Every time Australia is hit by a major flood, the same questions surface. Could anything have been done to reduce the damage? Most importantly, what can Australian homeowners do to better prepare for the next flood?
Spinifex is an opinion column. If you would like to contribute, contact us to ask for a detailed brief.
According to the Climate Council of Australia, more than two million Australian homes are exposed to flooding, contributing to an estimated $42.2 billion decline in residential property values. The Insurance Council of Australia puts the number even more starkly: about 225,000 homes across Australia face severe or extreme flood risk, corresponding to at least a 2 per cent or 5 per cent annual chance of flooding, yet only 23 per cent of these homes are estimated to have flood cover.
The floods across regional Victoria in 2022 showed how quickly lives can be turned upside down. Floodwaters swept through many communities, such as Rochester, Shepparton and Seymour, flooding 5017 homes and commercial properties and leaving many residents facing months of recovery. In Rochester alone, almost all dwellings were affected in some way during the 2022 floods. In Seymour, more than 250 homes and businesses were flooded above floor level during the October 2022 event.
Although rebuilding has continued, many existing homes remain vulnerable to future flooding, and relatively few have been retrofitted to withstand the next event better.
Preparing before the next flood, not just recovering after it
Historically, Australia’s flood management efforts have focused on emergency response and post-disaster recovery. Governments invest heavily in repairing damaged infrastructure, supporting affected communities, and rebuilding homes. Necessary work, but work that treats the symptom rather than the underlying risk.
One practical approach is flood resilient retrofitting, which modifies existing homes to reduce flood damage and improve their ability to recover more quickly after an event.
These measures are well established rather than novel, including elevating homes where appropriate, raising electrical outlets, incorporating water resistant building materials, installing backflow prevention devices, relocating essential services above expected flood levels, and improving site drainage.
Together, they can substantially reduce flood damage and speed recovery after future flood events. However, even with these solutions available, homeowners’ adoption of flood-resilient retrofits remains surprisingly low.
What is this research about?
Retrofitting has clear, well-documented benefits. So why does uptake remain so low? A new RMIT University study set out to identify the strategies that could help close the gap. Researchers surveyed 150 homeowners across flood prone Shepparton, Seymour and Rochester, interviewed 12 local authority representatives and 11 building and construction professionals, and surveyed 113 residential property valuers.
Across the three locations surveyed, 84-90 per cent of households reported having experienced riverine flooding. However, only 14-24 per cent had implemented even one floodproofing measure. Repeated flooding, it turns out, does not automatically translate into investment in property-level resilience.
What are the findings telling us?
The barriers shifted from town to town, but financial ones topped the list everywhere. High upfront costs, thin financial incentives and ongoing cost-of-living pressure all discouraged retrofitting. Governments provide substantial post-disaster assistance, but funding for preventive retrofitting remains scarce – leaving many households to simply delay. Technical barriers were also pronounced.
Flood resilient retrofitting demands specialised knowledge of local flood behaviour and appropriate construction methods, and many homeowners have nowhere reliable to turn for that advice, which erodes confidence in making a major investment.
Awareness varied too: Rochester recorded higher awareness than Shepparton and Seymour, yet even there, retrofit uptake stayed low. Household surveys repeatedly surfaced insurance concerns – rising premiums, affordability, and uncertainty over whether retrofitting would actually move the needle on future insurance outcomes. Behavioural factors also contribute, with many homeowners underestimating future flood risk and questioning whether lower insurance premiums or higher property values would offset retrofit costs.
Interviews with local authorities highlighted the important role of local councils and catchment management authorities in flood planning, hazard mapping and technical advice. However, they noted that a lack of coordination between government authorities, coupled with limited funding and legislative authority, constrains support for retrofitting existing homes.
Construction professionals similarly observed that while many flood resilient retrofit measures are technically feasible, their effectiveness depends on property specific solutions supported by appropriate technical expertise. Residential valuers, meanwhile, recognised that climate resilience is becoming an increasingly important factor in property valuation.
However, they identified ongoing challenges in consistently reflecting flood resilient retrofits in valuations, citing limited comparable market evidence, evolving professional guidance, and uncertainty about how buyers value resilience improvements. Collectively, these barriers appear to shape homeowners’ reluctance to invest in flood retrofitting measures for their existing homes.
What needs to change?
Fixing this can’t be left to homeowners alone. Governments, local councils, insurers, property professionals, the construction industry and homeowners themselves all have a role in determining whether resilience investment becomes affordable, practical and worthwhile. That means a genuine shift – from funding disaster recovery to promoting and funding disaster prevention.
Interviews and surveys consistently show that no single organisation can drive widespread retrofitting alone, indicating the need for coordinated action across government, industry, and communities. The table below summarises the key strategies identified across this research, who is best placed to lead them, and the support needed to make retrofitting a viable and normal part of home ownership.
Table: Strategies to encourage flood retrofitting in existing homes
| Strategy | Responsible party | Support needed |
| Reduce upfront financial barriers through retrofit grants, low interest loans and targeted incentives. | Governments | Shift in funding priorities from post disaster recovery to preventive investment |
| Provide practical, property-specific technical guidance and access to qualified professionals. | Local councils | Simplified, localised technical information to build homeowner confidence |
| Offer greater transparency on how resilience measures affect premiums and risk assessments. | Insurers | Clearer links between retrofitting and tangible insurance benefits |
| Integrate flood resilience into renovation, maintenance and property investment advice. | Property professionals | Industry-wide normalisation of retrofitting as routine property care |
| Adopt flood-resilient methods and materials as standard practice in construction and renovation work. | Construction professionals | Specialised knowledge of local flood behaviour and appropriate construction methods |
| Incorporate flood-resilient retrofit improvements into residential valuation practice. | Property valuers | Professional guidance, improved market evidence and standardised approaches for assessing resilience improvements. |
| Act on available information and invest in retrofitting their homes | Homeowners | Clearer information, financial assistance and confidence that investment will pay off |
| Translate awareness into action through education and demonstration of successful measures. | Community organisations / all stakeholders | Coordinated campaigns combining awareness, financial support and technical advice |
The findings consistently show that no single measure can drive widespread retrofitting alone. Financial assistance, technical guidance, insurance incentives and professional advice must operate together. The insurance sector can encourage retrofitting by being upfront about how resilience measures influence premiums and risk assessments, giving homeowners stronger financial incentives to invest. Construction professionals can support wider adoption by delivering property specific retrofit solutions.
Property professionals can integrate flood resilience into everyday advice on renovation, maintenance and long-term investment. This helps normalise retrofitting as part of routine property ownership, not an emergency response after the water recedes. Residential valuers can also contribute by recognising flood resilience improvements more consistently in valuation practice. This will require stronger market evidence and clearer professional guidance. Homeowners consistently said that awareness alone is not enough without tangible help. To translate awareness into action, community education must be complemented by accessible technical advice, financial support and visible examples of effective retrofits.
Australia has built real capability in emergency management and disaster response. The next frontier is disaster prevention. Existing homes will keep housing millions of Australians for decades to come, which makes flood resilient retrofitting today an investment in more resilient communities tomorrow. Most homeowners aren’t opposed to making their homes more resilient – they need clearer information, practical support, and confidence the investment will be worth it.
The question is no longer whether Australia should invest more in residential flood resilience. It’s how quickly governments, insurers, property professionals and communities can make retrofitting business as usual – rather than another recommendation issued after the next flood has already hit.
