Open access peer-reviewed chapter
Residual risk may be managed to influence the extent of negative consequences of flood events and to enhance the potential opportunities toward achieving the SDGs.
Abstract
In recent years, many parts of South Africa have been devastated by floods, impacting severely on the most vulnerable communities. Despite measures to reduce flood risk, and implementation of adaptation measures, there is always a measure of harm to livelihoods, health and wellbeing, and the economy, which persist far beyond flood events. This is of particular concern as flood events have increased in frequency and severity. A review of literature, addressing flood risk management, mitigation and adaptation in vulnerable coastal communities of South Africa, was conducted, to determine how to manage residual risks through implementation of resilience and recovery programs, employing suitable tools, inclusive of appropriate multidisciplinary stakeholders. This study interrogated different approaches used to assess social vulnerabilities, risk perception and the role of risk communication and information dissemination. Economic implications pertaining to tourism, livelihoods and loss of natural and built infrastructure were analyzed. Risk tools including early warning systems and risk assessment models were analyzed, and various future scenarios were explored. Possible opportunities presented by negative impacts of residual risks to achieving the SDGs were explored. The findings indicate that strengthening resilience depends heavily on collaboration across sectors to cater for local needs. Cooperation between government, private sector and communities is critical to achieving sustainable solutions to residual risk management.
Keywords
- flood risk management
- residual risks
- vulnerable communities
- climate adaptation
- policy development
- coastal flood risks
1. Introduction
Climate change combined with human activities and land transformation poses considerable risk to human health and wellbeing, ecosystems and the economy. Risk may be broadly defined as “the product of a hazard and its consequences” [1]. In the absence of harm to entities that are valued, such as people, property or natural areas and biodiversity, there is no risk. In the disaster risk landscape in South Africa, the largest losses are due to climate risk [2]. Climate risks impact negatively on economic activities, access to educational facilities, water quality and supply, and infrastructure [3, 4]. In the last two to three decades, we have seen a surge in extreme weather events (EWE), with floods topping the list as the most recurrent natural disaster [5]. This has resulted in the transformation of large areas, as recovery and restoration to the original condition are not entirely possible. We can only prepare adequately for what we anticipate with certainty. However, EWEs associated with climate change are linked to overwhelming uncertainty.
Flood hazard considers “the likelihood and severity of flood events” [6]. Globally, Africa and Asia are most impacted by climate change, contributing to food security and forced migration [4]. Africa has been identified as the continent worst impacted by climate change, where “one in every three people lives below the poverty line” [7]. EWEs may introduce wetter than normal conditions which have impact on food safety, health and well-being and livelihoods. South Africa has been subjected to damaging floods approximately every 2 years, with more intensive flood events occurring every 10–15 years but the frequency of the latter event is expected to increase [8, 9, 10]. South Africa has experienced more frequent flood events over the past few decades, with 77 major floods occurring between 1980 and 2010, resulting in the loss of over 1000 lives, devastation to infrastructure and loss of livelihoods [6]. Between 1950 and 2021 South Africa experienced 40 disastrous floods, with the east coast subjected to repeat flood events in the last three decades. The floods experienced in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, in 2019 left in its wake 80 fatalities, 1400 displaced people and damage estimated at ZAR140 million, while the April 2022 floods resulted in damages estimated at ZAR17 million [11].
1.1 Coastal settlements vulnerable to risk
Coastal towns and cities are especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and associated EWEs, particularly floods, and sea level rise (SLR) [12, 13]. SLR is not uniform and becomes more pronounced through discrete events that occur together with severe storms [14]. Coastal areas have become a concern due to the increasing flood events in coastal areas [8]. Vulnerability may be defined as “the lack of resistance to damaging/destructive forces” [1]. This is of particular concern in coastal areas due to the dynamic nature of natural forces from both the sea and land. As rivers are inundated with extreme volumes of water, and move sediment and debris downstream, the ultimate destination is the coastal area. With many settlements clustered closer to the coast, the high-density populations are recipients of the dire consequences of these high-risk events. Coastal floods also result from “high tides, storm surges and strong winds,” river floods and flash floods [1, 6]. The combination of inland flooding and coastal flooding can have considerable impact on coastal settlements. The magnitude, duration and frequency of flood events have become increasingly unpredictable, resulting in inadequate preparation for such events [1, 15]. In most instances, the intensity of floods is increasing, with resultant loss of lives and property, and devastating social and economic costs.
In developing countries, poverty and a multitude of socioeconomic and political factors contribute to placing vulnerable communities in a further precarious position. Informal settlements are permanent homes to approximately one billion people in the Global South [16, 17]. Basic services such as water and sanitation, solid waste removal, and adequate drainage are the norm in these settlements [18]. Due to the lack of services, informal settlements are often located along water sources and in drainage areas, which increases their vulnerability to flood events. These communities are often recurrent victims of floods, as they rebuild their unstable dwellings after each flood event and continue to reside in the same area. They are characterized by overcrowding, unemployment and low income [18, 19, 20]. Apart from informal settlements in South Africa, environmental injustice stemming from the historical political dispensation resulted in residential settlements being segregated, with certain groups residing in areas prone to floods. These were also the groups that faced socioeconomic challenges and limited access to resources and services. It is also noted that more settlements are arising in hazard-prone areas as time progresses [21], as people flock to urban areas.
Cape Town and Durban are the largest coastal cities in South Africa, with each city having a population exceeding 3 million people [20]. The Climate Change Act No. 22 of South Africa [22] in its principles acknowledges “the need for decision-making to consider the special needs and circumstances of localities and people that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.” This is especially important in coastal regions, with a high concentration of the population, with many leaving inland areas to work at the coast. Many of these migrant workers settle in informal dwellings, which place them in harm’s way when flood events occur.
1.2 Residual flood risk
Floods are a regular occurrence but the uncertainty in terms of predicting when they will occur and to what extent is challenging. Using a risk assessment approach is often effective in identifying hazards (causes) and effects (consequences) [6]. Risk assessment and probability of consequences under different scenarios help in planning for mitigation and adaptation [4]. However, there is always some degree of negative consequences that are unexpected, leaving communities and the environment at the mercy of flood events. This is residual harm or residual risk that is anticipated harm. Residual risk may be defined as “the risk that remains after the implementation of protection measures” [23] or “risk that remains in unmanaged form, even when effective disaster risk reduction measures are in place, and for which emergency response and recovery capacities must be maintained” [24]. Dealing with recovery following flood events has required considerable investment but many communities have failed to fully recover and return to what used to be their “normal” lives. This is a function of the vulnerability to flood event, which considers livelihoods, people and infrastructure [6].
This chapter aims to explore the management of residual flood risks to determine their impact on vulnerable communities in coastal areas of South Africa, through a review of flood risk management, mitigation and adaptation literature. This review examines how resilience and recovery interventions can address residual risks through the application of suitable approaches and tools. The challenges that residual risk poses to achieving the sustainability agenda, including specific barriers to successful implementation of appropriate mechanisms to manage residual risk, are examined. Ultimately, the implications of these significant issues for policy development are analyzed and recommendations are proposed.
2. Methodology
A literature search of peer-reviewed publications was conducted for the period 2010 to 2024, limited to South Africa. Search terms used were: “residual risk in coastal regions”; “coastal flood risk assessment” AND “coastal flood risk management in South Africa”; “coastal flood vulnerability in South Africa”; “climate change impact on coastal flooding in South Arica”; “socio-economic impacts of flood in South Africa.” The databases used to conduct the literature search and the results generated appear below in Figure 1.
A Google Scholar search generated 23 articles after refining by year and country. After removal of duplicates, 19 were found to be eligible.
ScienceDirect was used to conduct a literature search. After refining by year, document type, language, keywords and subject area, 22 were included, and 14 refined to be eligible after screening.
A literature search using Scopus generated 16 articles, after refining by year and country, 11 were found to be eligible.
Figure 1.
The stages in the literature search and refinement to determine the final selection for inclusion in the study, commenced with 8401 publications. This was screened for the period 2010 to 2024 generating 324 publications and refined further to include 34 publications in the study.
A total of 44 publications generated from the search above. These were screened further for relevance, and the final review included 34 publications. The content of the selected literature was examined within the broad themes: (1) social vulnerabilities of communities, health and wellbeing and displacement, (2) economic vulnerabilities and broader implications, (3) risk tools used to assess vulnerabilities and (4) risk scenarios and consequences. This was reviewed within the broad context of the ultimate contribution toward policy development.
Apart from this, other publications deemed appropriate were used to broaden the review where possible in the discussion section, as certain highly relevant publications were not part of the literature selected for the review but had a strong bearing on the aim of this chapter. This allowed the authors to make further inferences.
3. Results and discussion
Between 2014 and 2021, there were between 0 and 2 publications per year. There was a sharp increase in the number of relevant publications retrieved from 2022 to 2024 from the literature search conducted. This may be attributed to the severe and devastating floods experienced in 2022–2023 [9] (Figure 2).
Figure 2.
The number of publications per year over the period covered for the review, 2010 to 2024, was low ranging from 0 to 2 from 2014 to 2021. From 2022, there was a steep increase, with a maximum of nine publications in 2023.
3.1 Social vulnerabilities
Climate change has serious impacts for humankind with coastal communities among the most vulnerable [10, 12, 25, 26]. Social vulnerability is understood as a dynamic component changing over time, raising concerns of the inability of a population or community to cope with hazards such as floods [27]. These susceptibilities are often grouped as socioeconomic vulnerabilities. Social vulnerability can be typified by factors such as age, income, physical disabilities or other medical conditions, medical and health care access, well-being, gender, race, and ethnicity, access to resources, building infrastructure, population density and the nature and intensity of the hazard itself [10, 27, 28]. The literature provides evidence that fatalities may have reduced locally and globally, but social and economic repercussions remain a challenge in flood risk management [26]. Busayo et al. [25] report that studies in South Africa seem to focus primarily on physical risks and damage, with far less emphasis on social vulnerability of those most affected by flooding. In addition, South Africa has the legacy effects of apartheid resulting in “high risk areas and poverty traps where high rates of losses and damages go hand in hand with limited ability to cope and adapt due to marginalization, high poverty, and culturally imposed gender roles” which exacerbate the impacts of climate change [20].
3.1.1 Different approaches to understanding and assessing social vulnerability
Of the 34 publications reviewed, 11 papers refer to social vulnerabilities, while the other publications acknowledge a social component indirectly. One of the criteria on the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) of qualitative analysis is: Are participants, and their voices, adequately represented [29]? This is critical to understanding socially vulnerable communities due to flooding. A vital component to understand social vulnerabilities to both mitigation and response, is the lived experiences for both pre- and post-flood events. Four papers make categorical references to the voices of the vulnerable. These are: Busayo and Kalumba [28] reported on a study in East London, a coastal city in South Africa, Williams et al. [17] reported on Quarry Road West informal settlement, in Durban, along the east coast of South Africa, Quinn et al. [30] reported on residents’ responses on place meaning (an aspect of social vulnerability component) in four coastal towns in France, South Africa and UK and two French towns, and Ebhuoma et al. [10] reported on household preparedness for interventions and flooding along the coastal town of Amanzimtoti, South Africa. Ebhuoma et al. [10] explored the lived experiences of coastal vulnerable communities using a case study. Other publications, while not categorically focusing on the voices of the vulnerable, suggested approaches, which could contribute to understanding and mitigation of social vulnerabilities within the context of coastal flooding events and residual risk. These include: the GULLS model (Global Understanding and Learning for Local Solutions) [12], the Safe Development Paradox [31], an ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) approach [25], green infrastructure (GI) as a mitigation strategy [19], understanding rural and urban contexts [32], an integrated approach to flood resilience in urban contexts [33], adaptive strategies of communities in coastal inundation drawn from literature review [34] and contributions of social engagement relating to expansion from flood control [35].
Aswani et al. [12], in citing many authors, aver that vulnerability assessment and adaptation strategies are dual factors that are essential for holistic risk management. They refer to the GULLS model and the application of this conceptual model to vulnerability analysis. The GULLS project was implemented along coastal hotspots in countries across the globe (Australia, Brazil, India, South Africa, Madagascar and Solomon Islands) where warming of coastal waters has been faster. This model gathers local social vulnerability data to obtain a better understanding of drivers of community vulnerabilities. While this is applied at a local scale, it allows for up-scaling to a regional level. Understanding local cultures and knowledge has been raised in other papers as well, namely by Busayo et al. [25], Tauhid and Zawani [19], Zhou et al. [32] and Williams et al. [17].
A point raised in data collection in the GULLS Project was the use of translators to access the views of coastal communities of varying cultures [12]. In South Africa, five different communities within the same coastal region formed the study site. However, only one translator was used with bias to the Afrikaans-speaking population, since the study sites were mostly Afrikaans-speaking communities. While this in itself highlights the importance of understanding the communities, it raises caution that inclusivity is crucial in understanding vulnerabilities where there is diversity. Hence, in South Africa a single translator for one language will be deemed insufficient for social vulnerability data collection given the multicultural and multilingual contexts. It is the view of the reviewers that the lack of a comprehensive understanding of cultural contexts is likely to have poor responses in the future in terms of social vulnerability, residual impacts and damages. However, a contribution emanating from the GULLS project is the value of creating a cultural database of local demographics, which can be useful to practitioners to access for both mitigation and response to flood events.
Safe development in the form of infrastructure lock-ins is counter measures to flooding [31]. However, safe development has become paradoxical and has raised concerns as a mitigation strategy. These structures may not withstand EWEs, posing further risks. While these structures are conceived and built by local policymakers as a major defense against hazards such as flooding, Busayo et al. [25] argue that such structures are unsustainable without considering ecological-based development. An isolated engineering approach needs a critical rethink by policy makers, especially where social vulnerability is a major concern. Flooding is increasingly accounting for natural disasters. Germany (2021) and Spain (2024) displayed one of the more recent breaches in flood defenses. Global statistics show that the annual average death casualties ranged between 5000 and 15,000 persons [31]. The social vulnerability of death and the impact on family structures in surviving generations could be immeasurable. The literature reviewed also shows that the Safe Development Paradox has been inadequately studied in the global South, in particular in socially vulnerable communities.
Safe development also places greater risks by settling populations in areas that are prone to such extreme hazards providing false securities [31]. A review of safe development infrastructure and current studies on the risks involved is required. For example, bridges that may have been thought to be designed with resistance, to mitigate social vulnerabilities need to be revisited from the engineering perspective for added security. Collapsed bridges had significant impact on the KwaZulu Natal (KZN) South Coast, South Africa, causing commuting challenges in getting to work and in education facilities. Learners lost valuable instruction time due to flooding; there were also disruptions experienced in the National School Exit Examinations in the Eastern Cape South Africa in 2024. Learning from the Global North is a positive contribution to the Global South as they develop policies for mitigation and adaptation. However, a key point raised is that there are limitations in flood infrastructure design; hence, household adaptation and resilience require engagement and dialog between communities, governments and the wider public to overcome false securities. Social vulnerability is often hidden where science-based solutions are taken as resistant buffers creating a shift to a passive paradigm rather than active resilience in communities [26].
3.1.2 Relocation of vulnerable communities to mitigate against residual risks
A suggested flood mitigation strategy to counter the Safe Development Paradox is relocation [31]. However, while relocation may be a recommendation in the Global North, it may not necessarily apply to highly populated coastal communities with cultural attachments, especially in coastal towns and cities of the Global South. Relocation may require people to travel great distances to work and creates challenges for accessibility [19]. Further, relocation would mean spatial and infrastructure development, which implies transferring the issue to areas less likely to experience the hazards. In reality climate change, EWEs have shown the contrary; any area could be susceptible to the impacts of such natural events. However, responses for temporary relocation depending on the seriousness of the hazard may be an option to both physical damage and social vulnerability, that is, to keep family units intact, to make available medical assistance and food to identified holdings (relocations). Prior communication of such holdings for temporary safety should be given to communities in preparation for such unanticipated EWEs to make temporary or permanent relocations a fairly good response. Identified relocations are also likely to help practitioners in times of EWEs to focus their responses. This would imply that a central database of vulnerable communities together with areas of temporary relocation needs to be available in advance to practitioners for acute awareness and response.
