4.1 Households' characteristics
The author made a record of household sizes, age, marital status, the gender distribution of household heads, and length of residence to understand the characteristics of the households concerning this topic.
Of the 204 household representatives interviewed, 55 per cent of them are female, and 45 per cent of them are male. According to Terpstra and Lindell, gender indirectly influences the decision to respond to a hazard, and women are more likely than men to perceive risk and hazard-related characteristics (Terpstra & Lindell, 2013). Research from Serbia perceived men as being more prepared for flooding and appeared to have more confidence in their ability to handle it. Women, however, showed a greater understanding of flood events. Perhaps due to a deeper understanding, women displayed more attitudes toward taking care of the home (Cvetković et al., 2018). Contrary to earlier studies, the higher number of female heads does not have any noticeable positive impact on the flood response in the study areas. This outcome could be due to the existing socio-economic and gender inequality.
The mean age of respondents is 39.8 years. Previous literature shows that how old an individual is has a relationship with their physical capabilities, agility and activeness of response in case of an emergency. The older the age, the more the possibility of acquiring flood experience. The downsides, however, come as a result of the natural process of ageing, in which most people (mostly from 65 and above) physical activeness starts to drop, resulting to lower mobility and agility (HelpAge International, 2015).
In comparison, younger populations are active, but most lack the experience of the aged. According to a study on German citizens living near the Rhine and Danube rivers, households with older members had more trouble completing efficient emergency procedures than those with younger members (Thieken et al., 2007). The mean age of respondents can be considered to have a combination of experience and agility. However, this does not have any noticeable influence on flood response in the study areas.
Sixty per cent of respondents are married, 18 per cent are single, 16 per cent are widows/ widowers, 5 per cent are divorcees, and 1 per cent are separated. In a prior study conducted in Accra, Ghana, marital status was linked to acting in more protective ways than non-protective ways (Twerefou et al., 2020). In contrast to Accra, most household members in a marital union in Portee and Rokupa do not show evidence of flood protective behaviours.
The field result shows that most (44 per cent) households have four members, followed by households with six members, 37 per cent of households have five members, 10 per cent are single-member households, and 14 per cent have more than seven and above household members. A household with more members and inadequate resources can stress the available resources and increase household vulnerability. On the other hand, a larger household size with strong social networks and resources can improve the total household's ability to respond to flooding (John, 2020). Most (44 per cent) households with four members do not show any positive effect on households' capability in flood response. Observations show that 14 per cent of households with seven or more members live in dense household spaces and are therefore open to suffering more consequences from flooding, such as the faster transmission of water-borne sickness caused by flood-polluted water.
The field results revealed that most household members (70.59 per cent) have resided in their places for more than five years, while 8.82 per cent of households have lived there for between 3 to 4 years. The rest have been living in their households for less than three years. The length of stay of these people in flood-prone areas can be related to their experience with flooding and their incapability or unwillingness to leave these dangerous areas.
4.2 How do households get information, prepare, and evacuate during floods?
Most (53 per cent) of the respondents get information about a flood event by word of mouth. Eighteen per cent stated that they get disaster information through radios, phone calls, SMS, etc. 15 per cent of respondents get flood information through social media communication channels, such as WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, etc. (Fig. 2A).
A previous study on the urban slum communities in the Indian Himalayan city of Dehradun shows that information limitations negatively affect how people respond to and cope with disasters (Pandey et al., 2018). In contrast to the study areas, household inhabitants in Mombasa's informal settlements rely primarily on the radio for information about potential flooding disasters (Okaka & Odhiambo, 2019). Most respondents getting flooding information by word of mouth in Portee and Rokupa shows a widespread lack of flood information, which gives inhabitants less time to prepare for flood events.
The fieldwork occurred during the rainy season, the period in which flood events mostly take place. Against this backdrop, respondents were asked whether they were prepared to evacuate to a safer place in case a flood occurs that poses a risk to the safety of their households. Sixty per cent reported that they were not prepared, 18 per cent said they were ready, and 23 per cent were unsure about their preparation status (Fig. 2B).
The majority not ready to evacuate to safety (even if the need arises) indicates the possibility of this set of people being trapped in catastrophic flood events.
Interviewees were further asked whether they had a safe place they could temporarily go to during a disastrous flood event (Fig. 5). Fifteen per cent of households confirmed that they have a temporary safe area, and 41 per cent reported that they do not have anywhere to go for safety in case the need arises. Most households not having a secure location to evacuate to during an emergency could be linked to other probable factors such as availability, distance and accessibility, as well as cultural or religious beliefs regarding a potential temporary evacuation place.
