Partnership Funding in flood risk management: multi-level stakeholder engagement - a question of roles and power

The paper examines the new flood risk policy discussion in England and Wales. The summer floods in England in 2007 caused large damages to the environment, economy and humanity. Following this key flood event, the Government has started to redefine the national flood and coastal risk management policy in England and Wales. The key issue in the new policy agenda is to encourage the responsibilities of local authorities and reduce the central role of flood risk management. This decentralisation in flood risk management has a series of consequences in the development of new governance structures. The main reason for this shift from central to local level is the belief that local authorities deal with public administration tasks in a more efficient way. Nevertheless, the main problem is the gap between the delegated tasks and the lack of transfer of resources, especially the issue concerning funding is still unclear and unresolved. This constraint will go with fiscal and administration cuts. The consequences will be (1) ‘hollowing out’ of the Government with the downscaling of the responsibility towards local actors and (2) without proportional transfer of resources to local authorities they will not be able to deal with new tasks. Therefore, in practice there are many limitations, barriers and concerns with the new policy direction

Partnership funding in flood risk management: new localism debate and policy in England

The new flood risk policy discussion in England has started to redefine national policy regarding flood and coastal risk management. The key issue in the new policy agenda is to encourage the responsibilities of local authorities in flood risk management, which involve defining local strategies to manage local risks. This downscaling process in flood risk management has a series of consequences in the development of new governance structures and institutions as well as new working relations and intervention strategies. Nevertheless, the main problem is the gap between the downscaling of responsibility and the transfer of resources; in particular the question concerning funding and social capacity. In this way, the focus of policy discussion refers to two main aspects: (a) the equitable sharing of risk-burdens between public authorities, private companies and individuals and (b) how to encourage government agencies and nongovernment agents to take over responsibility for certain tasks from central government. The aim of this paper is to discuss the new funding regime for English flood risk management policy under the new policy paradigm

Catastrophe versus instability for the eruption of a toroidal solar magnetic flux rope

The onset of a solar eruption is formulated here as either a magnetic catastrophe or as an instability. Both start with the same equation of force balance governing the underlying equilibria. Using a toroidal flux rope in an external bipolar or quadrupolar field as a model for the current-carrying flux, we demonstrate the occurrence of a fold catastrophe by loss of equilibrium for several representative evolutionary sequences in the stable domain of parameter space. We verify that this catastrophe and the torus instability occur at the same point; they are thus equivalent descriptions for the onset condition of solar eruptions.Comment: V2: update to conform to the published article; new choice for internal inductance of torus; updated Fig. 2; new Figs. 3, 5, and

Evolving interregional co-operation in flood risk management: distances and types of partnership approaches in Austria

Flood risk management and policy in Europe are changing, so the role of local and catchment-wide flood risk management plans are now key contemporary issues in flood policy. A new policy agenda is to enhance inter-local solutions instead of local flood alleviation schemes. This paper analyses the new role of those local authorities and stakeholders in flood risk management as well as how the nature of the partnerships are established and operate, focusing especially on the main barriers and challenges. This paper examines catchment-based flood risk management in Austria. Catchment-based flood risk management was analysed in three different Austrian regions (Aist in Upper Austria, Triesting-Tal in Lower Austria and Ill-Walgau in Vorarlberg). The current functions of a partnership approach in flood risk prevention lie within the selection of sites for conservation of regionally important retention areas, harmonising spatial planning instruments and awareness-raising for protective measures on an inter-local level. The empirical results are currently characterized by a lack of sufficient co-operation between the members as well as with the regional authorities. The three case studies show different backgrounds and developments. The results show that the inter-local co-operation process is in no cases fully achieved. Some of the case studies show a higher integration in one field than others

On the horns of a dilemma: experts as communicators for property-level flood risk adaptation measures

This paper investigates the role of flood risk experts in supporting homeowners to implement property-level flood risk adaption (PLFRA). Homeowners can reduce their flood risks by implementing PLFRA. However, oftentimes they need advice on what sort of and how to implement PLFRA. This means that tailored experts advice is necessary to inform homeowners on such measures. But experience shows that mere information is often insufficient to motivate homeowners to realize measures. This contribution explores the reasons for the ineffectiveness of expert advice by investigating how expert advice responds to homeowners’ rationalities. Based on a case study from Flanders, Belgium, this paper reveals how the relation between experts and homeowners differs related to different rationalities of homeowners. The paper uses Cultural Theory to discuss strategies on how experts, providing advice on property-level risk adaption, could move beyond engineering skills by also using risk communication skills in order to involve homeowners in flood risk governance

