Learning in the Aftermath of Extreme Floods: Community Damage and Stakeholder Perceptions of Future Risk

Abstract

Policy learning in the aftermath of extreme events can happen as a result of changes in beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions of stakeholders acting in a coordinated manner. Understanding the factors that impact these beliefs may prove critical in understanding policy learning and change, since these can mean the difference between ongoing flood vulnerability as a consequence of extreme weather events rather than long‐term resilience. Data from in‐depth interviews, stakeholder surveys, public meeting documents, and community demographics were used to analyze stakeholder processes and risk perceptions in seven Colorado communities that were flooded in 2013. Differences in extent of damages and resource capacity have led to a diversity of venues and participatory processes to manage flood recovery across the case communities. The results of the stakeholder survey suggest that perceptions of problem severity are linked to past flood experiences, type of expertise and job position. Taken together, these results suggest who participates in flood recovery processes, specifically their position and field of expertise, may influence how flood risks are perceived at the community level.

Information Technology, Mutual Trust, Flexibility, Agility, Adaptability: Understanding Their Linkages and Impact on Humanitarian Supply Chain Management Performance

“…It is interesting to test these same relationships in the context of the humanitarian relief supply chain. Although there is an increase in the number of studies in the area of emergency management (Adeagbo, Daramola, Carim-Sanni, Akujobi, & Ukpong, 2016;Albright & Crow, 2015;Harte, Sowman, Hastings, & Childs, 2015;Kuipers, Boin, Bossong, & Hegemann, 2015;Robinson, Murphy, & Bies, 2014), there is comparatively limited research adopting the quantitative empirical research method in the context of HSC (Kovacs & Spens, 2011;Kunz & Reiner, 2012). Hence, this study is an attempt to address this critical research need; the aim of this study is to better understand the relationships among information technology (IT) utilization, mutual trust, agility, flexibility, adaptability, and performance in the context of the humanitarian supply chain.…”

Systematic Knowledge Sharing in a Natural Hazard Damage Context: How Organizational Borders Limit Lessons Learned

“…These archetypes are based on three building blocks of loops: (i) the reinforcing loop, where behavior is reinforced through itself for growth or decline; (ii) the balancing loop, where action is taken from negative feedback in attempts to move forward; and (iii) the delay, where some time elapses between cause and effect. Fragmentation of processes in an organization can be said to have great influence on barriers (Albright & Crow, ; Elgin, ; Nohrstedt & Weible, ). Such barriers could include: a lack of resources, unclear responsibilities, or uncertainties coupled with boundaries within the organization and toward actors in other organizations (Davies et al, ).…”

“…From a risk management point of view and in a resilience perspective, projected future changes affecting the cause and effect relationships within and between systems need to be added to the knowledge acquired from past events. To reflect, mediate, and adopt new policies is the goal of learning to enable processes for change that will lead to better handling of problems (Albright & Crow, ). Systematic learning from such events is, along with adaptive management, innovation, and transformation, essential for handling the effects of future climate changes (Albright & Crow, ; Lavell et al, ).…”

“…To reflect, mediate, and adopt new policies is the goal of learning to enable processes for change that will lead to better handling of problems (Albright & Crow, ). Systematic learning from such events is, along with adaptive management, innovation, and transformation, essential for handling the effects of future climate changes (Albright & Crow, ; Lavell et al, ). Insights into how systematic learning within public–private collaboration settings works is equally important for other types of relevant changes.…”

“…Barriers can be of different types: policies, plans, and goals for each organization, resources in the form of both machinery and individual abilities to handle problems, knowledge, and understanding of pending problems and possible solutions, and time for feedback of lessons learned with the ambition of being prepared for disturbances. Other barriers involve perception of risk, biases of one's own abilities, along with beliefs in risk, and if climate change is natural or man‐made, or both (Albright & Crow, ; Elgin, ; Nohrstedt & Weible, ). The latter constitute barriers for how effects of natural hazards risks are perceived and handled.…”