Households were also asked about the number of vulnerable persons they must worry about during evacuation (Fig. 6). The author refers to vulnerable persons during evacuation as persons at and above 65 and below ten years of age, persons with hearing or sight problems, pregnant women, persons with mental health problems, people with frequent episodes of seizures and the mobility impaired. Of the 204 households interviewed, 77 per cent reported having a vulnerable person(s) to worry about during an evacuation, while the remaining reported not having any. The average number of vulnerable household persons is 3.1.
4.3 Humanitarian aid
Humanitarian aid in times of distress is necessary to sustain life and keep the vital functions of a household running. The author inquired to know from where households can rely on support when in need.
The results show that the majority (83.2 per cent) of those interviewed do not consider themselves to have any reliable humanitarian aid source. A low number (0.5 per cent) considered community-based organizations reliable sources of aid, and no one stated the reliability of a relative within the community. 10.6 per cent considered government/ public institutions a reliable humanitarian aid source, while 4.8 per cent of households considered both local and international non-governmental organizations a reliable source of aid in the event of a flood disaster. The interviewees' responses were based on their past experiences of support received trust and feelings of reliability about the sources of support mentioned (Fig. 3).
In contrast to Portee and Rokupa, research in Da Es Salam reveals that 77 per cent of flood-prune urban slum households received support from various sources, while only 23 per cent received no support (John, 2020). Also, a study by Adelekan shows that 75.3 per cent of respondents who lived in impoverished coastal urban households in Nigeria get help from family and friends during flood disasters. While only 10.8 per cent of surveyed individuals said, they had received government support (Adelekan, 2010). Similarly to Adelekan's findings, 10.6 per cent of respondents in the study areas mentioned the government as a reliable aid source.
These findings indicate widespread low support from governments in coastal urban slum households, which implies hopelessness and abandonment of their fate. This issue can be linked to the limited capability of the responsible institutions to provide support, or the notion that additional assistance will make slum dwellers feel more at ease about continuing to live in such risky environments.
4.5 The role of community-based organizations in flood management
The communities' inhabitants organize themselves for local actions through community-based organizations (Table 1). The author took a record of the role of these organizations in flood response and management. All the 12 organizations interviewed stated they are clearing drainages, putting sandbags, and other flood barriers during flood disasters, and nine said they are engaged in community sensitization. Only 1 CBO stated that it is involved in identifying problems (Fig. 4A). Some of these organization’s primary roles are not in flood management, but indicated that they have to take part in flood management to protect their communities.
Table 1
Community-based organizations and their roles in flood management.
CBO | Site | Position of interviewee | Clearing drainages, putting sandbags and other flood breakers | Organizing community people and resources during flood emergencies | Help people during evacuation | Provide humanitarian relief items | Help rebuild destroyed homes and common assets | Problem identification | Community Sensitization |
Destiny sisters social club | Portee | Public relations officer | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | Yes |
Solar city organization | Portee | Senior Member | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | Yes |
Seaside rangers social club | Portee | Public relations officer | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | No |
Young stars' social club | Portee | Secretary | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | No |
Estate family social club | Portee | Senior Member | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | Yes |
Community health workers' Organization | Portee | Director | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
Heaviest fashion social club | Rokupa | Chairman | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes |
Sabenti Organization | Rokupa | Secretary-General | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes |
Moyen organisation | Rokupa | Member | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes |
To me, to you Organization | Rokupa | Senior Member | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | No |
One family organization | Rokupa | Chairlady | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | Yes |
Fashion models' social club | Rokupa | Chairperson | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | Yes |
A more significant number (58 per cent) of the organizations reported that they have never received support from the government, NGOs or INGOs. The number of organizations that confirm being supported by the government, NGOs/ INGOs, reported that they have been receiving funding, training, cleaning tools, and medical items support for their activities.
Table 2
Summary of CBOs and their support from external sources.
CBOs | Supports received |
One Family Organization | Funding | | |
To me to you, Organization | Funding | Cleaning tools | |
Moyen Organization | Funding | Training | |
Community Health Workers Organization | Funding | Training | Medical items |
Estate Family Social Club | Funding | Training | |
Sea Side Rangers Social Club | Funding | | |
Destiny Sisters Social Club | Training | Funding | |
The Freetown City Council requires that all CBOs be registered to gain official recognition so that officers can monitor their activities to comply with the local government act. All the organizations interviewed reported that they are officially registered to perform their respective functions. The registration status of a CBO can influence whether a government or NGO/ INGO would wish to establish a relationship with it during operations.
Unlike the organizations interviewed in Portee and Rokupa that asserted to be fully registered, many of the community-based organizations in the informal coastal neighbourhood of Glefe in Accra were formed following floods and are not acknowledged by local authorities. They only speak up during and after significant flooding incidents or when they mobilize to interact with local officials (Amoako & Inkoom, 2018).