Partnership approaches in flood risk management: lessons from the Eastern Alps

In the past decades flood risk management has taken a paradigm shift away from a structural, securitybased approach towards more an integrated, risk-based approach. While the ‘traditional’ approach was informed by afirm belief in controlling rivers via engineering solutions, flood risk management today increasingly acknowledgesthe importance of providing ‘more space for the rivers’. The new policy agenda has been implemented to enhance the development of catchment-wide management plans in flood risk management and at the same time to reduce the controlling role of central national governments. The aim of the paper is to examine the new role of these local authorities and organisations in flood risk management as well as how the nature of partnerships are established and operate, focusing especially on the main barriers and challenges. The current goal of this partnership approach lies with the conservation of regionally important retention areas for protective measures on an inter-local level. An important issue is that of compensation measures between upstream and downstream communities, which at present is causing many conflicts. We conclude that although a catchment-wide management approach may be seen as an ‘optimal’ solution for flood risk management. However, in practice there are many limitations and barriers in establishing these collaborations and making them effective

E-cigarette use among women of reproductive age: Impulsivity, cigarette smoking status, and other risk factors.

INTRODUCTION: The study aim was to examine impulsivity and other risk factors for e-cigarette use among women of reproductive age comparing current daily cigarette smokers to never cigarette smokers. Women of reproductive age are of special interest because of the additional risk that tobacco and nicotine use represents should they become pregnant. METHOD: Survey data were collected anonymously online using Amazon Mechanical Turk in 2014. Participants were 800 women ages 24-44years from the US. Half (n=400) reported current, daily smoking and half (n=400) reported smokingsociodemographics, tobacco/nicotine use, and impulsivity (i.e., delay discounting & Barratt Impulsiveness Scale). Predictors of smoking and e-cigarette use were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Daily cigarette smoking was associated with greater impulsivity, lower education, past illegal drug use, and White race/ethnicity. E-cigarette use in the overall sample was associated with being a cigarette smoker and greater education. E-cigarette use among current smokers was associated with increased nicotine dependence and quitting smoking; among never smokers it was associated with greater impulsivity and illegal drug use. E-cigarette use was associated with hookah use, and for never smokers only with use of cigars and other nicotine products. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette use among women of reproductive age varies by smoking status, with use among current smokers reflecting attempts to quit smoking whereas among non-smokers use may be a marker of a more impulsive repertoire that includes greater use of alternative tobacco products and illegal drugs

Strategic use of instruments of land policy for mobilising private land for flood risk management

The focus on private land of this special issue points at a “policy delivery gap” (Moss, 2008) and the instruments by which to overcome it. Whereas the technical and hydrological functions of land in flood risk management are relatively well known, there remain considerable gaps in the understanding of how to mobilise the required land resources and overcome, respectively prevent, flood-related conflicts in land use (Edelenbos et al., 2013; Morris et al., 2016). As most studies focus on case and context specific solutions, gaining a more comprehensive and generic understanding of the different options and mechanisms of leveraging land for floods is an important task for research and policy practice alike. This cross-disciplinary edited collection brings together research from the natural, technical, legal and social sciences to provide an encompassing instrumental perspective of mobilising land in the context of flood risk management. The core aim of this volume is to explore solutions to this pertinent issue in the broadening policy paradigm

Social justice in the context of adaptation to climate change – reflecting on different policy approaches to distribute and allocate flood risk management

Editorial to a special edition of the journal. Consequences of extreme hydrological events, such as those recently experienced in United States (e.g. Hurricane Harvey or Irma in 2017), floods in South Asia in 2017, or the Central European floods in 2013 and 2016, have again focused the attention of society, policy makers and academic scholars on questions of how to reduce vulnerability to such events, especially when faced with the dual challenges of climate and societal change. Not only is the likelihood of floods increasing (e.g. IPCC 2014), but, due to continuing development in hazard-prone zones, the so called bullseye effect which argues that increasing disaster frequency is largely due to increasing exposure, and the resulting higher degree of vulnerability in floodplains, it becomes more and more challenging to protect all properties to the same standard (see discussion around residual risk, Ashley et al. 2014; Jongman et al. 2015; Fuchs et al. 2017a). Hence, the outcome of current flood risk management strategies in many situations are necessitating changes to the current social contract between state and society, requiring a re-design of the role of central government and individual citizens and communities in terms of sharing responsibilities (Adger et al. 2013; Doorn 2016). In particular, government often encourages society to take the lead in the responsibility for flood risk management, but apparently with conflicts and misunderstandings arising (Harris 2012; Kuhlicke et al. 2016; Fuchs et al. 2017b) as well as potentially introducing inequalities in flood risk management outcomes. In Europe, we can already observe these aspects in recent developments, which have led to a re-arrangement of roles and responsibilities for flood risk management, such as introduction of Partnership Funding in England and Wales or Canada ‘risk-based’ stormwater charge (Thaler and Priest 2014; Geaves and Penning-Rowsell 2016; Thaler and Levin-Keitel 2016; Henstra and Thistlethwaite 2017). However, discussion and research concerning the implications of social justice and injustice in these new flood risk management debates is scarce (Johnson et al. 2007; Doorn 2015; Thaler and Hartmann 2016)