Although fair compensation is not the focus of this paper, it is an important and highly contentious element of any buyout program (Frimpong et al., 2019). The amount of money offered, and how it is offered to homeowners, can greatly impact homeowner perception of a program’s fairness, and therefore its social licence and viability within the community (Thistlethwaite et al., 2020; Seebauer & Winkler, 2020). For instance, Seebauer & Winkler (2020) discovered that low participation rates in an Austrian buyout program were, in part, related to the compensation offered; one participant said that they could repair their home ten times over with the amount of buyout money offered (Seebauer & Winkler, 2020). In the Chatham-Kent ESD case, all participants stressed the importance of finding a fair, objective and impartial way to determine property value and calculate compensation if a buyout program was offered. High housing prices in Southern Ontario mean many ESD residents likely could not afford equivalent waterfront properties elsewhere in the region even if they were to receive fair market value, considering the vast differences in market prices (Participant 3, 2021; Participant 6, 2021). As emphasized by Seebauer & Winkler (2020), this is likely a key point of resistance to accepting a buyout. Therefore, finding creative funding strategies and associated relocation opportunities will be crucial to creating a program homeowners find fair and acceptable. Participants identified the following elements which are, in their opinions, important to creating fair compensation mechanisms: 1) The calculation process should be transparent and publically accessible; 2) criteria should be impartial, with a specific rationale for the values and methods used; and, 3) the municipality must manage expectations throughout the process. This way, the process of determining property value and offers will at least be open and accountable. Combined with other strategies, such as relocation assistance and broader community support through financial and emotional counselling (Freudenberg et al., 2016), home value may become a less crucial concern for homeowners. Alternatively, insurance may provide an avenue for funding buyouts, and was referenced as a desirable option by Participants 1, 2 and 4 (2021). As of July 2021, Public Safety Canada has received national funding to renew the National Disaster Mitigation program, and is working to develop Canadian private flood insurance solutions for high risk homes (Public Safety Canada, 2021). While insurance may form a key element of future flood risk reduction in Canada (Davies, 2018; Craig, 2019), it is beyond the scope of this paper to review its potential role in buyouts. It should also be noted that Canada convened a Task Force on Flood Insurance and Relocation in 2020, and this task force is working to “develop a national action plan to assist homeowners with potential relocation for those at the highest risk of repeat flooding” (Public Safety Canada 2021).
3.2 Agencies potentially involved in buyouts must communicate clearly and facilitate meaningful public participation Researchers such as Binder et al., (2020) cite inconsistent or altogether absent communication as both a source of uncertainty and confusion, and a major failing of buyout implementation (Binder & Greer, 2016; Dachery-Bernard et al., 2019; Binder et al., 2020; Seebauer & Winkler, 2020; Thistlethwaite et al., 2020). For example, following Hurricane Sandy, residents in two separate buyouts – the Oakwood Beach and Mastic Beach buyouts – reported that inconsistent and contradictory information was shared with them (Binder & Greer, 2016; Freudenberg, Calvin, Tolkoff & Brawley, 2016; Binder et al., 2020). As a result, homeowners expressed continued frustration, experiences of being in ‘limbo’ and a loss of agency in their lives (Binder et al., 2020).
13