Perhaps a mitigation strategy to buffer flood hazards in conjunction with safe development is the ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) approach advocated by Busayo et al. [25], which claims EbA to be cost-efficient and multi-dimensional and reduces environmental impacts. They indicate that housing shortages have resulted in mushrooming informal urban settlements exposed to flood risks in coastal areas such as in the Western Cape (South Africa). A hybrid approach of engineering and environmental management indicators (protection of ecosystems, conservation of coastal dunes, sustainable agriculture by preventing vegetation depletion along riparian areas and restoration), together with early warning systems and information dissemination, are mitigation measures, which increase preparedness and are very likely to decrease the impact on social vulnerability. A criticism though is that theoretically, it is an assumption that EbA will include the vulnerable communities first-hand if implemented appropriately. However, the EbA approach is likely to have a big gap if communities at risk are not involved. It is important to establish how people perceive EbA and associated ecological infrastructure, so that how people value such interventions is understood [36]. The Green Infrastructure (GI) approach to flood mitigation is similar to the EbA approach [19]. GI encompasses the establishment and development of interconnected networks of green spaces that sustain natural ecosystems and have multiple social, economic and environment benefits including slowing or controlling flood water run-off. It is acknowledged that GI has been implemented but issues related to the poor urban populations are rarely given the attention deserved [19]. Social vulnerabilities as evident in other cases include disability, water-borne diseases and death. Three key aspects of GI programs relevant for coastal flood mitigation and reduction in residual risks are awareness, participation and a shared vision, which are reported to have contributed to the success of GI programs in Madurai, India. However, the case studies lack evidence of the lived experiences of the poor.
3.1.3 The role of integrated knowledge systems
Bwambale et al. [26] propose the integrated knowledge approach (science and indigenous knowledge) that seeks to narrow the science-practice gap. They refer to hylomorphism (context-specific lived experiences integrated with the science that models the patterns of events). Kamara et al. [37] within the context of drought responses indicated that resilience capabilities and potential were evident in communities with loaded indigenous and contextual ecological knowledge. Indigenous knowledge is core to the lived experiences for traditional communities within contextual ecosystems including their comprehension of flood hazards [26]. However, the question is: How is indigenous knowledge or elements of the lived experience going to be cascaded to future generations with the science? Bwambale et al. [26] point out three issues: (1) a dearth of case studies of integrated knowledge, (2) arguments that even with integrated knowledge systems there is residual risk and (3) none-the-less there are co-benefits of communities being included in the policy and decision-making. The point here is significant if lived experiences include indigenous and other communities of urban, peri-urban and rural communities along flood risk coastal areas. For example, extreme flooding along the KZN South Coast is no longer a rare event but has become repetitive. Lived experiences are crucial to input on the impact of social vulnerability, mitigation and adaptative responses. However, policy and recommendations need to be drafted and communicated with language and terminologies understood by the communities at risk [26] inclusive of relevant traditional knowledge. Strengthening resilience includes the use of traditional and indigenous knowledge, culture and inherent capacities of communities at risk [28, 37].
Kamara et al. [37] reported on wellbeing due to climate induced disasters. Wellbeing is defined as a reasonable state without physical ill-health. During hazardous events, humanitarian aid is based on emergency provisions. However, building resilience should be a pre-condition. Poverty is one of the social vulnerabilities, which many nations are battling with, including South Africa, with its prevailing inequalities. Mudefi [11] reported that along the Palmiet River, in KZN perpetual disparities (e.g., unemployment and poverty) had negative impacts forcing Black South Africans to live in flood-prone informal settlements. Households with limited access to resources are disadvantaged and less resilient, increasing vulnerability to ill health and food shortage [37]. There seems to be inadequate studies and information on contextual resilience capabilities to inform policies. Lack of local government action, for example, Ethekwini Municipality in the Palmiet River settlement, failed to clear blocked drains, which increases flooding risks. Poor maintenance reduces resilience and increases social vulnerability. Accordingly in the 2022 floods experienced in KZN, South Africa, schools, hospitals and clinics, the core fabric of social wellbeing was eroded [11]. However, the review by Mudefi [11] lacked emphasis on the lived experiences of the communities at risk. The focus slanted toward responsible and accountable units of municipalities, government and other organizations. However, Muyambo et al. [38] have indicated that due to poverty, communities are socially dependent on governments, which also signifies the accountability role of municipalities, government and other organizations in addressing social vulnerability.
Prashar et al. [33] through a systemic review on urban flood resilience assessment agree that there is need for an integrated approach to achieve success in developing strong flood reliance. However, this study pointed out the absence of social vulnerability themes such as mental health, gender-based issues and perceptions within the flood resilience context. These themes are essential for recovery responses to residual risk. To maximize benefits to society, future responses to flooding events should consider contextual assessment of each case accounting for individual and integrated elements. Social dimensions are critical to the facilitation and rate of the recovery phase [33].
3.1.4 Risk perception
Risk perception includes assessing the symbolic and emotional relationships attached to place meanings [30]. This study reported on a study which included a survey of 707 residents in four coastal towns in France, South Africa and UK. However, the South African study shows a bias toward higher economic communities (retirees and international property owners). The coast of KZN for example has a very large population of lower economic dwellers as well. The outcomes of the study indicated varying flood risk perceptions that place significant meaning where natural features exist. However, residents should also be aware of the negative impacts such as flood risks in that location. The study has social implications especially where relocation as alluded to by Breen et al. [31] is considered as a strategic flood mitigation or response. A valuable contribution of the study by Quinn et al. [30] is the notions of “living with risks” and “protection against risks.” The notion of “living with risks” involves socioeconomic strategies such as insurance, timely communication of early warnings and other strategic responses such as moving furniture. This would be a huge challenge to marginalized poor socioeconomic communities such as in South African coastal towns, as they often do not have access to the resources.
Williams et al. [17] suggest the Capital Approach Framework (CAF). The approach with social capital as a component was applied to the Quarry Road West informal settlement, Durban, South Africa, within the context of informal settlements and flooding. This settlement went through periods of rapid expansion. Expansion was noted prior to and post significant flood events. Components of social capital include social networks, level of trust and confidence in stakeholders of decision-making and policy development. Five community members were among the stakeholder participants in the case study. This is significant in that the vulnerable communities were given a voice in the study. However, the results show that the vulnerable group felt they were not treated equally (0% score) in the governance of Quarry Road Settlement, with low scores for communication and participation as well. Equal and inclusive participation and co-design are essential for community buy-in and ownership of interventions and programs [35].
Neglect of social dimensions has contributed to flaws in the design of adaptation strategies as they disconnect from the lived experiences of individuals and communities (Adger et al., 2013, cited in [17]). Lived experiences contribute to understanding differences in vulnerability, as pointed out by Zhou et al. [32] in a climate change review in rural and urban areas. Residual risk of floods has the potential to exacerbate existing social vulnerabilities. The legacy of spatial racial segregation is still evident to date in areas such as Mitchell’s Plain, Western Cape, South Africa where access to re-sources is limited [35]. Hence, localized interventions rather than “blanket policy” is valuable for adaptive strategies [32]. A reviewed input acknowledged the agency of women to adapt to floods but pointed out social vulnerabilities that challenged the agency more especially in rural areas
The results of a study conducted in East London, South Africa, using the resilience theory as a framework to understand social vulnerability identified the elderly, people with special needs due to physical challenges, women and children in descending order as vulnerable. East London faces increasing flood risks to those already exposed to these events. Studying, analyzing and responding to social vulnerability of vulnerable groups are important for risk identification, preparedness, living through and recovering from hazardous events [28]. Understanding social vulnerabilities in flood risk areas to improve preparedness to events can be elevated to mandatory.
A case study conducted in the coastal Amanzimtoti community in Durban, South Africa, collected primary data (using questionnaires) from residents on lived experiences. This study highlighted social vulnerabilities post the 2019 floods [10]. Post the study, KZN has experienced recurring, damaging floods over the past 3 years. The study elaborates on both preparedness for flooding events and social impacts of previous flooding events. The study reports that: mitigation measures involved insurance policies and sandbag stacking that were eventually ineffective to protect assets in poor communities. Previous flooding events caused psychological trauma among some residents and other emotional challenges such as loneliness, fear and being isolated from usual religious gatherings. A fair share of the responsibility was expected from the municipality in terms of preparedness with residents, suggesting the provision of emergency tents, informed possible alternative relocation to churches and a subsidy availability for refurbishments would have done much for their well-being. Residents indicated that they were forced to temporarily relocate, sometimes in neighboring communities until flood water recession reached liveable conditions. However, residents seem to have positive place meaning and attachment to their town [30]. This deep attachment is evident in preparedness in adaptive interventions such as investment in sealant application on walls, flood detection systems, erecting flood barricades and insurance. On the contrary, some residents believed that risk management and accountability rested with the municipality and hence did not implement mitigation measures. Perhaps, an assumption on the part of this belief is that existing engineering infrastructure such as drainage was sufficient security. This highlights the importance of raising awareness among vulnerable communities of environmental, social and economic risks of complacency to flood preparedness. The lack of such awareness is to their detriment and is likely to escalate residual risk in communities with social vulnerabilities.
