PDF file (2.44 MB) - Asia Pacific Adaptation Network

36Parallel Sessions 3: Institutional and Economic Aspects of Climate Change Impacts and AdaptationParallel Session 3BHousehold Economic Losses:A Case Study of Thailand’s 2011 FloodOrapan Nabangchang Srisawalak, PhDSenior Economist, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast AsiaThe paper examined the nature of the economic losses of households (HHs) during Thailand’s 2011flood, considered to be the worst to hit the country in the last 70 years. The study also looked at theextent to which the availability of information (i.e., via smart phones, internet, and mass media) hadany effect on actions people took to prevent or reduce their losses.Interviews were conducted with 589 HHs (middle andlow income) in the worst hit neighbourhoods of Bangkok(Don Muang) and the adjacent provinces of Nonthaburi(Bang Bua Thong) and Pathum Thani (Klong Luang). Thestudy explored actions people took before the flood,direct and indirect costs incurred during the flood, andexpenses they expected to incur after the flood receded.Major findings are as follows:• HHs with higher expenditures, more valuablehouses, and more cars incurred significantlymore losses because they had more assets atrisk.• Even after controlling for socioeconomicfactors, differences in neighbourhood effectswere statistically significant. For instance,household losses in both middle and lowincome neighbourhoods in Bang Bua Thong(higher depth + faster speed in water level rise)were higher than in Klong Luang (lower depth +slower water level rise).• District-level flood warnings were notsignificant in any of the ex post lossmodel specifications that controlled forneighbourhood effects.Evacuating household appliances and pets during the 2011Bangkok flood• Internet use: Heavy internet use is associated with reduced losses even in areas with deepfloodwaters and received little warning; many of the heavy internet users were in B.B.Thong.Dr. Srisawalak noted that World Bank estimated the total losses and damages at USD47 billion forthe three sites. Findings of this study were about 180% to 310% higher than the WB estimates dueto inclusion of other expenditures such as preventative action costs, other specific expenses incurredduring and after the flood, flood-related health care costs, and HH contributions to the community.International Conference on Climate Change Impactsand Adaptation for Food and Environmental SecurityConference Summary Report