Community Action: From top-down to bottom-up solutions

1. Community Action:From top-down to bottom-up solutions Fuad Ali, Duncan Thomas, Robby Soetanto and Aaron Mullins What are the interactions between householders, SMEs and decision-makers regarding extreme weather events? How can they inform attempts to improve community resilience to EWEs?

2. Outline Current adaptation scenario ‘Post-LCLIP’ tool Idealised vs actual situations Local authority ecology Time horizons Social responsibility Synthesis

3. Current Adaptation Scenario • EW Events, Pitt Review, ‘snow tuning’ • Legislative Entanglement • Civil Contingencies • Climate Change • Planning, Flood • National regime transition • Localism • Deficit Reduction • National Indicator removal • New local authority responsibilities (pluvial flood, health)

4. Top-down approach: No resources, not practical “Like all other local government departments in the country, my resources are virtually nil and I am being squeezed even harder at the moment .... but Climate Change adaptation cannot be implemented in a top down manner ... You need to get buy-in from the bottom.” Climate change manager “It’s all doom and gloom here at the moment!” Flood planning officer

5. Top-down view: The ‘adapted citizen’ • Knows where to go for information • Knows about local flooding initiatives • Knows steps for local community to become as resilient as possible • Knows about local council actions, local planning, local MP actions, Central Govt actions • Knows their local vulnerable people, ready to help them • Knows local risks at street level • Part of an active community network • High preparedness before a flood, insured against flooding • High awareness of potential flooding impacts on own home... Sound like anyone you know?

6. ‘Post LCLIP’ Tool • Carries insights from the CREW experience • To be done by office of Chief Exec (or Deputy) • Not an intern, a junior or a consultant • Sensitive to varying local authority ecologies • Flexible, policy-change proof • Foregrounds history, LA’s expertise/capacity • Inclusive and outward

7. Inter-relations:Idealised conception DM The state can be expected to protect us from extreme weather. Are they going to charge me for anything? Why aren’t they clearing the drains? Citizen-state relations. Political liability. Governmentality of environment, security and community. Vulnerable stakeholder Vital to local economy. SME HH Corporate social responsibility Community spirit.

8. Inter-relations:Actual situation DM Contradictory messages. Inadequate drain clearing. Support for local organisations diminishing. Ambiguity over social responsibility Seldom hear from council unless its over rates. Flood affected would appreciate solidarity. LA is viewed as a trustworthy source. Difficult to ‘engage’. Need to drill down to that level after big fish. Engagement costs. Blue rinse brigade. Public prefers to talk about anything else SME HH Customers understand our situation Local businesses are part of the community

9. Local Authority:Adaptation Ecology Emergency Planning Sustainability Drainage Adaptation Planning AirQuality

10. Local Authority:Drivers Civil Contingencies Act 2004 Duty of care Local Resilience Fora Emergency Planning DRAIN Flood and Water Management Act 2010 Nottingham Declaration Sustainability Drainage Climate Change Act 2008 EU Flood Directive SFRA NI188 Adaptation Section 106 Planning PPS25 Development and Flood Risk AirQuality The Environment Act 1995 NPPF Town and Country Planning Act 1990

11. Local Authority:Service provision IT Education Emergency Planning Sustainability Drainage Adaptation Housing Waste Planning AirQuality

12. Local Authority:Multiple points of entry Local business associations Church-based Organisation Emergency Planning Housing Association Sustainability Drainage Local History Adaptation Residential Social Landlord River society Transition Town Planning AirQuality Implications of a complex bureaucratic space Residents Association

13. Decision-makers:Differing time horizons Hot issue Slow burn Perceived importance τ Policy refresh Planning Cycle Employee Churn Election Cycle Time

14. Inter-relations: Social Responsibility • Psychological exploration perceptions of social responsibility within and between stakeholders • Qualitative and quantitative methods • 481 completed questionnaires • 3 sites in Birmingham (incl control), 1 in SE London • 174 cognitive mapping transcripts • Variables included • role • age, gender • ethnicity • prior experience • location, • Social Responsibility scores • Conceptual model of perceptions of social responsibility

15. Findings: Social Responsibility • Underpinning perceptions • Powerlessness • Societal Duty • Each stakeholders self-rated their own social responsibility higher than each other group • Gender: no difference • Age: elder sections reported greater social responsibility • Ethnicity: differentially reported level of social responsibility brought out by experience

16. Conclusions • Shift to event and locally led adaptation • More inclusive adaptation conversation • Scope for greater LA role after EW events • Better understanding LA self image and organisational ecology • LA view of local citizenry and CBO base • Multiple points of entry • Leverage borough-wide interconnections • Structural differences • Findings carried by ‘post-LCLIP’ tool