Como comunicar o risco de inundação aos ocupantes do prédio?

Agree with this. The approach has to also build trust be inclusive and not be a one off event. The best approach is often where you can work with the people in the building or street, that your audience know and trust. These are not 'self appointed' community leaders but individuals good engagement can find.

Understanding the audience is key to providing flood solutions as this can be affected by people's age, dexterity, life styles and appetite for risk. Landlords care about the fabric of the building & tenants more so on the contents whereas owner occupies are focused on both so very different messages for all

Agree, it is difficult to say which is more effective and what prompt will work with people you are targeting. I would emphasise again - try using existing groups - rather than creating a new 'crowd'.

Messaging is a key obstacle for flood mitigation practitioners. They are all SMEs with minimal marketing budgets so it befalls other bodies - insurers, government, property investors and NGOs to promote solutions and practical independent advice.

Resources should always be available after an engagement exercise but they only support decision making. Try not re-invent the wheel, use what is out there, but do curate the list so that it is appropriate to the people and location. Remember also that not everyone is online and even those people that are may not trust what they read. Be aware also that after a flood, 'men-in-vans' often appear to offer services to repair, recover and install property flood resilience measures. Bad experiences with these people affects trust with everyone (Trading standard team may help)

It's not just about actionable advice, it's also about explaining risk. If people perceive a 1 in 100 year or a 1 in 75 year event to be a low risk they still won't take any steps to mitigate the risk. Jargon is our biggest obstacle here. People don't understand the above return periods, even when expressed at %. They always seem so low (1%, 1.3%, is low - right?) Explaining that your home could flood 2 or three times during the time of your mortgage and you could be out of your home for many months is a more understandable explanation for most people

Absolutely. They have to be part of the whole process from identifying the risk, agreeing on the risk mitigation measures and then maintaining them. If the recipient of the flood solution is not involved from day one, it is unlikely that the project will be a success over the long term and fall into disrepair. This applies to small scale property solutions and large scale capital projects equally.

Case studies are a valuable resource for explaining risk assessment, risk management and risk reduction by showing practical applications of solutions, their impacts and outcomes.

The real issue with communicating risk to building owners is inertia. A study by Norwich Union (now Aviva) highlighted that properties will flood 3 times before owners will take action; that attitude hasn't changed in the 10 yrs since this study as people are still not proactive. Insurers (i.e. FloodRe) could help this by offering flood resilient payments PRIOR to a flood. They know where all 350k High Risk Properties are. Establishing a fund over a 10 year plan to address these would drive the industry to become more self sufficient, encourage new product development & address the lack of resources during the aftermath of flood events. FloodRecover (TM) is a piecemeal approach to resilience focused on the critical elements of the property