Is flood defense changing in nature? Shifts in the flood defense strategy in six European countries

Abstract

ABSTRACT. In many countries, flood defense has historically formed the core of flood risk management but this strategy is now evolving with the changing approach to risk management. This paper focuses on the neglected analysis of institutional changes within the flood defense strategies formulated and implemented in six European countries (Belgium, England, France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden). The evolutions within the defense strategy over the last 30 years have been analyzed with the help of three mainstream institutional theories: a policy dynamics-oriented framework, a structure-oriented institutional theory on path dependency, and a policy actors-oriented analysis called the advocacy coalitions framework. We characterize the stability and evolution of the trends that affect the defense strategy in the six countries through four dimensions of a policy arrangement approach: actors, rules, resources, and discourses. We ask whether the strategy itself is changing radically, i.e., toward a discontinuous situation, and whether the processes of change are more incremental or radical. Our findings indicate that in the European countries studied, the position of defense strategy is continuous, as the classical role of flood defense remains dominant. With changing approaches to risk, integrated risk management, climate change, urban growth, participation in governance, and socioeconomic challenges, the flood defense strategy is increasingly under pressure to change. However, these changes can be defined as part of an adaptation of the defense strategy rather than as a real change in the nature of flood risk management.

From citizen participation to government participation: An exploration of the roles of local governments in community initiatives for climate change adaptation in the Netherlands

“…In the Netherlands, flood safety risks from the rivers and the sea have historically been dealt with through primary flood defences in the form of a large system of dikes, dunes, barriers, and sluices (Gralepois et al, 2016;Kaufmann, 2018). Due to its dominance, adaptation to flood risks from the rivers and sea is highly institutionalized and legally embedded.…”

Resilience unpacked – framing of ‘uncertainty’ and ‘adaptability’ in long-term flood risk management strategies for London and Rotterdam

“…Although keeping the system in place might prove to be a good choice, it also begs the question if representatives from governmental authorities -being part of this existing system -are able to take a broader view. Gralepois et al (2016) refer to this as the 'stickiness of the technocentric policy regime'.…”

Toward more resilient flood risk governance

“…Besides physical and geographical factors, historical flood risk management, societal and cultural norms, administrative and legal frameworks are all important factors that influence flood risk management and governance (Fournier et al 2016, Gersonius et al 2016, Gilissen et al 2016a, Gralepois et al 2016, Hegger et al 2016b, Thieken et al 2016. Contextual, historical, and contemporary flood risk debates all have implications for how policies and legal frameworks should be shaped (Hegger et al 2016a).…”

“…In the paper by Gralepois et al (2016) the flood defense strategies in six European countries (Belgium, England, France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden) are analyzed. Although they do not find radical changes in either of the countries, they do find that the defense strategy in all countries has created more room for local, private, and individual responsibilities.…”

“…Linked to the last point, diversification of flood risk management strategies needs to be accompanied by suitable investments in the development of these strategies (Fournier et al 2016, Gilissen et al 2016a, Gralepois et al 2016, Thieken et al 2016. Financial investments and other resources channeled into one strategy should not lead to underinvestment in other strategies.…”