Background: The rise in global temperatures and the general effect of climate change, contributes to an increased flooding risk. Especially in communal safety work for Gothenburg and Karlstad, flood managing is high up on the priority list. The high level of threat that these two cities experience, is given by the fact that they are surrounded by water. The countermeasures that have taken place, must live up to the concept of sustainable development, since the primary cause of floods is climate change which has extremely long-time references. These strategies have to adapt for risks with broad time-frameworks, but this might generate other consequences of their own. This never-ending cycle of risks is a paradox called levée-effect affects human behaviour on decision-making level and also in the general public. The levée-effect causes people to feel a false sense of security behind a countermeasure for and will consequently lead to a lowered preparedness for it.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to delve into the communal work with floods countermeasures and how these reacts with the theory on the levée-effect.

Method: The method used to complete this study is a case study of specific countermeasures used to protect vulnerable places in Gothenburg and Karlstad from floods. The primary data collection has been in the form of interviews with relevant personnel from the two cities and their respective county administrative. As a complement to the interviews, a thorough content analysis of relevant communal documents has been made for the purpose of strengthen or deny the interviews. 

Results: Based on the results of the analysis, the two cities have been adapting according to a long time-references for the purpose of counter act the effects of climate change. This causes other kinds of problems though, since too long of a time-reference will cause peoples risk-awareness to be affected and the levée-effect to further show its effects. For example, society can feel way to comfortable and safe behind a countermeasure from a risk, that their preparedness towards it will lower consequently.

Conclusion: From the discussion of the study’s result, more than one conclusion can be drawn. Both Gothenburg and Karlstad, with their flood countermeasures, live up to a sustainable development which relies on a good knowledge and climate awareness. There is more than one challenge identified with this strategy which can be partially attributed to conflicts between decision-makers and other players which also affects the sustainability and safety levels of the city. Another challenge can be partially attributed to a lowered preparedness as a result of the construction of countermeasures for flood-management.