Search results

The purpose of this paper is to understand how built environment professionals approach the valuation of flood risk in commercial property markets and whether insurance promotes mitigation in different insurance and risk management regimes, draw common conclusions and highlight opportunities to transfer learning.

An illustrative case study approach involving literature search and 72 interviews with built environment professionals, across five countries in four continents.

Common difficulties arise in availability, reliability and interpretation of risk information, and in evaluating the impact of mitigation. These factors, coupled with the heterogeneous nature of commercial property, lack of transactional data and remote investors, make valuation of risk particularly challenging in the sector. Insurance incentives for risk mitigation are somewhat effective where employed and could be further developed, however, the influence of insurance is hampered by lack of insurance penetration and underinsurance.

Further investigation of the means to improve uptake of insurance and to develop insurance incentives for mitigation is recommended.

Flood risk is inconsistently reflected in commercial property values leading to lack of mitigation and vulnerability of investments to future flooding. Improvements are needed in: access to adequate risk information; professional skills in valuing risk; guidance on valuation of flood risk; and regulation to ensure adequate consideration of risk and mitigation options.

The research addresses a global issue that threatens local, and regional economies through loss of utility, business profitability and commercial property value. It is unique in consulting professionals across international markets.

Improved management of commercial property at risk from flooding may result from well-targeted advice from built environment (BE) professionals, such as surveyors, valuers and project managers. However, research indicates that the role of these professionals in providing such advice is currently limited for a variety of reasons. This paper aims to investigate the (perceived and real) barriers and opportunities for providing such advice in a number of international locations. In particular, the research sought greater understanding of the link between regulation and guidance; perceived roles and capacity; and training and education needs.

To cover different international settings, an illustrative case study approach was adopted within the selected countries (Australia, UK, USA, China and Germany). This involved a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews of BE professionals with experience of advising on commercial properties at risk of flooding. Due to the specific nature of these interviews, a purposive sampling approach was implemented, leading to a sample of 72 interviews across the five international locations.

Perceived barriers were linked to regulatory issues, a shortage of suitably experienced professionals, a lack of formal guidance and insurance requirements. BE professionals defined their roles differently in each case study in relation to these factors and stressed the need for closer collaboration among the various disciplines and indeed the other key stakeholders (i.e. insurers, loss adjusters and contractors). A shortage of knowledgeable experts caused by a lack of formal training, and education was a common challenge highlighted in all locations.

The research is unique in providing an international perspective on issues affecting BE professionals in providing robust and impartial advice on commercial property at risk of flooding. While acknowledging the existence of local flood conditions, regulatory frameworks and insurance regimes, the results indicate some recurring themes, indicating a lack of general flood risk education and training across all five case study countries. Learning across case studies coupled with appropriate policy development could contribute toward improved skills development and more consistent integration of BE professionals within future flood risk management practice, policy and strategy.

Vulnerability studies are commonly used to inform planning, as cities and regions seek to build resilience to environmental hazards. In Shelby County, Tennessee, socioeconomic census tract data were mapped to identify the socially vulnerable population and places to underpin strategies in the Mid-South Regional Resilience Master Plan (RRMP). While this is an important step in identifying vulnerability in the county, this paper aims to enhance the local analysis through an integrated approach that considers both social factors and environmental hazards in assessing vulnerability.

This paper conducts a social vulnerability assessment by integrating a social vulnerability index with risk exposure analysis at the census tract level to identify the population and places vulnerable to riverine flooding in Shelby County.

The analysis reveals that social vulnerability assessments that do not relate socioeconomic factors to specific environmental hazards such as riverine flooding underestimate the population and places that are vulnerable. For Shelby County, this has the tendency to undermine the prioritization and effectiveness of strategies to build resilience to riverine flooding and can worsen preexisting marginalization.

This paper recommends integrated vulnerability assessments for each of the environmental hazards identified in the Mid-South RRMP to augment existing resilience efforts in the county.

This paper enhances the understanding of social vulnerability assessments by consolidating the need for integrated assessment frameworks as basis for resiliency planning.