Learning from the past to inform flood risk management: Analysis of public survey data in Belgium on flood early warning and response during the July 2021 flood
Abstract. In July 2021 an intense rainfall event resulted in severe flooding in Belgium as well as neighbouring countries. The Walloon Region of Belgium was severely affected with 39 fatalities reported; in the aftermath, the warning system was criticised. In this paper we assess the flood forecasting, warning and response system in the Walloon Region of Belgium for the July 2021 flood event. The analysis is based on an online survey of affected residents (n = 550) and investigates the reception of official warnings, the interpretation and trust in those warnings, and subsequent response behaviour. We find that among the respondents in the Walloon Region 33 % reported not having received any warning, and 56 % did not know how to respond effectively. We analyse the most important influencing factors across the warning chain using the Protective Action Decision Model as a theoretical framework and test influencing factors using logistic and linear regression models. We find that those who were most severely affected at the household level were less likely to receive an official warning. Additionally, flood experience, the level of perceived surprise at the household level, and perceived flood severity significantly influenced whether individuals knew how to respond to the upcoming flood. Despite the flood’s huge magnitude, those who took damage-reducing actions were more likely to report an actual reduction in flood damage. This analysis highlights the need to improve Belgium's flood warning system by ensuring timely issuance of clear warnings and underscores the benefits of enhanced flood risk awareness for damage reduction.
Very interesting study and I had a very good time reading it, I find it very approachable in the sense that even without prior knowledge we can understand fully the study and its results ! Thank you for this it's very valuable !
In Section 1.1 you indicate that you expand the PADM, maybe it can be nice to explain a bit further on the reasons of your expansion, for example go in more depth on why you are separating pre-decision process and perceptions. Then also what can help you is after your figure when you explain why PADM is suitable for your study explain also why it's limited, as this would pave you the way to justify your expansion (which is a very nice addition by the way).
For Section 1.2, I think you have a lot of visual elements with a clear timeline and where critical decisions must be taken and when, maybe a simple timeline figure could be a nice addition to this section which is rich in information, it would wrap it up and help the reader understand the stakes for the points further discuted in the paper ! "For an early warning system to be effective, warning messages need to be received by users with a sufficient lead time allowing them to 190 take protective action (called response in Fig. 1)", following up my previous comment, this can be very nicely visually represented in the timeline I described I think.
I think your methodology section is solid, valid and well justified, I really liked how it was split in RQs as well, it gives a very clear overview of how you did the study and makes it replicable.
I really like Figure 3 as it wraps up perfectly your results section, maybe you could have intermediary versions of this figure with focus points on the results section and at the end have the overall framework expanded, that way maybe it would make your result section less heavy in text ? A summary table could also be a nice addition at the end of the result section with the main trends found in your results and what recommendations would they lead to potentially? To have this clearer overview of your findings I think that would be a nice addition to work.
I would add also limitations in terms of methodology, I think one critisicm you could receive (which is very easy and common with survey studies) is that you didn't try to have follow-up interviews to confirm at least part of your findings, this is a classic, so maybe it can be nice to mention it in the limitations !
Thank you for the very enjoyable read, great study !