Participatory geographic information systems and public engagement within flood risk management

White, Iain; Kingston, Richard; Barker, Adam

doi:10.1111/j.1753-318x.2010.01083.x

Cited by 72 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to several authors (Steinführer et al 2009, Watson et al 2009, White et al 2010, codelivery should be accompanied by enhanced participation opportunities in the decision-making process. This would be an argument for more comprehensive forms of coproduction.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the involvement of civil society in FRM decision making has been widely analyzed (e.g., Tippett 2005, Petts 2007, Koontz 2014, OECD 2015, this is less so for citizen engagement in the implementation of FRM, e.g., the installment of PLP measures. Only a limited number of authors in the general public participation literature consider this phase in their analysis (e.g., Macnaghten and Jacobs 1997, White et al 2010, Nye et al 2011, OECD 2015.…”

Section: Coproducing Flood Risk Management Through the Inclusion Of Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coproducing flood risk management through citizen involvement: insights from cross-country comparison in Europe

Mees¹,

Crabbé²,

Alexander³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Across Europe, citizens are increasingly expected to participate in the implementation of flood risk management (FRM), by engaging in voluntary-based activities to enhance preparedness, implementing property-level measures, and so forth. Although citizen participation in FRM decision making is widely addressed in academic literature, citizens' involvement in the delivery of FRM measures is comparatively understudied. Drawing from public administration literature, we adopted the notion of "coproduction" as an analytical framework for studying the interaction between citizens and public authorities, from the decision-making process through to the implementation of FRM in practice. We considered to what extent coproduction is evident in selected European Union (EU) member states, drawing from research conducted within the EU project STAR-FLOOD (Strengthening and Redesigning European Flood Risk Practices towards Appropriate and Resilient Flood Risk Governance Arrangements). On the basis of a cross-country comparison between Flanders (Belgium), England (United Kingdom), France, the Netherlands, and Poland, we have highlighted the varied forms of coproduction and reflected on how these have been established within divergent settings. Coproduction is most prominent in discourse and practice in England and is emergent in France and Flanders. By contrast, FRM in the Netherlands and Poland remains almost exclusively reliant on governmental protection measures and thereby consultation-based forms of coproduction. Analysis revealed how these actions are motivated by different underlying rationales, which in turn shape the type of approaches and degree of institutionalization of coproduction. In the Netherlands, coproduction is primarily encouraged to increase societal resilience, whereas public authorities in the other countries also use it to improve cost-efficiency and redistribute responsibilities to its beneficiaries.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Coproducing Flood Risk Management Through the Inclusion Of Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coproducing flood risk management through citizen involvement: insights from cross-country comparison in Europe

Mees¹,

Crabbé²,

Alexander³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These multidisciplinary studies have ranged from topics such as: identification of factors that influence the decision of the community to cooperate in disaster management (Brilly and Polic 2005;Howgate and Kenyon 2009;Lara et al 2010;Martin 2010;Das 2011); development of social resilience capacity (Bahadur et al 2010;Norris 2011;Sok et al 2011;Ashley et al 2012;Bakker et al 2012); or aspects of uncertainty linked to climate change, where participatory approaches with different stakeholders are working together to develop a common strategy by managing water resources and urbanization (Ribarova et al 2011;Burch et al 2010;White et al 2010;Samuels et al 2010;Lomas and Giridharan 2011). These studies have contributed to the development of government approaches that lead to the implementation of participatory and inclusive public policies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What do people think about the flood risk? An experience with the residents of Talcahuano city, Chile

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the province of Concepción (Chile), floods are considered one of the main natural hazards. One of the most important cities of this area is Talcahuano. During the last years, Talcahuano has been affected by a number of flood episodes, as a consequence of an increase in the frequency of extraordinary atmospheric events, along with a higher exposure to the flood risk caused by an intense urban development. On 27 February 2010, an 8.8°earthquake (Richter scale) occurred in central southern Chile and originated the tsunami which flooded a large percentage of the residential area and military base of the Talcahuano city. This flood event affected a population higher than 180,000 people (including 23 casualties and invaluable economic and environmental losses). The objective of this study is to investigate the social perception and knowledge of Talcahuano residents affected by different types of flood, including tsunami, emphasizing which are their risks, vulnerability, resilience and coping capacity concepts. In addition, the kind of measures that have been proposed to improve their capacity to face floods after having suffered the natural disaster will be determined. This social assessment has been carried out based on a survey to permanent residents. Research results reveal that their endogenous and exogenous characteristics have resulted determinant to explain their perception.

show abstract

“…The communication will further have to address the heterogeneity of the public (Martens et al 2009), foster mutual understanding and mediate between different views (Höppner et al in press). It will also be a challenge to deal with uncertainty which is inherent to risk assessment (Mostert and Junier 2009;White et al 2010). Finally, the communication will have to be specific rather than generic, which means that communication should be adjusted to the specific needs of the people (Renn 2005).…”

Section: Towards Active Flood Risk Communication?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This can be interpreted as a demand for more communication towards stakeholders (e.g. Hagemeier-Klose and Wagner 2009a;van Alphen et al 2009) and a demand for more flood risk management participation from citizens (e.g., White et al 2010).…”

Section: European Floods Directivementioning

confidence: 99%

Flood Risk Management in Flanders: Past Developments and Future Challenges

Kellens

Vanneuville

Verfaillie³

et al. 2013

Water Resour Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

o o d ri s k ma n a g e me n t i n Fl a n d e r s : p a s t d ev e l o p me n t s a n d f u t u r e c h a l l e n g e s . Wa t e r R e s o u r c e s M a n a g e m e n t , 2 7 ( 1 0 ) : 3 5 8 5 -3 6 0 6 . FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT IN FLANDERS:PAST DEVELOPMENTS AND FUTURE CHALLENGES AbstractThis paper presents the state of the art of flood risk management in Flanders, a low-lying region in the northern part of Belgium which is vulnerable to flooding. Possible flood hazard sources are not only the many rivers which pass through the Flemish inland, but also the North Sea, which is sensitive to the predicted sea level rise and which can affect large parts of the Flemish coastal area. Due to the expected increase in flood risks in the 21 st century, the Flemish government has changed its flood management strategy from a flood control approach to a risk-based approach. Instead of focusing on protection against a certain water level, the objective now is to assure protection against the consequences of a flood, while considering its probability.In the first part, attention is given to the reasoning and functioning of the risk-based approach. Recent improvements to the approach are discussed, as well as the GIS-implementation of the entire model. The functioning of the approach is subsequently demonstrated in two case studies. The second part of the paper discusses future challenges for the flood risk management in Flanders. The driving force behind these challenges is the European Directive on the assessment and management of flood risks, which entered into force in 2007. The Flemish implementation of the directive is discussed and situated in the European landscape. Finally, attention is given to the communication of flood risks to the general public, since the "availability" of flood risk management plans is among the requirements of the EU Floods Directive.

show abstract

Participatory geographic information systems and public engagement within flood risk management

Cited by 72 publications

References 8 publications

Coproducing flood risk management through citizen involvement: insights from cross-country comparison in Europe

Coproducing flood risk management through citizen involvement: insights from cross-country comparison in Europe

What do people think about the flood risk? An experience with the residents of Talcahuano city, Chile

Flood Risk Management in Flanders: Past Developments and Future Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About