Country report england and wales



Download 2.43 Mb.
Page27/31
Date conversion17.07.2018
Size2.43 Mb.
1   ...   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31

It should be noted that the experience at the worst time and the worst time scores would account for much of the vulnerability that remained in the long term. However, here the analysis was undertaken excluding the worst time scores as a predictor in order to examine what other explanatory factors might emerge. Other factors were of some significance. Prior health was one continuing influence. Post event factors, problems with insurers, evacuation and the time taken to get back to normal remained in the analysis affecting recovery. Gender and age do not feature in this model although gender and age differences were of some significance in vulnerability in the short term as measured by the worst time GHQ12 of flooding suggesting differential resilience and recovery with age and gender. One new and to some extent surprising factor was area house prices. These exerted a significant if small adverse effect on long term vulnerability with higher area prices areas associated with higher GHQ12 current scores

In the model of factors explaining the stress of the flood event itself, flood characteristics featured as explanatory factors with the number of main rooms flooded as well as contamination of flood waters. However as in the other models, problems with insurers and loss adjustors were major contributory factors in stress experienced and the level of uninsured losses had some influence. Two variables related to the dwelling and area characteristics of households were included in this model. Renting and living in low house price areas both had an adverse effect on levels of stress experienced in the flood (Table 6.23). Unexpectedly, being in the highest social grade groups (AB) was a predictor of higher stress levels and living alone was a predictor of lower stress levels. The £ value of uninsured losses and problems with insurers and loss adjustors were post –event predictors of higher stress levels.

When the overall severity of the flood event was modelled (Table 6.23), broadly similar predictors emerged. Three flood characteristics were significant factors: the contamination of flood waters, and the depth and extent of flooding to the home.
Table 6.23: Post-event factors social, dwelling and flood event characteristics and the stress and overall severity


Stress of the event on the household

Number of cases 611, R2 = .303, R2 = .291 (adj)





Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t

Sig.

B

Std. Error

Beta





(Constant)

2.774

.405




6.842

.000

Problems with insurers/loss adjustors (1= no effect to 10= extremely serious effect)

.209

.031

.242

6.730

.000

Number of main rooms flooded


.433

.115

.142

3.782

.000

Contaminated flood waters


1.449

.264

.191

5.478

.000

Area house prices


.265

.067

.140

3.960

.000

Rented accommodation


1.126

.331

.120

3.398

.001

Gender

-.510

.208

-.085


-2.448

.015

Living alone

-.497

.236

-.074

-2.107

.035

Social grade AB

-.540

.266

-.072

-2.034

.042

Uninsured £ losses (as ln. U = 1)


.069

.035

.069

1.977

.049



Overall severity

Number of cases 611, R2 = 0.304, R2 = 0.293 (adj)




Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t

Sig

B

Std. Error

Beta







(Constant)

3.668

.477




7.685

.000

Number of main rooms flooded

.414


.103

.151

4.007

.000

Contaminated flood waters


1.053

.238

.154

4.426

.000

Problems with insurers/loss adjustors

.194

.028

.249

7.024

.000

Evacuation

.973

.213

.175

4.571


.000

Gender

-.617

.187

-.113

-3.299

.001

Time to get back to normal


.010

.003

.106

2.959

.003

Area house price rating


.186

.062

.108

3.012

,003

Maximum depth main room flooding



.004

.002

.081

2.089

.037

Prior health

-.162

.085

-.066

-1.909

.057




1   ...   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31


The database is protected by copyright ©hestories.info 2017
send message

    Main page