3.1.5 Communication and information dissemination
A common and chief concern that repeatedly appeared in this review was that of communication and information dissemination [10, 11, 17, 28]. Ineffective and incomprehensive communication and early warning systems exacerbate social vulnerability issues. For example, the anxiety and fear of vulnerable individuals, households and communities are likely to be confronted when events are suddenly upon them. Communication channels need to be timeously and proactively implemented, as television and radio news and social media warnings can be delayed in initiating urgent responses [11]. Further, electronic media works only when people are using them [28]. On the contrary Ebhuoma et al. [10] found that some residents preferred social media. However, they do concur that diverse communication mechanisms are more effective. In Bangladesh, coastal hazard inundation communication uses village networks and mosque authorities, using hand mikes and loudspeakers (Garai, 2017 cited in Sultana et al. [34]). Mosques are visible in many vulnerable communities in the South African coastal cities. Such community structures need to be explored as a co-strategy for communication during hazardous events. Respondents in the Amanzimtoti study conveyed the value of timeous communication and early warning indicating that it would allow time to protect or salvage key assets and make informed arrangements for relocation if necessary [10]. Williams et al. [17], raised the issue of communication and information post flood events in the Quarry Road West Settlement, citing lack of transparency in communication, the unavailability and inaccessibility of data on previous events, and the unavailability of reports in the languages of the residents as limitations, which needs to be considered in preparedness for future events.
The examination of social vulnerability in this review indicates that there is a dearth of published studies on the lived experiences of socially vulnerable coastal communities to flood risks, to inform increased preparedness and make recovery from residual risk meaningful and efficient. Further studies to address this gap have the potential to address residual risk more effectively, as the most vulnerable are yet to be fully understood within their contexts. Studies of lived experiences are also of value to communities across contexts where similarities may exist. Further, studies on lived experiences are needed and likely to provide a greater base for policy makers and practitioners to better prepare for flood hazards and recovery with an integrated approach. However, this review does categorically highlight the nuances around communication and early warning systems. To note though is the need for research on communication to include both early warning systems and real-time information to mitigate casualties and loss of assets [28]. Loss of life and its impact on future generations is one of the key social vulnerability issues of concern. This review favors policy, mitigation, preparedness and recovery founded on principles of integrated and hybrid approaches [25, 33], which includes social vulnerability rather than isolated focus on safe development engineering. The review also illuminates the number of approaches that can be applied by policy makers and practitioners to address social vulnerability and residual risk in an integrated way. More studies and publications on lived experiences of social vulnerability are likely to support (Sustainable Development Goal) SDG 11:
3.2 Economic implications
3.2.1 The significant impact of flooding on tourism
Floods in the Western Cape province of South Africa between 2011 and 2014 resulted in R682.8 million loss for municipalities, while floods in Mpumalanga province cost municipalities R535 million loss, and significant damage to infrastructure in Gauteng province due to floods between 2015 and 2018 [6]. South Africa’s vulnerable coastal areas, which are economically dependent on tourism, have been significantly affected by ecological degradation and climate change [30, 36, 39]. The attrition of natural habitats impacts tourism by reducing the esthetic and recreational value of these regions, which in turn affects local livelihoods. The literature highlights that climate change has substantial economic implications for tourism, particularly in vulnerable regions like Southern Africa. The changing climate affects tourism activities due to its impact on the natural environment, which is a core attraction for many destinations [39, 40]. For instance, rising temperatures, changes in rainfall patterns, and increased frequency of EWEs can disrupt tourism activities and decrease the appeal of certain destinations, leading to reduced tourist arrivals and revenue losses. Coastal areas, which are popular for beach tourism, face threats from SLR and coastal erosion [41], increasing the economic vulnerability of these regions and affecting livelihoods reliant on tourism.
Estuaries are often prime locations for eco-tourism, with unique biodiversity and coastal landscapes that attract tourists. Van Niekerk et al. [42] reflect on the vulnerability of South African estuaries to climate change. The findings highlight the significant impacts of climate change on coastal ecosystems, particularly in the context of South Africa’s diverse estuarine environments. More importantly, the vulnerability of estuarine areas is attributed to climate-induced stressors, including SLR, temperature changes, altered rainfall patterns, and more EWEs such as storms and floods. The vulnerability of estuaries has profound economic consequences for local communities, especially in areas reliant on these ecosystems for their livelihoods. Considering that South African estuaries provide critical services, including fisheries, tourism, and biodiversity, climate change can disrupt these services, threatening the economic stability of communities that depend on coastal resources. Tourism, particularly in areas where estuaries are a key attraction, is likely to face declines due to habitat loss, reduced biodiversity, and increased storm damage to coastal infrastructure. Van Niekerk et al. [42] proceed to argue that the impacts on tourism are closely linked to the degradation of estuarine habitats, associated with erosion of these sensitive ecosystems, particularly in regions like KZN. On a broader scale, the coastal nature of Durban means that tourism is a vital economic sector, heavily reliant on beach activities and ocean access. Flooding poses a direct threat to this sector by damaging infrastructure, such as beachfront facilities, and reducing tourist footfall during adverse weather conditions. The knock-on effect is a decline in revenue for local businesses that depend on tourism. Furthermore, flooding can result in environmental degradation, including beach erosion and pollution from overflowed sewage systems, which detracts from the city’s attractiveness as a tourist destination [10, 17, 19, 32, 43].
The study by Fitchett et al. [44] focusing on the coastal towns of St. Francis Bay and Cape St. Francis can be aligned with the coastal areas of KZN Province, which also faces similar challenges related to climate change and coastal vulnerability. KZN’s coast, popular for its thriving tourism sector, is highly susceptible to the economic impacts of climate change. As in the case of St. Francis Bay, rising sea levels, increased storm intensity, and changing weather patterns in KZN could threaten infrastructure, including beachfront properties, tourist attractions, and critical coastal services such as fishing and shipping. Tourism is a major economic driver in KZN, with destinations such as Durban, the iSimangaliso Wetland Park, and the Drakensberg Mountains attracting international visitors. The increased potential for coastal erosion and flooding could disrupt this industry, leading to significant revenue losses. In comparison, when aligning the findings from Dube, Nhamo, and Chikodzi’s [45] study on SLR and coastal tourism in Cape Town, to the context of KZN Province, similar economic and environmental challenges emerge given the region’s extensive coastline and reliance on coastal tourism. In KZN, the economic risks from rising sea levels parallel those identified in Cape Town, impacting key tourist destinations such as Durban’s Golden Mile, Ballito, and Umhlanga. These areas draw substantial tourism income from beach activities, hotels, and beachfront properties. Rising sea levels and increased storm surges can result in significant infrastructure damage, increasing the costs of maintenance and repair. In KZN, tourism is a major employer, with coastal erosion or flooding resulting in job losses and reduced income for local communities, exacerbating poverty levels in already vulnerable populations. Furthermore, KZN’s coastal zones include ecologically sensitive areas like estuaries and wetlands, which are critical for sustaining marine biodiversity and supporting eco-tourism initiatives. The loss of these habitats due to SLR can diminish the ecological value of the region, further affecting tourism potential.
Hence, the devastating implication of rising sea levels on economic growth opportunities, especially in coastal tourism, suggests the need for careful planning and investment in sustainable coastal infrastructure to protect both the economy and natural habitats, and to improve climate services to enhance disaster resilience in coastal communities by better aligning information with local needs, thereby reducing risks associated with extreme weather and flooding [40, 46, 47].
3.2.2 Infrastructure to support vulnerable communities and livelihoods
The literature interrogated by Dube et al. [45], Ebhuoma et al. [10], and Quin et al. [30] supports the arguments presented in the study conducted by Angelstam et al., which emphasizes the need for investments in maintaining and restoring ecological infrastructure to support the economic stability of vulnerable communities. This includes mitigating risks such as flooding and erosion that directly affect tourism and other coastal economic activities. The study “Mapping and evaluating the impact of flood hazards on tourism in South African national parks” by Dube et al. [45] offers a comprehensive analysis of how flood hazards affect the tourism sector in South Africa, particularly within national parks. The research underscores salient economic and social implications of flooding on vulnerable communities reliant on tourism as a primary source of income. In essence, flooding poses significant economic risks to the tourism sector, particularly in protected areas like national parks that attract international and local visitors. Flood events often result in infrastructure damage, such as washed-out roads, damaged visitor facilities, and increased maintenance costs [45]. The disruption to tourism activities leads to revenue losses, impacting both park authorities and the broader economy of surrounding communities, who depend heavily on tourism for their livelihoods [10, 19, 30, 35, 43]. Local businesses that provide ancillary services such as accommodation, food, and transport are impacted. This can lead to long-term economic instability in these regions, further marginalizing already vulnerable communities. Vulnerable communities living near estuaries may face displacement and loss of income as these impacts worsen. Furthermore, the shifting dynamics of marine currents and the effects on fish stocks can jeopardize local livelihoods, particularly those reliant on small-scale fishing [32, 34, 44, 48].
These arguments are strengthened by Ebhuoma et al. [10] and Williams et al. [17] within the context of flooding in Durban, South Africa. It is evident that economic impacts are significant, especially on low-income households in informal settlements. Williams et al. [17] outline the complexities of flood management in informal settlements, focusing on governance structures and their influence on the effectiveness of water management strategies. Poorly managed water governance can exacerbate the vulnerability of residents, leading to increased costs for infrastructure repair and loss of livelihoods. Economic activities in these areas are often informal and rely on fragile systems that are vulnerable to flood damage. Additionally, frequent flooding disrupts local economies, causing property damage, loss of assets, and displacement. For instance, in Quarry Road West (Durban, South Africa), poor governance and lack of infrastructure contribute to a cycle of poverty and increased economic vulnerability for residents. Residents often lack formal property rights, which limits their ability to advocate for necessary infrastructure improvements. This marginalization exacerbates their vulnerability to climate-induced flooding, and the absence of affordable insurance options exacerbates the financial strain on these communities. Consequently, economic losses manifest not only in property damage but also in disrupted livelihoods, as informal sectors such as street vending and small businesses face prolonged recovery periods after flood events. In addition, there is “business interruption and consequent reduced number of employed people, as well as transboundary economic losses and costs of emergency evacuation” [49]. This amplifies the need for financial safety nets and subsidies for vulnerable populations to mitigate the economic burden of climate-related disasters.
3.3 Application of appropriate risk management tools
The application of risk-based tools for the development of flood risk management strategies has largely featured the engagement of integrated models [13]. Such models consider trade-offs between management objectives and model uncertainties, to identify the critical parameters in each system. This has significant implications for refining and reconfiguring models as uncertain, unpredictable flood events occur. Multidisciplinary models consider ecology, economy, and society in measuring trade-offs against each other, to determine the consequences of alternatives under different scenarios [13].
Frazier et al. [21] applied a Residual Risk Assessment (RRA) model to assess risks to communities and health systems. This study highlighted the omission of health systems in many hazard assessments and recognized the risks and vulnerabilities of health systems. The RRA demonstrated the importance of such a model to help communities by determining residual risk and understanding how risks change over time. This can be used to prioritize risk reduction strategies and align community risk perception to be more reflective of reality and contribute to better risk communication. This can easily be applied specifically to flood events, as it allows for the RRA scores to “be compared across communities, the values can be compared between hazards and severities” [21].
Early warning systems (EWS) are important in risk communication to facilitate preparedness and response to climate risks [3]. EWS are best developed in collaboration with communities, as this will address the community needs. Often EWS are developed by government without consultation, resulting in it not achieving what it set out to do. Underpinning effective EWS is sound meteorological data. To obtain robust data, it is critical to maintain meteorological equipment in good order. This requires funding and adequately trained and skilled professionals to ensure that robust models are applied to generate data for the EWS. In the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region, resource challenges may create barriers for successful implementation of EWS [3]. Lunga et al. [50] conducted a study to determine an EWS based on a case study in Durban’s Quarry Road informal settlement. This employed geographic information system (GIS) technology and spatial analysis of several criteria (including rainfall intensity, geology, land use, slope, and elevation) to identify flood-prone zones and contribute to EWS in the KZN region. South African Weather Services (SAWS) provide warnings associated with flash floods but do not provide levels of risk associated with vulnerable communities. This study concluded that there is a need for more intensive post-flood damage database, which would inform future predictive models. This requires investment to provide real-time spatial data to inform the EWS.
3.4 Consequences of future scenarios
Coastal floods resulting from storm events are projected to be more intense in combination with SLR, threatening storm protection infrastructure and coastal settlements. Coastal dune erosion reduces the buffering capacity, which offers protection to coastal infrastructure [41], requiring strategic planning to consider various possible future scenarios to guide decision making. The variables, introduced by human activities and natural phenomena, present coastal dynamics never considered before [14]. Quantitative global climate change projections produced in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Synthesis Report (Summary for Policymakers) are based on assumptions and a range of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission scenarios [4]. These include the following scenarios: very low and low GHG emissions, which are CO2 emissions decreasing to net zero between 2050 and 2070; intermediate GHG emissions with CO2 emissions approximately the same as current levels until 2050; and high and very high GHG emissions with approximately double current CO2 emissions between 2050 and 2100. In the majority of gauged coastal locations, it is projected that the frequency of extreme sea level events will increase substantially. The risks to coastal communities will continue to rise beyond 2100 due to SLR associated with melting ice sheets and warming of the oceans. This will be exacerbated by continued increase in GHG emissions into the future, contributing to melting ice sheets in the Antarctic, with resultant SLR of 2–3 m in the next 2000 years if warming is limited to 1.5°C [4]. South Africa has experienced an annual SLR of approximately 1.71 mm since the 1990s, while the IPCC Synthesis report projects a global SLR of 0.18 m/annum for a low emissions scenario and 0.23 m/annum for a high emission scenario, for the year 2050 [20].
South Africa’s coastline, of approximately 3751 km, includes the South Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean, resulting in varied climatic conditions, environmental conditions, and coastal developments [20, 51]. Despite the variability, most of the coastline has something to offer, making it sought after. This variability results in regional differences, which would influence future projections, as there is no “one-size fits all.” The implementation of adaptation plans linked to different scenario projections would also be subject to regional differences in the form of local government structures and resources. Johnston et al. [51] state that in a sustainability-focused scenario of 2°C rise in temperature, the eastern parts of SA are projected to have increased rainfall and reduced number of cyclones of higher intensity. SLR is set to increase, with a projected 90 cm increase with very high GHG emissions or a projected 50 cm increase in a very low GHG emission scenario. Despite efforts to reduce the impacts of climate change in coastal regions, the trajectory of negative consequences has been set in motion, but these impacts may be alleviated through mitigation and adaptation management strategies. Damages associated with SLR under a low-emission scenario may result in annual costs in the region of 306 million EUR or 815 billion EUR under high-emission scenario by 2050. In contrast, by 2100, the low-emission projected costs are 1.3 billion EUR and high-emission projection of 2.4 to 3.3 billion EUR [20]. This illustrates the alarming increase in costs associated with continuing with “business as usual.”
High-emission scenarios are projected to have far-reaching consequences for the near to long-term future. Mitigation and adaptation measures to reduce such impacts of climate change on coastal communities will require significant planning and investment. Investment in such measures should link to the SDGs to achieve sustainable solutions for various scenarios, such as national and disaster risk reduction strategies. Climate change must be mainstreamed in national policies, strategies, and plans, along with general public awareness and capacity building in officials and decision-makers. South Africa currently has legislation covering climate change (Climate Change Act 22 of 2024) and disaster risk management (Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002), “aligned with international best practice” [52].
