Floods and heatwaves – why resilience, adaptation and integration must inform landlords’ asset strategy

Affected residents often suffer long-term mental impacts, too, which can affect their ability to work, causing repercussions for rent arrears and other debt, for many years after the event.

While less visible than floods, heatwaves are even more devastating in terms of human impact.

Heat-related excess deaths in summer 2022 were a record 4,500 (Office for National Statistics). 

2023 was the hottest year on record, yet 2024 temperatures are already predicted to far surpass both previous years.

While an unseasonably mild February relieved fuel poverty, the prospect of scorching summer temperatures, exacerbated by the El Niño effect, could lead to record deaths, as vulnerable residents struggle to deal with sustained temperatures in overheating homes. 

So, is your organisation mandating overheating risk assessments to the same degree as underheating/fuel poverty risk?

If future headlines castigate social landlords for hundreds of excess deaths, will this be another moment when everyone talks about ‘lessons learned’ and vows to set up another taskforce? 

Indeed, are these lessons we need to learn, or can the sector get on the front foot and focus on mitigation not remorse?

Although it may seem like another call on diminishing budgets, climate resilience and adaptation can, and must, be considered within a holistic asset management approach.

Data is king, and a reasonable starting point is to analyse existing data to identify homes with vulnerable occupants and to conduct desk surveys to know which homes, especially south or west-facing and certain construction types, will be at the highest risk of overheating, or indeed flood risk, over the next five years.

Increasingly boards are acknowledging that linear or siloed approaches (dealing with one issue/crisis at a time) are not resource or cost-efficient and, importantly, can cause intervention fatigue with occupants who may stop co-operating after multiple disruptions.

Instead, risk matrices (for fire safety, damp and mould, fuel poverty, overheating, flood risk etc) can be weighted so priority is given to homes with multiple risks and/or the most vulnerable tenants, for a ‘one-touch’ approach.

Additionally, this can be overlaid with data on significant works that are due, including decency and replacement roofs, doors and windows, so that major programme consolidation becomes business as usual.

The economies of scale and resource efficiency of integrated asset strategy is undoubted, but you may wish to undertake some business case analysis to evidence this more precisely for your organisation.

A highly integrated approach will require considerate leadership if those who have been tasked with focusing on crises like fire safety or damp and mould, with carefully curated and costed plans, are asked to refocus into a multi-solution approach.

It could lead to considerable internal frustration so there needs to be an incredibly open and collaborative process with your teams to ensure a smooth transition so that resilience and climate mitigation is integrated into plans as soon as possible.

Creating comparable approaches with costed plans for siloed versus integrated strategies is crucial to demonstrate to existing taskforce teams that a multi-solution approach will safeguard more people than a linear approach.

This buy-in will be essential to ensure aligned and supportive asset management teams can be deployed for greatest impact.

Sarah Daly, associate director, sustainability, Turner & Townsend