{"title":"Homeowner responsibility in flood risk management – The fairness of financial support for property-level flood resilience","authors":"Mandy Paauw , Sally Priest , 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.
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.