4. Implications for policy development
Considering the projected increase in climate-related impacts, there is a growing urgency for policies to protect tourism infrastructure and enhance the resilience of vulnerable communities. The adoption of sustainable tourism practices is encouraged [39, 40, 46] while exploring the implementation of collaborative governance involving multiple stakeholders, including local communities, industry players, and policymakers, is crucial for undertaking effective adaptation strategies. Angelstam et al. [36] advocate that enhancing collaborative governance and fostering partnerships between local communities, policymakers, and private sectors is key strategy proposed to drive sustainable development and adaptation measures. The authors recommend active adaptive management, which involves iterative learning and evidence-based policy adjustments to respond to ongoing environmental changes effectively.
The literature by Claassens et al. [46], Cooper and Green, [40] and de Wit et al. [48] underscore the necessity for comprehensive policy frameworks that address the cumulative effects of coastal development. There is a critical demand for baseline data to inform policy decisions, guiding future infrastructure projects in a manner that balances development and ecological sustainability, through integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) approaches and adaptive coastal management policies. Van Niekerk et al. [42] affirm the importance of integrated coastal zone management that considers both the socioeconomic and environmental aspects of estuary management, therefore, the call for policies that focus on climate resilience, such as coastal protection measures, habitat restoration, and sustainable resource management practices. These include integrating coastal infrastructure planning with climate adaptation planning strategies, promoting sustainable tourism practices, and considering nature-based solutions such as dune restoration to mitigate erosion, and policies that strengthen the capacity of local communities to adapt to changing environmental conditions [19, 40, 42, 46, 48]. Policies need to focus on promoting sustainable development practices that incorporate climate resilience, particularly in informal settlements where the urban poor often live. The outcomes of the study by Tauhid and Zawani [19] stress the need for policies to integrate green infrastructure into urban planning. For example, infrastructures, such as green roofs, urban wetlands, and permeable pavements, help absorb and manage stormwater, reducing flood risks.
Policymakers are encouraged to promote community participation, ensuring that the solutions are tailored to local needs and are sustainable over time. In effect, the policy development process must prioritize community participation, integrating local knowledge and fostering multi-sector partnerships. This implies that local governance structures need to be more inclusive and capable of addressing the needs of vulnerable communities. Williams et al. [17] advocate for the involvement of residents in flood risk management, as they possess crucial knowledge about local vulnerabilities that can inform better decision-making [32]. On the contrary, Fitchett et al. [44] assert that local perceptions of climate risks are often disconnected from scientific predictions. For instance, many accommodation proprietors are aware of the threats posed by climate change, but there is limited proactive adaptation, with responsibility frequently placed on the government, despite its capacity limitations. This gap between perceived and actual risk highlights the need for more robust policy frameworks that integrate scientific data with local perceptions and provide tangible climate-resilient adaptation strategies. According to Goble et al. [53] and van Niekerk et al. [42], the coastal management, in South Africa, has evolved drastically, moving from sector-based management to an integrated and holistic approach. The government has implemented frameworks like the National Coastal Management Program (NCMP) to better address coastal risks, including those linked to climate change and flooding. This has led to improved policy development aimed at reducing vulnerabilities in coastal communities, especially in the face of rising sea levels.
Policy development initiatives highlight the need for interdisciplinary approaches, involving local governments, communities, and environmental experts. Strengthening institutional capacities, improving flood resilience, and incorporating environmental and social justice into tourism planning are critical for long-term sustainability. The systematic review by Sultana et al. [34] underscores the integration of local adaptation practices into formal policy frameworks, promoting risk-informed nature-based solutions and community-driven initiatives [54]. The underlying principle is that policies need to be adaptive and flexible, addressing both short-term impacts and long-term risks associated with climate change. Additionally, policies must recognize the social values and cultural practices of informal communities, which can enhance adaptive capacity and resilience [35].
Studies by Dube et al. [45], Ebhuoma et al. [10], and Quinn et al. [30] advocate for a more integrated approach to policy development, focusing on proactive flood risk management strategies. They suggest that tourism policies should incorporate climate adaptation measures to protect infrastructure and ensure the safety of tourists. This includes early warning systems, “investment in climate-resilient infrastructure, transparent management of public resources” [54], and comprehensive disaster response plans. Ebhuoma et al. [10] explore the various structural and non-structural measures applied by eThekwini Municipality to enhance flood resilience. However, the literature raises barriers to communication as an enduring gap to effective early warning systems. For instance, during the 2019 floods, the failure to use preferred communication channels like social media reduced the effectiveness of early warning systems. To improve flood resilience, the study recommends enhancing community engagement, particularly with marginalized groups, to tailor interventions effectively. The adoption of inclusive communication strategies using a mix of traditional media (radio, TV) and digital platforms (social media) could increase the reach and effectiveness of early warnings. The authors also support the notion of integrated policy frameworks that align disaster risk reduction with broader urban development goals, contributing to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 11, which aims for inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable cities. In essence, addressing the economic and social impacts of flooding in Durban requires a multi-faceted approach that includes improving infrastructure, enhancing community preparedness, and developing targeted policies that support vulnerable populations. In addition, transparent risk communication is critical in preparing adequately for management of residual risks [23].
Quinn et al. [30] investigate on how community attachments to local waterbodies, such as rivers and lakes, influence flood risk perception and management preferences. It reviews the role of symbolic and emotional connections in shaping risk decisions. People’s attachment to landscapes, including economic and cultural ties, can hinder preparedness and risk management efforts, especially in high-risk areas. Policymaking should integrate local knowledge and perceptions to enhance community engagement and the acceptance of flood management measures. Regarding policy implications to address rising sea level risk factors, Dube et al. [55] report that policies should focus on sustainable adaptation measures, including the construction of seawalls, beach nourishment, and the restoration of natural barriers such as dunes and wetlands. Equally important is taking strategic actions in enhancing community awareness and involvement in climate adaptation planning to ensure the resilience of the tourism sector. Engaging local communities in adaptation planning and providing education on the impacts of climate change can help align public efforts with sustainable tourism practices. There is also a need for better data collection and monitoring systems to effectively predict and respond to sea level changes. Some of the barriers to effective climate governance were explored in a study by Adom et al. [7]. These included lack of funding, poor investment in climate change, and poorly trained, inadequately qualified and skilled professionals to implement policies and programs to address climate governance issues. This requires adequate resources and funding to be addressed as part of adaptation planning and residual risk management.
5. Residual risk management and the SDGs
Risks associated with flooding may seriously compromise progress toward achieving the sustainability agenda. Flood risk associated with vulnerable communities exacerbates the current dire situation in many countries in the Global South, where poverty, food insecurity, and compromised wellbeing are part of daily life. Hence, it is critical that potential risks that persist beyond the implementation of protection measures are managed to reduce further suffering and loss. Climate change adaptation is critical in achieving the SDGs, but reducing the impacts of flooding, among other climate risks, requires planning [10]. This may require finding opportunities in potential negative impacts and being proactive in implementing activities, policies, and programs to reduce negative impacts of floods. Table 1 below explores the opportunities that are linked to the negative consequences associated with flood events.
| SDG No. | SDG description | Consequences of flood events and associated opportunities to reduce residual risk and contribute to the SDGs | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | No poverty | Loss of livelihoods, compounded by forced temporary or permanent displacement. | Development and implementation of policies that address mitigation measures to protect vulnerable communities. |
| 3 | Good health and wellbeing | Diseases due to sewage infrastructure failures. | Strengthen health systems to manage residual risks early; training of personnel; ensuring adequate resources are available, which may provide additional employment opportunities. |
| 6 | Clean water and sanitation | Extensive damage to sewage and water infrastructure compromises water quality. | Equip communities with more robust infrastructure or temporary services in the event of infrastructure being compromised; create awareness among communities relating to these issues, especially impact of water quality on health. |
| 8 | Decent work and economic growth | Impacts on livelihoods and economy. | Work with communities to establish the possible entrepreneurial opportunities, such as nature-based solutions to prevent coastal erosion. |
| 9 | Industry innovation and infrastructure | Damage to infrastructure. | Opportunity for the development of adaptation measures to reduce residual risk; development of ecological infrastructure [36]. |
| 10 | Reduced inequalities | Loss of livelihoods; lack of resources to recover timeously. | Partnerships to bridge the divide facilitating coping mechanisms, linked to SDG17. Government budget allocation to address recovery from loss of livelihoods |
| 11 | Sustainable cities and communities | Migration to urban areas and settlement in unsuitable landscapes [8]. | Restoration of functional ecological infrastructure [36]. Provision of more robust building materials or robust dwelling design to replace unsafe informal dwellings. |
| 13 | Climate action | Social, environmental, and economic sectors’ resilience to climate adaptation compromised. | Use lessons learned to revise adaptation planning and improve mitigation measures. |
| 14 | Life below water | Coastal ecosystems disrupted. | Use of nature-based solutions to ensure ecosystem resilience to climate change. Dune stabilization and regulations to control coastal developments. |
| 15 | Life on land | Terrestrial ecosystems disrupted and resilience to further disruptions compromised. | Investing in ecological infrastructure to maintain resilient ecosystems and provide ecosystem services. |
| 16 | Peace and justice strong institutions | Contravention of the rule of law results in people settling in vulnerable environments [8]. | Creating a wider awareness of climate change and the activities that contribute to exacerbated flood risk associated with climate change. |
| 17 | Partnerships for the Goals | Inadequate budget allocation and resources for flood disasters at different tiers of government, and across government and private sectors. | More partnerships required to ensure faster recovery period and pooling of resources. |
Table 1.
