72 C Lucas and T Young
Greater Hobart is the capital of the Australian island state of Tasmania.
Although it has a temperate climate, Tasmania is located in the ‘Roaring
forties’ – the strong prevailing winds of the southern hemisphere – and its weather
is famously changeable. Hobart is at high risk of bushfire, and its position at the
foot of kunanyi/Mount Wellington makes it prone to flash flooding.
Greater Houston is at the forefront of urbanisation and climate change.
The region has been devastated by storm and flood events for over a century,
including the deadliest hurricane in US history – the Galveston Storm of
1900. More recently, the metropolitan region has been impacted by Tropical
Storm Allison (2001), Hurricane Ike (2008), and major floods in 2015 and
2016. In August 2017, Hurricane Harvey soaked the region, bringing record
rainfall and property damage.
The United States and Australia also have different insurance contexts.
Flooding is the costliest disaster in the United States, with damages increasing significantly in the last few decades (Thomas & Leichenko 2011). In the
first half of the 20th century, private insurers left the market as flood losses
mounted across the United States (Knowles & Kunreuther 2014). In 1968, the
United States government created the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) to subsidise premiums for homeowners and incentivise communitylevel investment in flood management – helping communities and households to bounce-back faster after a flood (Thomas & Leichenko 2011).
Australia is subject to periodic flooding both from storm-related events
and cyclones, and from catchment-wide rains across extensive floodplains.
As a continent it has the greatest annual variability in rainfall and runoff,
and often experiences long periods of drought, so floods can come as a surprise (Wenger et al. 2013). Australia has long taken a market-led approach
to disaster insurance, and flood cover has historically been included in a
minority of household insurance policies. In some parts of the country,
including large parts of northern Australia, flood insurance is either unavailable or unaffordable. This reflects an industry standard to price insurance according to localised risk data, as well as higher numbers of extreme
events and high costs for operating in remote environments (ICA 2018a).
Non-insurance and underinsurance are widespread in Australia, in part
because of high levels of public mistrust of insurers (Tranter & Booth 2019)
and because of the trade-offs undertaken by households in their insurance
decision-making (Booth & Harwood 2016).
These differences between Hobart and Houston’s landscape, community
and insurance contexts generate distinct lived experiences of flood insurance, and thus case studies that complement one another, as well overlapping in some findings.
Hobart: Managing insurantial uncertainty
An extreme weather event on 11 May 2018 brought record-breaking rainfall of 129 mm in 24 hours, high winds, and flooding to Hobart. Almost
Greater Hobart is the capital of the Australian island state of Tasmania.
Although it has a temperate climate, Tasmania is located in the ‘Roaring
forties’ – the strong prevailing winds of the southern hemisphere – and its weather
is famously changeable. Hobart is at high risk of bushfire, and its position at the
foot of kunanyi/Mount Wellington makes it prone to flash flooding.
Greater Houston is at the forefront of urbanisation and climate change.
The region has been devastated by storm and flood events for over a century,
including the deadliest hurricane in US history – the Galveston Storm of
1900. More recently, the metropolitan region has been impacted by Tropical
Storm Allison (2001), Hurricane Ike (2008), and major floods in 2015 and
2016. In August 2017, Hurricane Harvey soaked the region, bringing record
rainfall and property damage.
The United States and Australia also have different insurance contexts.
Flooding is the costliest disaster in the United States, with damages increasing significantly in the last few decades (Thomas & Leichenko 2011). In the
first half of the 20th century, private insurers left the market as flood losses
mounted across the United States (Knowles & Kunreuther 2014). In 1968, the
United States government created the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) to subsidise premiums for homeowners and incentivise communitylevel investment in flood management – helping communities and households to bounce-back faster after a flood (Thomas & Leichenko 2011).
Australia is subject to periodic flooding both from storm-related events
and cyclones, and from catchment-wide rains across extensive floodplains.
As a continent it has the greatest annual variability in rainfall and runoff,
and often experiences long periods of drought, so floods can come as a surprise (Wenger et al. 2013). Australia has long taken a market-led approach
to disaster insurance, and flood cover has historically been included in a
minority of household insurance policies. In some parts of the country,
including large parts of northern Australia, flood insurance is either unavailable or unaffordable. This reflects an industry standard to price insurance according to localised risk data, as well as higher numbers of extreme
events and high costs for operating in remote environments (ICA 2018a).
Non-insurance and underinsurance are widespread in Australia, in part
because of high levels of public mistrust of insurers (Tranter & Booth 2019)
and because of the trade-offs undertaken by households in their insurance
decision-making (Booth & Harwood 2016).
These differences between Hobart and Houston’s landscape, community
and insurance contexts generate distinct lived experiences of flood insurance, and thus case studies that complement one another, as well overlapping in some findings.
Hobart: Managing insurantial uncertainty
An extreme weather event on 11 May 2018 brought record-breaking rainfall of 129 mm in 24 hours, high winds, and flooding to Hobart. Almost