Climate change and development within floodplains are expanding flood risk zones and increasing the number of households that are underinsured. Although flood insurance is core to disaster preparedness, how flood-prone households navigate flood insurance decisions remains poorly understood. This study explores how households make decisions about flood insurance coverage within contexts shaped by engagement, renewal cycles, rezoning, and insurer practices, rather than assuming a linear progression from awareness-to-behaviour pathways. Longitudinal data were collected through initial survey-interview engagements with 982 households in flood-prone areas of Melbourne, Australia and 641 follow-up engagements conducted four to six months later. Inductive analysis of follow-ups found that seven percent of participants (n = 42) reported a change in flood insurance decision-making. Change outcomes are reported as either a cognitive reassessment of insurance coverage (n = 11 or 2%) or a behaviour (n = 31 participants or 4%) in the form opting out of flood coverage (n = 2 or <1%), checking flood coverage (n = 20; 3%) or increasing flood coverage (n = 9 or 1%). Across cases, insurance decisions were shaped by conflicting flood risk assessments, rezoning without prior engagement, affordability constraints, and limited guidance on what constitutes adequate coverage. The findings indicate that insurance-related outcomes described by participants were not typically framed in terms of disengagement or poor risk awareness, but rather in relation to perceived uncertainties within flood risk governance and insurance systems. These observations highlight the potential value of early engagement processes that support interpretation, learning, and decision-making in increasingly uncertain flood risk environments.
Kamstra et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: