Storm Christoph: UK flood response improving, but lockdown confused the messaging
,
Overlapping disasters struck parts of England and Wales in January as battered communities which were already suffering from the effects of a prolonged period under lockdown. It was the first time in recent memory that the UK authorities were required to address two such huge events at the same time.
The storm , threatening thousands of homes and leading to evacuations in some areas. The costs of yet another major storm will be felt by the affected communities for months to come.
The response to Storm Christoph has revealed the UK鈥檚 strengths and weaknesses. On the plus side, the authorities are now in handling major floods 鈥� learning from previous disasters in in 2014 and in 2020.
Extensive early warning, planning, procedures and flood mapping are now in place. Over 300 were issued by the Environment Agency in the three days leading up to the storm hitting. This gave communities due warning of the potential of severe flooding. In some instances, prior evacuation by citizens and communities was recommended and indeed .
So in this sense, crisis communication was good. For the most part, UK emergency planning has become astute at dealing with single hazard emergencies. Incidents that are restricted to geographical areas where local emergency flooding plans can be enacted with more ease.
鈥楥onflicting advice鈥�
Yet despite a commitment to an 鈥溾�� 鈥� planning to meet differing types of shocks and threats 鈥� the floods have revealed that the UK is not, in practice, very successful in dealing with overlapping disasters. Multi-hazard threats require agile decision making.
In the case of Storm Christoph, initial indications suggest that there was a lack of joined-up crisis communication which linked flood advice 鈥� even evacuation guidance 鈥� with the requirements of also meeting COVID-19 lockdown restrictions.
People were, in many instances, not clearly informed about how they were supposed to evacuate their homes and meet the requirements of staying within COVID-19 bubbles. There was confusion over what people should do if they were forced to leave their homes. Could they stay with friends? Or would that put them in danger of COVID-19? As Didsbury West councillor Richard Kilpatrick :
You have a situation where, for the last year, people have been repeatedly told to stay at home for their safety suddenly getting this conflicting advice.
Nor was it entirely clear how emergency responders would be able to provide flood-related support without making them further vulnerable to COVID-19 contagion.
Key advice was eventually forthcoming 鈥� at least in north-west England 鈥� where residents were informed that they were in this scenario and they should not hesitate to evacuate. But the clarity of this advice was far from uniform across the country and was issued at differing times.
Effective crisis communication relies on a clear and timely framing of the challenge 鈥� in this case the overlapping disasters. It is also important to outline what the local capabilities and requirements are. And clear information about how the local population can respond to the crisis is crucial. This applies across the world, from the UK to .
My own , with colleagues at 蜜桃AV, shows that poor framing (such as weak communication) can lead to a lack of compliance. This in turn leads to citizens blaming emergency managers for any failures.
People must have trust and confidence that they are both heeding critical flooding advice and staying compliant with pandemic restrictions. This cannot be ignored: flooding is here to stay and lockdowns may be something we all have to learn to live with for the .
, Professor of Crisis & Disaster Management,
This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .
