PR 00274: verschil tussen versies

Geen bewerkingssamenvatting
Geen bewerkingssamenvatting
Regel 20: Regel 20:
* Multi-actor: government, private companies, NGOs, citizens.
* Multi-actor: government, private companies, NGOs, citizens.
'''3 How is flood risk management organized in my country?'''
'''3 How is flood risk management organized in my country?'''
''Table 1: Comparison of flood risk governance arrangements (FRGAs), adapted from {{Cite|resource=Bestand:Comparison-of-countries.pdf|name=Matzcak et al., 2016:72|dialog=process-file-dialog}}, completed for Germany and Denmark by using {{Cite|resource=Bestand:Buijs et al 2018.pdf|name=Buijs et al., 2018|dialog=process-file-dialog}}.''
{| class="wikitable"
!Characteristics of governance
!Belgium
!Germany
!Denmark
!the Netherlands
!United Kingdom
|-
|Diversification & dominance
|Moderately diversified, defence  still important
|High diversified, focus on  defence
|Highly diversified, focus on  defence
|Low diversification, defence  dominant
|Highly diversified, quite  balanced
|-
|Multi-sector
|Water sector and spatial planning  gaining equal importance; water sector still important
|Multi-sector involvement &  integrated by spatial planning
|Multi-sector involvement (landowners  and farmers have a say; landowners do not pay)
|Water sector dominant
|Multi-sector involvement &  integrated by spatial planning
|-
|Multi-actor
|Public (state dominant)
|Public (state and federal states)  dominant
|Public & private
|Public (state dominant)
|Public & private
|-
|Multi-level
|Decentralised, tendency towards  centralisation
|Central guidance & decentralization  to federal state & local level
|Central guidance & ongoing  decentralization to local level
|Both central and regional level
|Central and local level
|}


'''4 What is the desired situation in relation to the flood risk challenges for the region?'''
'''4 What is the desired situation in relation to the flood risk challenges for the region?'''

Versie van 18 sep 2019 11:48

Roadmap.jpg

The FRAMES Decision Support System, or DSS, can be used as a road map with the following 10 questions to help involved authorities identify how governance relates to the resilience of flood prone areas.

1 What is the flood risk (sea, river, rainfall) and which are the flood risk challenges in your region?

Typical challenges for areas:

  • Coastal flooding as main challenge (Zeeland, Denmark)
  • Fluvial flooding and coastal flooding/influence  (Alblasserwaard, Wesermarsch)
  • Fluvial flooding (UK pilots, Belgium pilots)
  • Pluvial flooding: surface water flooding

When this is not clear, please make use of the following tools

  • Flood risk maps delivered for the EU Flood Directive
  • Pilots: Scenario’s and other forecasting techniques to define future challenges
  • Pilots: IPCC reports and national adaptation strategies

Discuss flood risk scenarios and define challenges for resilient areas and communities with relevant stakeholders

2 What is the emphasis of the current FRMS applied in your area?

  • Apply multilevel and multi-actor to discuss regional flood risk management strategies
  • Multilevel: EU, national, regional, local
  • Multi-actor: government, private companies, NGOs, citizens.

3 How is flood risk management organized in my country?

Table 1: Comparison of flood risk governance arrangements (FRGAs), adapted from Matzcak et al., 2016:72, completed for Germany and Denmark by using Buijs et al., 2018.

Characteristics of governance Belgium Germany Denmark the Netherlands United Kingdom
Diversification & dominance Moderately diversified, defence still important High diversified, focus on defence Highly diversified, focus on defence Low diversification, defence dominant Highly diversified, quite balanced
Multi-sector Water sector and spatial planning gaining equal importance; water sector still important Multi-sector involvement & integrated by spatial planning Multi-sector involvement (landowners and farmers have a say; landowners do not pay) Water sector dominant Multi-sector involvement & integrated by spatial planning
Multi-actor Public (state dominant) Public (state and federal states) dominant Public & private Public (state dominant) Public & private
Multi-level Decentralised, tendency towards centralisation Central guidance & decentralization to federal state & local level Central guidance & ongoing decentralization to local level Both central and regional level Central and local level

4 What is the desired situation in relation to the flood risk challenges for the region?

5 What are potential MLS-actions to enhance the flood resilience of your region?

Overview of actions based on analysis pilot activities

  • Linked to MLS layers
  • Linked to area context to apply actions: coastal, fluvial, pluvial
  • Linked to Diversification of Governance context to apply actions (or adaptation of FGRA required): low, medium, high
  • Pilots can be used as examples

6 What is the impact of potential (spatial) actions on systems and sectors in the region?

Make sure to harmonize impact assessments with the national adaptation strategies

7 Who should be involved and what level should participation be?

  • Stakeholder analysis examples by project
  • Link to FRGA to support stakeholder analysis
  • Analysis of multilevel and multi-actor setting, including participation level, during pilot implementation
  • Analyse differences between pilot implementation and FRGA

8 How can the implementation process for MLS-pilots be organized?

There are three types of pilot implementation processes:

  • Goal oriented (Reimerswaal, …)
  • Participatory process oriented (UK)
  • Planning process oriented (DAPP Denmark)

Differences are mainly based on the governance context, the organization in the lead in the pilot and the role in the FRGA.

9 What are potential barriers and success factors in the implementation of MLS actions and how can these be dealt with considering up-scaling of pilot results?

10 Which capacities are key to foster adaptation towards a more diversified flood risk management strategy?

  • Analysis of adaptive capacities lacking, employed or emerging in pilots studies, based on pilot processes
  • Provides on a more abstract level to decision-makers which capacities are needed for planning, implementation and up-scaling of MLS
  • Roadmap for capacity building for pilots to become successful working on diversified FRM

Make sure to interview decision-makers about adaptive capacities