Floods can be approached at a given location with two different concepts in mind: defending against floods or adapting to floods (Saurí-Pujol et al., 2001) (further, the option of mitigation exists, but this is a rather long-term and large-scale approach). First, resistance-based flood protection is the traditional approach to flood risk; second is resilience, which is linked with the concept of flood risk management. Flood protection usually requires dykes, technical flood protection measures, and strong water management institutions with technical skills; resilient flood risk management asks for comprehensive and integrative concepts, encompassing many stakeholders and asking for collaboration at various levels. The advantage of resistance-oriented flood protection is that it facilitates using protected land efficiently without the necessity of making compromises because of the flood risk. However, this approach has boundaries and constraints when flood risk increases, protection measures fail, or extreme floods occur. Thus, complementary resilient flood risk management is necessary, which comes with costs for adaptation and compromises for land use, but allows for coping much better with the management of increasing risk and extreme events because it reduces vulnerabilities.
DOCUMENT
Financially vulnerable consumers are often associated with suboptimal financial behaviors. Evaluated financial education programs so far show difficulties to effectively reach this target population. In our attempt to solve this problem, we built a behaviorally informed financial education program incorporating insights from both motivational and behavioral change theories. In a quasi-experimental field study among Dutch financially vulnerable people, we compared this program with both a control group and a traditional program group. In comparison with the control group, we found robust positive effects of the behaviorally informed program on financial skills and knowledge and self-reported financial behavior, but not on other outcomes. Additionally, we did not find evidence that the behaviorally informed program performed better than the traditional program. Finally, we discuss the findings and limitations of this study in light of the financial education literature and provide implications for policymaking and directions for future research.
MULTIFILE
