Successive French governments have progressively decentralised flood control policy to increase the role of local authorities in planning and crisis management. In 1982, a law mandated local risk maps for 5 types of exceptional natural hazards and set up Cat’ Nat’, a national system of damage compensation based on an insurance super-fund. While this system clearly improved the situation of victims of extreme events through subsidies in housing and infrastructure reconstruction, it did not necessarily foster a parallel reduction of vulnerability: insurance is more tuned to the past than to the future, and the tacit rule supports identical reconstruction so as not to increase the pre-disaster vulnerability (but not reducing it either). Yet indirectly, the recognition of a state of natural disaster triggers vulnerability reduction later, through various measures at various scales, from housing level (build back better) to the PAPI (action programmes for flood prevention); we describe them and present a case study before presenting hypotheses to explain the resistance of private landowners as well as potential improvements to better bridge recovery and resilience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barraqué et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: