The long term psychological effect of the distress and trauma caused by the memory of damage and losses associated with flooding of communities remains an under researched impact of flooding. This is particularly important for communities that are likely to be repeatedly flooded where levels of mental health disorder will damage long term resilience to future flooding. There are a variety of factors that affect the prevalence of mental health disorders in the aftermath of flooding including pre-existing mental health, socio-economic factors and flood severity. However previous research has tended to focus on the short term impacts immediately following the flood event and much less focus has been given to the longer terms effects of flooding. Understanding of factors affecting the longer term mental health outcomes for flooded households is critical in order to support communities in improving social resilience. Hence, the aim of this study was to explore the characteristics associated with psychological distress and mental health deterioration over the longer term. The research examined responses from a postal survey of households flooded during the 2007 flood event across England. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis and binomial logistic regression were applied to data representing household characteristics, flood event characteristics and post-flood stressors and coping strategies. These factors were related to reported measures of stress, anxiety, depression and mental health deterioration. The results showed that household income, depth of flooding; having to move out during reinstatement and mitigating actions are related to the prevalence of psycho-social symptoms in previously flooded households. In particular relocation and household income were the most predictive factors. The practical implication of these findings for recovery after flooding are: to consider the preferences of households in terms of the need to move out during restorative building works and the financial resource constraints that may lead to severe mental hardship. In addition the findings suggest that support with installing mitigation measures may lead to improved mental health outcomes for communities at risk.

This study conducts a comprehensive systematic review of the economic impact of Digital Twin (DT) technology within the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry, following the PRISMA methodology. While DT adoption has been accelerated by advancements in Building Information Modelling (BIM), the Internet of Things (IoT), and data analytics, significant challenges persist—most notably, high initial investment costs and integration complexities. Synthesising the literature from 2016 onwards, this review identifies sector-specific barriers, regulatory burdens, and a lack of standardisation as key factors constituting DT implementation costs. Despite these hurdles, DTs demonstrate strong potential for enhancing construction productivity, optimising lifecycle asset management, and enabling predictive maintenance, ultimately reducing operational expenditures and improving long-term financial performance. Case studies reveal cost efficiencies achieved through DTs in modular construction, energy optimisation, and infrastructure management. However, limited financial resources and digital skills continue to constrain the uptake across the sector, with various extents of impact. This paper calls for the development of unified standards, innovative public–private funding mechanisms, and strategic collaborations to unlock and utilise DTs’ full economic value. It also recommends that future research explore theoretical frameworks addressing governance, data infrastructure, and digital equity—particularly through conceptualising DT-related data as public assets or collective goods in the context of smart cities and networked infrastructure systems.

>Flood events have far-reaching consequences, not only in economic or financial terms but also in social and health-related impacts. There is a...

Studies in the UK and elsewhere have identified that flooding can result in diverse impacts, ranging from significant financial costs (tangible) to social (intangible) impacts on households. At the same time, it is now clear that large-scale flood defence schemes are not the panacea to flood risk, and there is an increasing responsibility on property owners to protect their own properties. Hence, there is an emerging expectation for homeowners to take action in the form of investing in property level flood risk adaptation (PLFRA) measures to protect their properties. However, hitherto the level of uptake of such measures remains very low. The tangible financial benefits of investing in PLFRA measures are generally well understood and have been demonstrated to be cost beneficial for many properties at risk from frequent flooding. Importantly, these estimates tend to take little account of the value of the intangible benefits of PLFRA measures and therefore may be under estimating their full benefits. There remains a need to develop an improved understanding of these intangible benefits, and this research sets out to bridge this knowledge gap. Based on a synthesis of the literature, the contingent valuation method was selected as a means to value intangible impacts of flooding on households. A questionnaire survey of homeowners affected in the 2007 flooding was employed to elicit willingness to pay (WTP) values to avoid the intangible impacts of flooding on their households. The analysis of the questionnaire survey data revealed that the average WTP per household per year to avoid intangible flood impacts was £653. This therefore represents the value of the intangible benefits of investing in PLFRA measures and is significantly higher than previously estimated. This research builds on previous research in suggesting a higher value to the intangible impacts of flooding on households by assessing wider range of intangible impacts and focussing on more experienced individuals. Furthermore, the research indicates that factors which influence the WTP values were principally stress of flood, worrying about loss of house values, worrying about future flooding and age of respondents, with income showing a weak correlation. The establishment of a new value for the intangible impacts of flooding on households in the UK is helpful in the domain of flood risk management when evaluating the total benefits (tangible and intangible) of investing in flood protection measures, thus providing a robust assessment for decision-making on flood adaptation measures at an individual property level.

