Policy experimentation within flood risk management: Transition pathways in Austria

IF 3.6 3区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Thomas Thaler, Edmund C. Penning-Rowsell
{"title":"Policy experimentation within flood risk management: Transition pathways in Austria","authors":"Thomas Thaler,&nbsp;Edmund C. Penning-Rowsell","doi":"10.1111/geoj.12528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Flood risk management (FRM) is facing various challenges, such as climate change and biodiversity losses. Traditional structural FRM measures are now not always feasible as responses to these challenges. One answer might be the use of policy experiments to promote innovation. This paper aims to assess and to explain why innovations in FRM are rarely implemented. We analysed seven innovative strategies across Austria that combine several different approaches. Each is concerned with risk reduction systems designed to save space, time and possible rising costs. The research used 76 qualitative standardised semi-structured interviews with key FRM experts conducted between 2012 and 2021 in order to examine transition pathways through time. The results show that there exist numerous drivers and barriers to debating, designing and implementing FRM innovations. The capture of transition pathways nevertheless shows the system shift from a more traditional understanding towards a transformative path, which created new understandings of the role of the different actors in FRM as well as new institutional settings. However, these policy experiments were still led by the relevant public administrations as they are the main funders, the principal actors in the planning and implementation phases in the realisation of many of these innovations.</p>","PeriodicalId":48023,"journal":{"name":"Geographical Journal","volume":"189 4","pages":"701-714"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/geoj.12528","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geographical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/geoj.12528","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Flood risk management (FRM) is facing various challenges, such as climate change and biodiversity losses. Traditional structural FRM measures are now not always feasible as responses to these challenges. One answer might be the use of policy experiments to promote innovation. This paper aims to assess and to explain why innovations in FRM are rarely implemented. We analysed seven innovative strategies across Austria that combine several different approaches. Each is concerned with risk reduction systems designed to save space, time and possible rising costs. The research used 76 qualitative standardised semi-structured interviews with key FRM experts conducted between 2012 and 2021 in order to examine transition pathways through time. The results show that there exist numerous drivers and barriers to debating, designing and implementing FRM innovations. The capture of transition pathways nevertheless shows the system shift from a more traditional understanding towards a transformative path, which created new understandings of the role of the different actors in FRM as well as new institutional settings. However, these policy experiments were still led by the relevant public administrations as they are the main funders, the principal actors in the planning and implementation phases in the realisation of many of these innovations.

洪水风险管理中的政策实验:奥地利的过渡路径
洪水风险管理(FRM)面临着气候变化和生物多样性丧失等各种挑战。对于这些挑战,传统的结构性FRM措施现在并不总是可行的。一个答案可能是利用政策实验来促进创新。本文旨在评估和解释FRM创新很少实施的原因。我们分析了奥地利七种结合了几种不同方法的创新策略。每个项目都涉及降低风险的系统,旨在节省空间、时间和可能上升的成本。该研究在2012年至2021年期间对关键FRM专家进行了76次定性标准化半结构化访谈,以检查时间的过渡途径。结果表明,在FRM创新的讨论、设计和实施过程中存在许多驱动因素和障碍。然而,对过渡途径的捕捉表明系统从更传统的理解转向变革的途径,这创造了对森林资源管理中不同行动者的作用以及新的体制设置的新理解。然而,这些政策实验仍然是由相关的公共行政部门领导的,因为他们是主要的资助者,是实现许多这些创新的规划和实施阶段的主要参与者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.30%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Geographical Journal has been the academic journal of the Royal Geographical Society, under the terms of the Royal Charter, since 1893. It publishes papers from across the entire subject of geography, with particular reference to public debates, policy-orientated agendas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信