Engaging Residents in Policy and Planning for Sea Level Rise: Application of the Action-Oriented Stakeholder Engagement for a Resilient Tomorrow (ASERT) Framework

This chapter describes the application of the Action-oriented Stakeholder Engagement for a Resilient Tomorrow (ASERT) framework for communicating with and engaging both residents and community stakeholders in their localities’ efforts to prepare for and to respond to flooding and sea level rise. The application of ASERT incorporates communication, education/learning, and gamification elements that can be embedded into community meetings. We describe the way in which ASERT community meetings are designed (1) to provide an inclusive and engaging process that will allow residents to participate in their city’s resilience efforts; (2) to provide information about resilience in an environment that encourages social learning, including curiosity and reflection, to promote behavioral change that will result in improved resilience and public support for resilience solutions; and (3) to allow residents to offer real-time perceptions of risk to, and feedback about, resilience solutions in their communities and/or cities. This chapter briefly discusses the ASERT framework, illustrates its application (using two examples from Virginia Beach, Virginia), describes the use of gamification in the community meetings, and provides lessons learned regarding communication and stakeholder engagement efforts targeted at building resilience in coastal communities

Participatory GIS as a Tool for Stakeholder Engagement in Building Resilience to Sea Level Rise: A Demonstration Project

This article describes a participatory geographical information system (PGIS) demonstration project used as part of the stakeholder engagement efforts undertaken by the Citizen Engagement Working Group of the Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project. The PGIS demonstration project was conducted in the Little Creek/Pretty Lake case study area in the Hampton Roads region of southeastern coastal Virginia. PGIS served as a deliberative and participatory mechanism to obtain local knowledge from residents about the location of valued assets within the community and locations challenged by increased flooding and sea level rise. The PGIS application, using the weTable tool, was found to be useful for soliciting and documenting local knowledge, such as by highlighting community assets and identifying community challenges. It was also found to be useful for facilitating community-wide discussion, visualizing the problem, and understanding the severity of sea level rise and flooding. The PGIS demonstration project showed how participatory mapping can directly engage residents in creating sociospatial data, build knowledge, and foster learning and deliberation in a complex issue such as resilience to flooding and sea level rise

Developing an Institutional Arrangement for a Whole-of-Government and Whole-of-Community Approach to Regional Adaptation to Sea Level Rise: The Hampton Roads Pilot Project

Adaptation to sea level rise (SLR) requires coordination among local, state, and federal entities and collaboration across governments, nonprofits, businesses, and residents. This coordination and collaboration are reflected in institutional arrangements associated with a whole-of-government and whole-of-community approach to regional adaptation. This study analyzes the development of an interlocal agreement (ILA), the Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project (the Pilot Project), as an example of such an arrangement. This study assesses how factors throughout three phases of ILA development (initiation, implementation, and execution) influence outcomes and effectiveness. Drawing upon participant observation, document analysis, survey of participants, and interviews with key informants this study identifies factors that facilitate effective regional adaptation to SLR (impetus, agreement) and factors that hamper adaptation efforts (funding, ease of delivery), and offers insight into the complexities of institutional collective action to address contentious and challenging issues such as SLR

Cancer rehabilitation indicators for Europe.

Little is known of cancer rehabilitation needs in Europe. EUROCHIP-3 organised a group of experts to propose a list of population-based indicators used for describing cancer rehabilitation across Europe. The aim of this study is to present and discuss these indicators. A EUROCHIP-3 expert panel reached agreement on two types of indicators. (a) Cancer prevalence indicators. These were proposed as a means of characterising the burden of cancer rehabilitation needs by time from diagnosis and patient health status. These indicators can be estimated from cancer registry data or by collecting data on follow-up and treatments for samples of cases archived in cancer registries. (b) Indicators of rehabilitation success. These include: return to work, quality of life, and satisfaction of specific rehabilitation needs. Studies can be performed to estimate these indicators in individual countries, but to obtain comparable data across European countries it will be necessary to administer a questionnaire to randomly selected samples of patients from population-based cancer registry databases. However, three factors complicate questionnaire studies: patients may not be aware that they have cancer; incomplete participation in surveys could lead to bias; and national confidentiality laws in some cases prohibit cancer registries from approaching patients. Although these studies are expensive and difficult to perform, but as the number of cancer survivors increases, it is important to document their needs in order to provide information on cancer control