Homeowner responsibility in flood risk management – The fairness of financial support for property-level flood resilience

IF 5.5 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Environmental Science & Policy Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-17 DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104341
Mandy Paauw , Sally Priest , Ann Crabbé
{"title":"Homeowner responsibility in flood risk management – The fairness of financial support for property-level flood resilience","authors":"Mandy Paauw ,&nbsp;Sally Priest ,&nbsp;Ann Crabbé","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Governments worldwide are diversifying their flood risk management (FRM) strategies to deal with flood risks. This requires the involvement of multiple policy domains as well as non-state actors – including homeowners. Homeowners can get involved in FRM through property-level flood resilience (PFR) measures. Various initiatives have been launched to financially support homeowners in the implementation of these measures, such as government grants and insurance mechanisms. However, even with financial support, transferring responsibility to homeowners has justice implications: many may lack the economic, social, or cultural capacity to implement PFR, and strict eligibility criteria can exclude certain groups from benefiting. This paper examines the justice implications of financial support for PFR by analysing how different mechanisms align with four conceptualisations of distributive justice: libertarian, utilitarian, Rawlsian, and egalitarian. England and Flanders serve as illustrative cases. England has developed multiple types of financial support and has a longer history of working with PFR, while in Flanders support remains limited and highly localised. By focusing on the justice dimensions of financial support for PFR – rather than a strict comparison of the two contexts – the analysis reveals how the presence of absence of support mechanisms can reinforce or mitigate inequality. These insights are important if PFR is to become mainstreamed and integrated into FRM.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"177 ","pages":"Article 104341"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901126000341","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Governments worldwide are diversifying their flood risk management (FRM) strategies to deal with flood risks. This requires the involvement of multiple policy domains as well as non-state actors – including homeowners. Homeowners can get involved in FRM through property-level flood resilience (PFR) measures. Various initiatives have been launched to financially support homeowners in the implementation of these measures, such as government grants and insurance mechanisms. However, even with financial support, transferring responsibility to homeowners has justice implications: many may lack the economic, social, or cultural capacity to implement PFR, and strict eligibility criteria can exclude certain groups from benefiting. This paper examines the justice implications of financial support for PFR by analysing how different mechanisms align with four conceptualisations of distributive justice: libertarian, utilitarian, Rawlsian, and egalitarian. England and Flanders serve as illustrative cases. England has developed multiple types of financial support and has a longer history of working with PFR, while in Flanders support remains limited and highly localised. By focusing on the justice dimensions of financial support for PFR – rather than a strict comparison of the two contexts – the analysis reveals how the presence of absence of support mechanisms can reinforce or mitigate inequality. These insights are important if PFR is to become mainstreamed and integrated into FRM.
房主在洪水风险管理中的责任——对财产级抗洪能力的财政支持的公平性
世界各国政府正在将其洪水风险管理(FRM)策略多样化,以应对洪水风险。这需要多个政策领域以及包括房主在内的非国家行为体的参与。房主可以通过财产级抗洪能力(PFR)措施参与到FRM中来。已经发起了各种倡议,在财政上支持房主执行这些措施,例如政府赠款和保险机制。然而,即使有了财政支持,将责任转移给房主也会产生公正的影响:许多人可能缺乏实施PFR的经济、社会或文化能力,严格的资格标准可能会使某些群体无法受益。本文通过分析不同机制如何与分配正义的四个概念(自由意志主义、功利主义、罗尔斯主义和平等主义)相一致,考察了对PFR的财政支持的正义含义。英格兰和佛兰德斯就是一个例子。英格兰已经开发了多种类型的财政支持,并且与PFR合作的历史更悠久,而在佛兰德斯,支持仍然有限且高度本地化。通过关注对PFR的财政支持的正义维度——而不是严格比较这两种情况——分析揭示了支持机制的存在或缺失如何加剧或减轻不平等。如果要使PFR成为主流并集成到FRM中,这些见解是重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书