共 50 条
Governance models for nature-based solutions: Seventeen cases from Germany
被引:41
|作者:
Zingraff-Hamed, Aude
[1
]
Huesker, Frank
[2
]
Albert, Christian
[3
]
Brillinger, Mario
[3
]
Huang, Joshua
[1
]
Lupp, Gerd
[1
]
Scheuer, Sebastian
[4
]
Schlaetel, Mareen
[3
]
Schroeter, Barbara
[5
]
机构:
[1] Tech Univ Munich, Chair Strateg Landscape Planning & Management, Emil Ramann Str 6, D-85354 Freising Weihenstephan, Germany
[2] Helmholtz Ctr Environm Res, Permoserstr 15, D-04318 Leipzig, Germany
[3] Ruhr Univ Bochum, Inst Geog, Univ Str 150, D-44805 Bochum, Germany
[4] Humboldt Univ, D-10099 Berlin, Germany
[5] Leibniz Ctr Agr Landscape Res, Working Grp Governance Ecosyst Serv, Eberswalder Str 84, D-15374 Muncheberg, Germany
来源:
基金:
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词:
Financing instruments;
Flood risk mitigation;
Institutional structures;
Polycentric governance;
River Management;
Stakeholder participation;
URBAN;
MANAGEMENT;
FRAMEWORK;
BENEFITS;
D O I:
10.1007/s13280-020-01412-x
中图分类号:
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号:
08 ;
0830 ;
摘要:
Nature-based solutions (NBS) for mitigating climate change are gaining popularity. The number of NBS is increasing, but research gaps still exist at the governance level. The objectives of this paper are (i) to give an overview of the implemented NBS for flood risk management and mitigation in Germany, (ii) to identify governance models that are applied, and (iii) to explore the differences between these models. The results of a hierarchical clustering procedure and a qualitative analysis show that while no one-size-fits-all governance model exists, polycentricism is an important commonality between the projects. The study concludes by highlighting the need for further research on traditional governance model reconversion and paradigm changes. We expect the findings to identify what has worked in the past, as well as what is important for the implementation of NBS for flood risk management in future projects.
引用
收藏
页码:1610 / 1627
页数:18
相关论文