Willingness to Pay for Flood Risk Reduction and Its Determinants in Japan

Abstract

This study aimed to clarify public preferences for flood control measures in Japan, willingness to pay (WTP), and the main factors involved in WTP by applying the contingent valuation method. Findings showed that most residents surveyed expected some flood control measures, and revealed a diversity of interest in river management. WTP levels for different measures ranged from a mean of ¥2,887 to ¥4,861 and from a median of ¥1,000 to ¥2,000. However, WTP for additional flood risk reduction beyond initial levels was found to be zero. This was considered to be because WTP for flood risk reduction must be determined within a multi‐risk context. WTP for flood control measures may increase with per capita income, individual preparedness, and/or experience with flooding, but may decrease with distance from a river, acceptability of flood risk, and provision of environmental information. Furthermore, perception of flood risk may increase WTP, while perception of other risks may decrease it. Methods of dealing with environmental risk that were proposed in the survey may have affected WTP levels.

The determinants of private flood mitigation measures in Germany — Evidence from a nationwide survey

“…More literature is available on private flood mitigation e.g. in Denmark (Koerth et al 2013), France (Poussin, Botzen, and Aerts 2013), Italy (Miceli, Sotgiu, and Settanni 2008), Japan (Takao et al 2004;Zhai et al 2006), Switzerland (Siegrist and Gutscher 2008), the UK (Bichard and Kazmierczak 2012), and the US (Carson, McCullough, and Pooser 2013;Lindell and Hwang 2008). The sample sizes of the household surveys and the statistical analyses vary between less than 150 (Koerth et al 2013) and more than 2000 (Takao et al 2004).…”

Specifying risk management standard for flood risk assessment: a framework for resources allocation

“…The introduction of more public and private involvement to the government's role and responsibility in "modern flood risk management" in Japan has become more common practice in some other countries as well [16], e.g. Germany [20] …”

“…Having the fact that flood defense cannot be against all floods [13] or in other words recognizing the limits of structural flood defense [14][15][16], and witnessing that the extensive investment in flood control works does not decrease the flood occurrence nor damages [17], solution for flood risk reduction has moved from hard to soft engineering solution and nonstructural approaches [18]. It is more promising to meet the "demands of sustainable development, a more strategic, holistic and long-term approach" of flood risk management [19].…”

Valuing preferences over stormwater management outcomes including improved hydrologic function

“…However, a new generation of decentralized stormwater solutions can produce important ancillary environmental benefits. Previous research has estimated values for surface water quality [Carson and Mitchell, 1993;Van Houtven et al, 2007;Johnston et al, 2005] and for flood reduction from stormwater management [Bin and Polasky, 2004;Zhai et al, 2006Zhai et al, , 2007, but no estimates exist for the values of some of the other environmental benefits of alternative approaches to stormwater control. This paper fills that gap by using a choice experiment survey of households in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois, to estimate the values of multiple attributes of stormwater management outcomes.…”