Policy Change and Learning in Response to Extreme Flood Events in Hungary: An Advocacy Coalition Approach

Abstract

In an analysis of the 200‐year history of flood management in Hungary, I use the advocacy coalition framework and the focusing event literature to examine what policy change occurs and what is learned as a result of experiencing extreme and damaging flood events. By analyzing the policy response to a series of extreme floods (1998–2001) in this newly democratizing nation, I attempt to identify the factors that influenced the occurrence of policy change and policy‐oriented learning. In 2003, Hungary enacted a comprehensive flood management program that included economic development and environmental protection goals, a distinct departure from Hungary's historical structural approach to flood management. However, it is less clear that long‐lasting changes in belief systems about how floods should be managed have occurred. In this analysis, I argue that processes external to the flood policy subsystem (e.g., process of democratization and Hungary's accession to the European Union), along with the occurrence of the extreme flood events, enabled a coalition of individuals and organizations to press for policy change.

Overcoming social barriers to learning and engagement with climate change adaptation: experiences with Swedish forestry stakeholders

“…Results also support studies showing that personal experiences with extreme natural events can motivate people to take action to lower the risks from natural hazards (Brody 2009;Albright 2011;Kreibich et al 2011) Stakeholders from Kronoberg, especially, were motivated to learn and engage with climate change adaptation when they linked the scientific knowledge discussed with the focus groups to their own recent experiences with storm risks. However, the adaptive measures taken by stakeholders who fit that profile focused almost exclusively on addressing risks that they had already experienced, not new risks that might arise in the future.…”

Learning processes, public and stakeholder engagement: Analyzing responses to Colorado’s extreme flood events of 2013

“…These overlapping concepts of learning may encourage adaptation of local policies to increase the resilience of communities faced with risk from extreme events. There are several potential driving factors that may explain variation in learning in response to extreme events: extent of flood damage, resource availability (e.g., financial, technical, human capacity), structure and openness of decision-making processes, and type of stakeholder participation in recovery (Brody, 2003;Johnson et al, 2005;Brody et al, 2009;Albright, 2011;Vulturius, 2013). Researchers argue that collaboration and collaborative processes are key components to the formation of the development of resilient cities .…”

“…Communities may identify policy failures or draw new conclusions about relationships, networks, and organizational structure (organizational learning). Policy learning -changes of beliefs, attitudes, goals, or behaviors -in response to new information may occur in response to extreme events (Sabatier and Weible, 2007;Albright, 2011). These overlapping concepts of learning may encourage adaptation of local policies to increase the resilience of communities faced with risk from extreme events.…”

“…Groups and individuals who are not considered political elites or experts may be able to influence political discourse in more open, collaborative processes-which may in turn lead to policy learning (Albright, 2011). Communities with more open and democratic participatory processes may display a greater depth and extent of policy learning.…”

“…Technical, network and financial resources are often necessary to foster capacity development for local or community-based management-an approach that includes in-depth local-level stakeholder participation (Steelman and Carmin, 2002), whereas a lack of capacity may discourage communities from involving a wider selection of stakeholders and in-depth deliberation in decision-making processes. In the aftermath of an extreme event, we may see increased resources (e.g., inflow of external funds or emergent leadership) and/or the redistribution of resources including financial and technical resources, access to decision makers and decision-making authority, mobilization of supporters, and public opinion (Sabatier and Weible, 2007;Albright, 2011). These shifts in resources after an event may influence how and to what extent local governments chose to incorporate stakeholders in their recovery processes.…”