Regional Symposium on Disaster Risk Management-2021

SEUSL in Collobration with DDMC-Ampara

HOUSEHOLD BASED FLOOD RISK PREPAREDNESS; POLICY

PROPOSAL
M.H. Rihan1, M.G. Mohamed Thariq1*
Department of Biosystems Technology, Faculty of Technology, South Eastern University of
Sri Lanka, Oluvil.
1*
[email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION

A flood is defined by the Oxford Reference Dictionary (ORD) as an overflow or inflow of

water beyond its usual bounds. When the volume of water in a water body or water channel is
over its carrying capacity, the water overflows beyond the water body's normal bounds, causing
flooding. Preparing for a flood allows the communities to react is connected dangers more
efficiently (Adams, 2018). Household pre-flood preparedness encompasses all steps and
policies implemented before an occurrence for the purposes of preparedness mitigation, and
prevention is all important factors to consider. Planning, coordinating, learning, equipping,
practicing, evaluating, and developing the capacity to prevent, react to, rebound from, and
mitigate the effects of flood disasters are all part of the preparation cycle. Designing warning
systems, planning for evacuation and reallocation, storing food and water, constructing
makeshift shelters, devising management plans, and modeling disasters are all part of disaster
preparedness. Preparedness and planning for post-risk response and recovery include
contingency planning as well. According to a recent policy on household preparedness,
improving community preparedness is the key to reducing Flooding disaster risk is connected
to economic position and knowledge because top-down programs that do not engage
communities seldom reach people who are most disaster-affected people and may potentially
render them more vulnerable (Egli, 2005). As a result, the goal of this study was to analyze the
flood risk preparation of Sri Lankan households.

1.1 Method of flood risk preparedness at the household level

The action of household-based flood risk preparation method can be divided into two ways
these are physical household-based flood risk prepared and non-physical household-based
flood risk prepared methods. The action of the physical method contains two parts these are
permanent actions and temporary actions. Non-physical methods are normally temporary
actions that like preparing the things those are using for living purpose such as food and dresses
and the power source such as battery during the flood condition period and the awareness also
include this non-physical method.
1.2 Physical household-based flood risk prepared method

Landscape design: Appropriate site drainage and controlling surface water runoff can reduce a
property's flood risk by changing the region and the dangers that encircle the building. This
might include the practice of greening the surrounding areas to improve subsurface drainage.
Changes to the landscape design are often permanent and expensive for the entire society.

65
 Regional Symposium on Disaster Risk Management-2021
SEUSL in Collobration with DDMC-Ampara

Building on elevated land: This is another method of avoiding flooding. This may be done
successfully while new constructions are being built. As a result, landscape design must be
considered throughout the new development planning process (Egli, 2015).
Elevation: Elevating a structure above flood level is a long-term and effective way to lessen
flood risk. It is possible if the entire house is lifted or if a newly raised level within the house
is built (Fema, 2014). A structure must first be detached from its base before it may be raised
retroactively. After that, piers, columns or piles, posts, continue walls are used to build a new
foundation or an expansion of the existing foundation (Aerts, 2014)
Barriers; Water infiltration into individual structures or greater swaths of land are divided can
be stopped by permanent and/or moveable barriers (BMNT, 2014) Barriers include prevent
logs, floodwalls, bunds, seawalls, and flood gates, as well as other semi-permanent structures.
However, barriers must be maintained, and local drainage systems may be damaged to the point
that flood issues for nearby structures are exacerbated (Fema, 2014). Commonly three types of
barriers are used to the flood risk these are freestanding barriers (Stop logs), Floodwalls, and
External flood doors.

Tubes (air and water-filled): Temporary barriers are made of geomembranes or reinforced
polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tubes. Tubes can be filled with air or water, with the former requiring
anchoring pins or weighted skirts and the latter relying on a dead load of water. Both types of
barriers are impermeable and need pumping. (Ogunyoye et al., 2011).

Containers that have been filled with water or aggregates (permeable and impermeable):
Water or aggregates might be used to fill these temporary barriers. The deadweight of the
containers acts as a stabilizing component, and they are either porous or impermeable.
Geotextiles or geosynthetic fabrics are used to create permeable barriers. To keep them stable,
wire meshes, pins, and frames are employed. The materials used to fill the containers also affect
the waterproofness of the measures. Sandbags are a frequent example of this type (Poussin et
al., 2015). Sandbags, on the other hand, have a poor level of efficacy and are susceptible to
collapsing or being overtopped during floods (Poussin et al., 2015). Furthermore, filling
sandbags takes a long time and requires a lot of effort. Because sandbags are non-reusable and
may frequently retain toxins from sewage after floods, they create major disposal issues (Reeve
and Badr, 2003).
Dry flood-proofing: Floodproofing that is not wet is used to keep water out of a structure that
is at risk of flooding. In many circumstances, the solutions are ineffective against high-
magnitude dynamic flooding and are consequently limited to up to 1 m of water depth The
water pressure may then become too great for the walls of the structure to bear (Lasage et
al.,2014). Furthermore, various procedures must be maintained on a regular basis, and they do
not completely eliminate the need to escape in the event of a storm, as there is still a possibility
of flooding. Furthermore, certain retrofitting may require invasive implementation (Fema,
2014). Examples of dry flood proofing are Flood proof basement windows, Sealed light shafts,
Window and door guards, a Bitumen sealant is used to waterproof the cellar (black tank),
Drainage, and watertight concrete is used to create a waterproof cellar (white tank).