Purpose: Recently, the focus of UK and European flood risk management policy has been towards promoting the uptake of property level flood adaptation measures. Despite this focus, the take‐up of property level flood adaptation measures (both resilient and resistant) remains very low. One of the apparent barriers to uptake is the cost of installing such measures. This study aims to investigate the cost of adopting resilient reinstatement measures by considering a small number of actual properties that were flooded in Cockermouth during 2009.Design/methodology/approach: Secondary data obtained from a loss adjusting company provides the basis for analysis. The data take into consideration the cost benefit of resilient repair, assuming the same properties were flooded again. The traditional reinstatement costs were established as the actual cost of putting the properties back in a like‐for‐like manner while resilient reinstatement costs were established by creating new resilient repair schedules based on recommended good practice.Findings: The results of the study show that the percentage extra cost for resilient reinstatement over traditional repair cost ranged from 23 to 58 per cent with a mean of 34 per cent depending on the house type. However, while resilient repairs were found to be more expensive than traditional (i.e. like‐for‐like) methods, they were found to significantly reduce the repair costs assuming a subsequent flood were to take place. Resilient flood mitigation measures seem most promising and, given repeat flooding, will help in limiting the cost of repairs up to as much as 73 per cent for properties with a 20 per cent annual chance of flooding, which indicates that the up‐front investment would be recovered following a single subsequent flood event.Originality/value: The uptake of resilient reinstatement among the floodplain property owners in the UK is very low and one of the reasons for the low uptake is lack of understanding of the cost and benefit of adopting such measures. While there have been previous studies towards investigating the costs of resilient reinstatement, it is believed that this is the first to use real claims data and information to analyse the tangible costs/benefits of resilient reinstatement.

Purpose: – There has been a significant increase in flooding in the UK over the past ten years. During this time, Government policy has moved from investment in flood defences towards encouraging property owners to take responsibility for reducing the impact of flooding. One of the ways in which this can be achieved is for homeowners to adapt their properties to flood risk by implementing property level flood risk adaptation (PLFRA) measures. While there has been some attempt to develop an understanding of the benefits of such measures, these previous studies have their limitations in that the intangible benefits have not been fully considered. As such, there remains a need for further development of these studies towards developing a more comprehensive understanding of PLFRA measures. It is against this background the purpose of this paper is to present a conceptual cost benefit analysis (CBA) framework for PLFRA measure. This framework brings together the key parameters of the costs and benefits of adapting properties to flood risk including the intangible benefits, which have so far been overlooked in previous studies. Design/methodology/approach: – A critical review of the standard methods and existing CBA models of PLFRA measures was undertaken. A synthesis of this literature and the literature on the nature of flooding and measures to reduce and eliminate their impacts provides the basis for the development of a conceptual framework of the costs and benefits of PLFRA measures. Within the developed framework, particular emphasis is placed on the intangible impacts, as these have largely been excluded from previous studies in the domain of PLFRA measures. Findings: – The framework provides a systematic way of assessing the costs and benefits of PLFRA measures. A unique feature of the framework is the inclusion of intangible impacts, such as anxiety and ill health, which are known to be difficult to measure. The study proposes to implement one of the stated preference methods (SPM) of valuation to measure these impacts, known as the willingness to pay method, as part of a survey of homeowners. The inclusion of these intangible impacts provides the potential to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the benefit cost ratio (BCR) for different stakeholders. The newly developed CBA conceptual framework includes four principal components: the tangible benefits to insurers; the tangible benefits to the government; the tangible benefits to homeowners; and the intangible benefits to homeowners. Originality/value: – This tool offers the potential to support government policy concerned with increasing the uptake of PLFRA measures through increasing the information available to homeowners and thereby supporting the decision-making process.