6. Lessons learned, conclusion, and recommendations
The resounding message from Grab and Nash [9] in their study on KZN indicated that the scale of the floods experienced in KZN, South Africa, in 2022, is likely to recur and possibly be of a larger magnitude. Although the aid provided by government and non-government organizations was significant, it would be preferable to reduce the suffering in the aftermath of such EWEs. Hence, proactive planning is critical to manage and reduce residual risks. In summary, the salient lessons learned and recommendations on flood risk management policy development drawn from the literature reviewed include the necessity of promoting transdisciplinary knowledge production and social learning among diverse stakeholders to bridge existing gaps in understanding and action. Strengthening resilience depends heavily on collaboration across sectors, from disaster risk management to sustainable tourism practices. The authors Angelstam et al. [36] and Goble et al. [53] advocate for scaling up research and development projects that integrate ecological and social insights, facilitating investments in green infrastructure. Practical recommendations involve prioritizing conservation and landscape restoration initiatives that align with broader sustainability goals. By fostering collaboration across different scales and sectors, authorities can better manage residual risks and enhance the resilience of vulnerable communities against climate-related impacts.
Claassens et al. [46] heighten the focus on regulatory frameworks to oversee coastal developments and prevent
In further enhancing coastal monitoring and urban resilience planning [40, 48, 55], justifying the importance of investing in sustainable infrastructure, and fostering community involvement in resilience planning through a multi-dimensional approach [23], integrating economic, social, and natural capital considerations, is critical. The understanding is that prioritizing ecological conservation and promoting multi-stakeholder collaboration can protect coastal economies and ecosystems against future climate impacts. Collaborative efforts between government bodies, the tourism industry, and local communities [23] to effectively manage and mitigate the impacts of SLR warrant much attention, stressing the need for long-term monitoring of coastal changes and the implementation of early warning systems to minimize economic disruptions. Equally important is for policy makers to reinforce local governance mechanisms, incorporating climate risk assessments into adaptive urban planning, and fostering stakeholder collaboration in driving climate resilience. This is coherently endorsed by Dube [39] in the description of adaptive management in tourism planning. Proactive measures, such as diversifying tourism products and services, can help reduce dependence on vulnerable coastal areas. Additionally, the integration of climate change education into tourism planning can raise awareness and encourage the adoption of more sustainable practices. Dube recommends that future research should focus on identifying specific adaptation strategies tailored to the unique needs of different tourism destinations, particularly in regions highly susceptible to climate impacts. In effect, there needs to be a deliberate shift in how tourism is managed, providing for greater consideration of climate resilience in tourism policies to safeguard economic interests and support sustainable development. The outcomes of the study undertaken by Dube et al. [55] propose collaborative efforts between government bodies, the tourism industry, and local communities to effectively manage and mitigate the impacts of SLR.
In the same vein, Dube et al. [45] postulate enhancing collaborative efforts between disaster management authorities, park management, and local communities to build resilience, through integration of stakeholder engagement in decision-making processes to develop sustainable tourism strategies that mitigate flood risks and reduce possible residual risks. Addressing the economic and social impacts of flooding in South Africa requires a multi-faceted approach that includes improving infrastructure, enhancing community preparedness, and developing targeted policies that support vulnerable populations [10, 44]. Quinn et al. [30] clarify the importance of integrating local knowledge into flood risk management to foster effective, community-driven, and culturally responsive policies. As highlighted by Ebhouma et al. [10], mental health of communities following flood events requires attention, to help them cope with the devastation, loss, and displacement. This embraces a more holistic approach to residual risk management. The authors espouse for a paradigm shift in flood management strategies, from relying solely on traditional infrastructure to incorporating nature-based solutions [6]. This approach not only mitigates flooding but also enhances urban resilience, biodiversity, and social equity, making it a multifaceted strategy for sustainable urban development. The lessons learned underscore the importance of collaborative governance, adaptive policies, and investments in green infrastructure to address the complexities of urban flooding, especially in vulnerable communities. Strengthening institutional capacities, improving flood resilience, incorporating scientific projections, local knowledge, and practical adaptation strategies to safeguard and sustain human well-being, tourism, and coastal livelihoods are vital in preparing for future disasters as we anticipate an increase in EWEs.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the contribution of Research Interns, Nondumiso Mokwena and Maphili Khumalo in the initial literature searches, whereafter the authors refined and screened the results and analyzed the literature.
References
- 1.
Kron W. Flood risk hazard values vulnerability. Water International. 2005; 30 (1):58-68 - 2.
CDRF. Climate & Disaster Resilience Fund. South Africa: Climate & Disaster Resilience Fund; 2024. Available from: https://climateresiliencefund.org.za/ - 3.
Agbehadji IE, Schütte S, Masinde M, Botai J, Mabhaudhi T. Climate risks resilience development: A bibliometric analysis of climate-related early warning Systems in Southern Africa. Climate. 2023; 12 (1):3 - 4.
IPCC. Summary for policymakers. In: Core Writing Team, Lee H, Romero J, editors. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC; 2023 - 5.
Wang H-W, Castro DS, Chen GW. Managing residual flood risk: Lessons learned from experiences in Taiwan. Progress in Disaster Science. Jun 2024:100337 - 6.
CSIR. Flooding: Current state and implications of climate change on flooding in South Africa. In: GreenBook National Overview. Pretoria, South Africa: Council for Scientific and Industrial Research; 2019. Available from: https://pta-gis-2-web1.csir.co.za/portal/apps/GBCascade/index.html?appid=33d9a846cf104e1ea86ba1fa3d197cbd - 7.
Adom RK, Simatele MD, Das DK, Mukalazi KA, Sonwabo M, Mudau L, et al. Enhancing climate change adaptation governance through transforming institutions in Kwa-Zulu Natal Province, South Africa. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management. 2024; 16 (4):413-438 - 8.
Dube K, Nhamo G, Chikodzi D. Flooding trends and their impacts on coastal communities of Western Cape Province, South Africa. GeoJournal. 2022; 87 (Suppl. 4):453-468 - 9.
Grab SW, Nash DJ. A new flood chronology for KwaZulu-Natal (1836-2022): The April 2022 Durban floods in historical context. South African Geographical Journal. 2024; 106 (4):476-497 - 10.
Ebhuoma EE, Nene NJ, Leonard L. Analysis of urban households’ preparedness and municipal interventions to build flood resilience in Durban, South Africa: Implications for SDG 11. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators. 2024; 23 :100454 - 11.
Mudefi E. Disaster management ‘deeds’ in the context of April 2022 KwaZulu-Natal floods: A scoping review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2023; 98 :104122 - 12.
Aswani S, Howard J, Gasalla MA, Jennings S, Malherbe W, Martins I, et al. An integrated framework for assessing coastal community vulnerability across cultures, oceans and scales. Climate and Development. 2019; 11 (4):365-382 - 13.
Oddo PC, Lee BS, Garner GG, Srikrishnan V, Reed PM, Forest CE, et al. Deep uncertainties in sea-level rise and storm surge projections: Implications for coastal flood risk management. Risk Analysis. 2020; 40 (1):153-168 - 14.
Cartwright A. Coastal Vulnerability in the Context of Climate Change: A South African Perspective. Cape Town: Centre for Criminology; 2011 - 15.