1.3 Non-Physical household-based flood risk prepared method

Improving risk awareness: For a society to properly adapt to a flood danger, awareness is an
essential component. When appropriate information is sparse or memories of earlier
experiences or events disappear, awareness is diminished, according to this theory. Awareness
66
 Regional Symposium on Disaster Risk Management-2021
SEUSL in Collobration with DDMC-Ampara

can be raised by focusing on local difficulties, providing basic flood-reduction measures, and
continuing such efforts on a regular basis (Poortinga, et al., 2011).

Financial preparedness and resilience: Cannon, 1994, Argues, that knowing about flood
catastrophe risks and vulnerabilities is unless paired with an understanding of other economic
systems, it is ineffective in limiting their consequences and people's financial capabilities to
resist and recover from disasters, as well as this financial preparedness's assistance in
purchasing and storing goods. During the data collection period, households were considered
prepared if they had 11 items in their flood preparedness emergency kit. Emergency heat and
housing, meals, instruments, water, training, battery-powered, developing an interconnection
plan for evacuation where to go and whom to call, individual hygiene, battery-powered radio
and/or mobile phone, first-aid kit, and important documentation wewasmong the 11 items in
the emergency kit during the data collection process.

2. DISCUSSION
In this study, physical and non-physical household-based flood risk preparedness is depending
on the individual house-holders economy and financial level. It was shown that households
with a higher monthly income were more prepared than lower-income households (Phillips,
2005). Another research confirmed this, revealing that families this association might be an
explanation for the increase, in order to lessen vulnerability and instability, greater knowledge,
skills, and access to more information are needed. Which adds to household flood preparation.
Human factors also including for the flood conditions such as building sited on waterways,
poor drainage systems, development of slums, dumping trash down drains, and destroying
vegetation those are should be controlled for avoiding flood conditions. Increased length of
floods, which causes significant damage, might be one explanation, and it could improve a
person's understanding of future threats and preventive methods. Above mentioned physical
methods are suitable for particular places but non-physical methods are suitable for all times
for household-based flood risk preparedness.

3. CONCLUSION
Flood condition is a serious socio-economic issue in Sri Lanka because this situation is
destroying the people living places and also croplands. The goal of this initiative was to prepare
household-based flood risk to protect people's lives and property. That physical and non-
physical preparedness are could be an effective solution to overcome the household flood risk.

REFERENCES
Adams, A.G., 2008, ‘Perennial flooding in the Accra Metropolis: The human factor’,
unpublished Master of Science thesis, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and
Technology, Kumasi.

Aerts, J. C. J. H., Botzen, W. J. W., De Moel, H., and Bowman, M. (2013). Cost estimates for
flood resilience and protection strategies in New York City. Annals of the New York Academy
of Sciences, 1294, 1–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12200

BMNT. (2019). Eigenvorsorge bei Oberflächenabfluss Wien 2019. Ein Leitfaden für Planung,
Neubau und Anpassung. Retrieved from https://www. bmnt.gv.at/wasser/wasser-

67
 Regional Symposium on Disaster Risk Management-2021
SEUSL in Collobration with DDMC-Ampara

oesterreich/foerderungen/foerd_hochwasserschutz/2019_04-Leitfaden-Eigenvorsorge-bei-
Oberfl%C3%A4chenabfluss.html

Cannon, T. (1994). Vulnerability analysis and the explanation of ‘natural’disasters. Disasters,

development and environment, 1, 13-30.

Egli, T. (2005). Wegleitung Objektschutz gegen gravitative Naturgefahren. Bern, Switzerland:

Vereinigung Kantonaler Feuerversicherungen.

FEMA. (2014). Homeowner's guide to retrofitting. Six ways to protect your home from
flooding. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency
[7] Lasage, R., Veldkamp, T. I. E., de Moel, H., Van, T. C., Phi, H. L., Vellinga, P., and Aerts,
J. C. J. H. (2014). Assessment of the effectiveness of flood adaptation strategies for HCMC.

Menard L, Slater RO, Flatz J. Disaster preparedness and educational attainment. J Emerg
Manag. 2011;9(4):45–52.

Ogunyoye, F., Stevens, R., and Underwood, S. (2011). Temporary and demountable flood
protection guide. Bristol, England: Environment Agency

Phillips BD, Metz WC, Nieves LA. Disaster threat: preparedness and potential response of the
lowest income quartile. Environmental Hazards. 2005;6:123–13

Poortinga, W., Bronstering, K., and Lannon, S. (2011). Awareness and perceptions of the risks
of exposure to indoor radon: A population‐based approach to evaluate a radon awareness and
testing campaign in England and Wales. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(11),
1800-1812.

Poussin, J. K., Botzen, W. J. W., and Aerts, J. C. J. H. (2015). Effectiveness of flood damage
mitigation measures: Empirical evidence from French flood disasters. Global Environmental
Change, 31, 74–84.

Reeve, D., and Badr, A. (2003). Performance of sandbags for domestic flood defence.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers–Water and Maritime Engineering, 156, 341–
349.

68