Chilvers, 2008;Fiorino, 1990;Renn et al, 1995). An impressive diversity of participatory mechanisms have accordingly been applied at various stages, from thè downstream' of technology diffusion, to the`upstream' of early experimentation and vision development (

No abstract

This paper examines accounts of the risks associated with living close to potential sources of pollution emphasizing the way in which discussion of the risk of pollution is informed by wider assessments of local life. In particular it highlights ways in which residents' accounts of local pollution often diverge from the way in which the problem is conceptualized by 'outsiders'. Data are analysed from focus groups with lone mothers in two neighbourhoods facing clear local pollution problems -in one case from a factory and in the other from major roads. Detailed discussion is provided of how the issue of pollution fits into lone mothers' wider assessments of life within these neighbourhoods. The correlation between poor populations and pollution has recently been described by environmental groups such as Friends of the Earth as a problem of environmental injustice. The analysis suggests, however, that this description often has little resonance with those affected by local pollution and, as a consequence, may not provide the most profitable way of linking the environmental and social exclusion agendas.Hazards … are an intrinsic part of everyday social reality and of the very identity of (an) area (Irwin, A., 1995, p. 94)

This paper reports findings from research conducted for the Environment Agency 1 investigating the social distribution of the risk of flooding in England and Wales. Following a broadly outcome based analysis, and using socio-geographic modelling techniques and the 1991 Census, the social class characteristics of the population at risk from flooding were explored and compared with the population considered not at risk as a means to uncover any evidence of social inequality. The Environment Agency indicative flood plain maps (1 in 100 year return for fluvial and 1 in a 200 year return for tidal flooding) were used to identify at risk areas. Two different methods of capturing the at risk population were employed; one based on census enumeration districts and the other using surface population models which redistribute the area population over a grid surface of the area of interest. The two methods provide completely different results. The enumeration district method indicates that those in higher social classes are the most likely to be exposed to flood hazard while the grid method indicates that it is those in the lower social classes who are most at risk. We suggest that the grid method provides a more accurate analysis but highlight the significant effect that the choice of areal unit and spatial analysis can have on conclusions about the extent of any inequality in vulnerability to flooding.