Cea L, Costabile P. Flood risk in urban areas: Modelling, management and adaptation to climate change. A review. Hydrology. 2022; 9 (3):50 - 16.
Welisiejko S, Cáceres B. Informal Settlements: No Longer Invisible. The Role of Impact in Scaling Capital Mobilisation to Fund Slum-Upgrading Programmes Globally. London, UK: The Global Steering Group for Impact Investment; 2022 - 17.
Williams DS, Máñez Costa M, Celliers L, Sutherland C. Informal settlements and flooding: Identifying strengths and weaknesses in local governance for water management. Water. 2018; 10 (7):871 - 18.
Lunga W, Nkosi M, Tirivanhu P, Madzivhandila T, Ramaphakela T, Majikijela Y, et al. Strengthening disaster risk resilience through enhanced coordination mechanisms at local level in flood hazard prone areas: Case study of KwaZulu-Natal province. In: Pretoria, South Africa: HSRC DCES Report. HSRC; 2023 - 19.
Tauhid F, Zawani H. Mitigating climate change related floods in urban poor areas: Green infrastructure approach. Journal of Regional and City Planning. 2018; 29 :98 - 20.
CMCC. G20 Climate Risk Atlas. Impacts, Policy, Economics. South Africa: CMCC; 2024. Available from: https://www.g20climaterisks.org/south-africa/ - 21.
Frazier TG, Wood EX, Peterson AG. Residual risk in public health and disaster management. Applied Geography. 2020; 125 :102365 - 22.
RSA. Climate Change Act 22 of 2024. Government Gazette No 50966. Pretoria, South Africa: Parliament of the Republic of South Africa; 2024 - 23.
Hartmann S, Pedoth L, Dalla Torre C, Schneiderbauer S. Beyond the expected—Residual risk and cases of overload in the context of managing alpine natural hazards. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science. 2021; 12 (2):205-219 - 24.
UNDRR. Residual Risk: Switzerland: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. 2024. Available from: https://www.undrr.org/terminology/residual-risk - 25.
Busayo ET, Kalumba AM, Afuye GA, Olusola AO, Ololade OO, Orimoloye IR. Rediscovering South Africa: Flood disaster risk management through ecosystem-based adaptation. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators. 2022; 14 :100175 - 26.
Bwambale B, Nyeko M, Muhumuza M, Kervyn M. Questioning knowledge foundation: What is the best way to integrate knowledge to achieve substantial disaster risk reduction? International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2020; 51 :101850 - 27.
Ajtai I, Ștefănie H, Maloș C, Botezan C, Radovici A, Bizău-Cârstea M, et al. Mapping social vulnerability to floods. A comprehensive framework using a vulnerability index approach and PCA analysis. Ecological Indicators. 2023; 154 :110838 - 28.
Busayo ET, Kalumba AM. Recommendations for linking climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction in urban coastal zones: Lessons from East London, South Africa. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2021; 203 :105454 - 29.
Lockwood C, Munn Z, Porritt K. Qualitative research synthesis: Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. JBI Evidence Implementation. 2015; 13 (3):179-187 - 30.
Quinn T, Bousquet F, Guerbois C, Heider L, Brown K. How local water and waterbody meanings shape flood risk perception and risk management preferences. Sustainability Science. 2019; 14 :565-578 - 31.
Breen MJ, Kebede AS, König CS. The safe development paradox in flood risk management: A critical review. Sustainability. 2022; 14 (24):16955 - 32.
Zhou L, Kori DS, Sibanda M, Nhundu K. An analysis of the differences in vulnerability to climate change: A review of rural and urban areas in South Africa. Climate. 2022; 10 (8):118 - 33.
Prashar N, Lakra HS, Shaw R, Kaur H. Urban flood resilience: A comprehensive review of assessment methods, tools, and techniques to manage disaster. Progress in Disaster Science. Oct 2023:100299 - 34.
Sultana T, Islam MR, Mustafa FB, Sim JOL. A systematic review of coastal community adaptation practices in response to climate change-induced tidal inundation. Journal of Coastal Conservation. 2022; 26 (4):32 - 35.
Mclachlan J, Tanyanyiwa CT, Schneuwly R, Carden K, Armitage NP, Abrams A, et al. Pathways to water resilient south African cities–from mono-functional to multi-functional stormwater infrastructure. Scientific African. 2023; 20 :e01674 - 36.
Angelstam P, Barnes G, Elbakidze M, Marais C, Marsh A, Polonsky S, et al. Collaborative learning to unlock investments for functional ecological infrastructure: Bridging barriers in social-ecological systems in South Africa. Ecosystem Services. 2017; 27 :291-304 - 37.
Kamara JK, Akombi BJ, Agho K, Renzaho AM. Resilience to climate-induced disasters and its overall relationship to well-being in southern Africa: A mixed-methods systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2018; 15 (11):2375 - 38.
Muyambo F, Belle J, Nyam YS, Orimoloye IR. Climate-change-induced weather events and implications for urban water resource management in the free state province of South Africa. Environmental Management. 2023; 71 (1):40-54 - 39.
Dube K. Evolving narratives in tourism and climate change research: Trends, gaps, and future directions. Atmosphere. 2024; 15 (4):455 - 40.
Cooper JAG, Green AN. Southern African sandy coasts in the context of near-future sea-level rise. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa. 2023; 78 (3):149-166 - 41.
Guastella LA, Rossouw M. Coastal vulnerability: What will be the impact of increasing frequency and intensity of coastal storms along the south African coast. Reef Journal. 2012; 2 :129-139 - 42.
Van Niekerk L, Lamberth SJ, James NC, Taljaard S, Adams JB, Theron AK, et al. The vulnerability of south African estuaries to climate change: A review and synthesis. Diversity. 2022; 14 (9):697 - 43.
Rodina L, Harris L, Ziervogel G, Wilson J. Resilience counter-currents: Water infrastructures, informality, and inequities in Cape Town, South Africa. World Development. 2024; 180 :106619 - 44.
Fitchett JM, Grant B, Hoogendoorn G. Climate change threats to two low-lying south African coastal towns: Risks and perceptions. South African Journal of Science. 2016; 112 (5-6):1-9 - 45.
Dube K, Nhamo G, Chikodzi D, Chapungu L. Mapping and evaluating the impact of flood hazards on tourism in south African national parks. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism. 2023; 43 :100661 - 46.
Claassens L, de Villiers N, Waltham N. How developed is the south African coast? Baseline extent of South Africa’s coastal and estuarine infrastructure. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2022; 222 :106112 - 47.
Lumbroso D, Vincent K, Murambadoro M, Steynor A, Tsarouchi G, Nezi M. Current uses and potential future needs for climate services in South Africa. Climate Services. 2024; 36 :100516 - 48.
de Wit M, Rawlins J, Petrie B. Economic risk assessment of climate change at the city level. The case of Cape Town, South Africa. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development. 2023; 15 (1):118-140 - 49.
Tanoue M, Taguchi R, Alifu H, Hirabayashi Y. Residual flood damage under intensive adaptation. Nature Climate Change. 2021; 11 (10):823-826 - 50.
Lunga W, Nkosi M, Chirima G, Madzivhandila T, Ratshiedana P, Ramaphakela T, et al. Developing an Early Warning System to Strengthen Disaster Risk Resilience: Experiences from Flood-Prone Areas of KwaZulu-Natal Province. Research Square Preprint; 2023 - 51.
Johnston P, Egbebiyi TS, Zvobgo L, Omar SA, Cartwright A, Hewitson B. Climate Change Impacts in South Africa: What Climate Change Means for a Country and its People. South Africa: University of Cape Town; 2024 - 52.
STATSSA. Sustainable Development Goals Country Report 2023. South Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: Statistics South Africa; 2023 - 53.
Goble BJ, Lewis M, Hill TR, Phillips MR. Coastal management in South Africa: Historical perspectives and setting the stage of a new era. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2014; 91 :32-40 - 54.
Muyambo F, Belle J, Nyam Y, Orimoloye I. Building resilience to multiple climate change-related risks in QwaQwa using the community capitals approach. Journal of Water and Climate Change. 2024; 15 (8):3431-3449 - 55.
Dube K, Nhamo G, Chikodzi D. Rising sea level and its implications on coastal tourism development in Cape Town, South Africa. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism. 2021; 33 :100346