Toward more resilient flood risk governance

被引:53
作者
Driessen, Peter P. J. [1 ]
Hegger, Dries L. T. [1 ]
Bakker, Marloes H. N. [1 ]
van Rijswick, Helena F. M. W. [2 ]
Kundzewicz, Zbigniew W. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Environm Governance Copernicus Inst Sustainable D, Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Utrecht, Sch Law, Utrecht Ctr Water Oceans & Sustainabil Law, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Polish Acad Sci, Inst Agr & Forest Environm, Poznan, Poland
[4] Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res, Potsdam, Germany
关键词
climate change; Europe; flood risk governance; flood risk management strategies; resilience; MANAGEMENT; EUROPE; ADAPTABILITY; MITIGATION; FRAMEWORK;
D O I
10.5751/ES-08921-210453
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Countries all over the world face increasing flood risks because of urbanization and the effects of climate change. In Europe, flooding is the most common of all natural disasters and accounts for the largest number of casualties and highest amount of economic damage. The current scientific debate on how urban agglomerations can be made more resilient to these flood risks includes a discussion on how a diversification, coordination, and alignment of flood risk management strategies (FRMSs), including flood risk prevention through proactive spatial planning, flood defense, flood risk mitigation, flood preparation, and flood recovery, can contribute to flood resilience. Although effective implementation of FRMSs can be considered a necessary precondition for resilience, efficient and legitimate flood risk governance can enhance this societal resilience to flooding. Governance and legal research has the potential to provide crucial insights into the debate on how to improve resilience. Yet the social sciences have only looked into this issue in a fragmented manner, often without a comparative scope. This special feature addresses this knowledge gap by focusing on the scope and workings of FRMSs, but also on cross-cutting topics such as uncertainties, distributional effects, solidarity, knowledge management, and citizen participation. The papers included in this feature are written by both policy analysts and legal scholars. The above-mentioned issues are thus approached via a multidisciplinary perspective. All papers convincingly show that one-size-fits-all solutions for appropriate and resilient flood risk governance arrangements do not exist. Governance arrangements should be tailored to the existing physical, socio-cultural, and institutional context. This requires an open and transparent debate between scientists and practitioners on the normative starting point of flood risk governance, a clear division of responsibilities, the establishment of connectivity between actors, levels, and sectors through bridging mechanisms, and adequate knowledge infrastructures, both nationally and internationally.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]  
Aerts JCJH, 2008, ECOL SOC, V13
[2]   A framework for evaluating flood risk governance [J].
Alexander, Meghan ;
Priest, Sally ;
Mees, Hannelore .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2016, 64 :38-47
[3]   Ensemble flood risk assessment in Europe under high end climate scenarios [J].
Alfieri, Lorenzo ;
Feyen, Luc ;
Dottori, Francesco ;
Bianchi, Alessandra .
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS, 2015, 35 :199-212
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2015, OECD Principles on Water Governance, P24
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2012, Changes in Flood Risk in Europe
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2016, CLIMATIC CHANGE, DOI DOI 10.1007/s10584-014-1084-5
[7]  
[Anonymous], STESASERA352 POP DIV
[8]   Major flood disasters in Europe: 1950-2005 [J].
Barredo, Jose I. .
NATURAL HAZARDS, 2007, 42 (01) :125-148
[9]  
Bates B.C., 2008, LINKING CLIMATE CHAN
[10]   Changed knowledge requirements for spatial flood governance [J].
Bergsma, Emmy .
ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 2016, 21 (04)