IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v55y2016ip2p361-367.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legitimizing differentiated flood protection levels – Consequences of the European flood risk management plan

Author

Listed:
  • Hartmann, Thomas
  • Spit, Tejo

Abstract

The European flood risk management plan is a new instrument introduced by the Floods Directive. It introduces a spatial turn and a scenario approach in flood risk management, ultimately leading to differentiated flood protection levels on a catchment basis. This challenges the traditional sources of legitimacy for flood risk management, which are predominantly founded on strong institutions and engineering solutions. Future flood risk management needs to incorporate stakeholders and citizens in the decision-making process because the choices for the flood risk management plan will be more normative and political. In terms of concepts of legitimacy, this means an increasing importance of throughput legitimacy, complementing input and output legitimacy. This change shares similarities with a paradigm shift in spatial planning around the 1970s. Therefore, this contribution argues that flood risk management, according to the European Floods Directive, can profit from experiences and approaches in spatial planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Hartmann, Thomas & Spit, Tejo, 2016. "Legitimizing differentiated flood protection levels – Consequences of the European flood risk management plan," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(P2), pages 361-367.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p2:p:361-367
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.08.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901115300666
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.08.013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. W. J. Wouter Botzen & Érika Monteiro & Francisco Estrada & Giulia Pesaro & Scira Menoni, 2017. "Economic Assessment of Mitigating Damage of Flood Events: Cost–Benefit Analysis of Flood-Proofing Commercial Buildings in Umbria, Italy," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 42(4), pages 585-608, October.
    2. Susana Goytia, 2021. "Issues of Natural Resources Law for Adopting Catchment-Based Measures for Flood Risk Management in Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Rauter, Magdalena & Kaufmann, Maria & Thaler, Thomas & Fuchs, Sven, 2020. "Flood risk management in Austria: Analysing the shift in responsibility-sharing between public and private actors from a public stakeholder's perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    4. Magdalena Rauter & Thomas Thaler & Marie-Sophie Attems & Sven Fuchs, 2019. "Obligation or Innovation: Can the EU Floods Directive Be Seen as a Tipping Point Towards More Resilient Flood Risk Management? A Case Study from Vorarlberg, Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-18, October.
    5. Hudson, Paul & Raška, Pavel & Macháč, Jan & Slavíková, Lenka, 2022. "Balancing the interaction between urban regeneration and flood risk management – A cost benefit approach in Ústí nad Labem," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    6. Vincent Caby & Lise Frehen, 2021. "How to Produce and Measure Throughput Legitimacy? Lessons from a Systematic Literature Review," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 226-236.
    7. Anna Porębska & Izabela Godyń & Krzysztof Radzicki & Elżbieta Nachlik & Paola Rizzi, 2019. "Built Heritage, Sustainable Development, and Natural Hazards: Flood Protection and UNESCO World Heritage Site Protection Strategies in Krakow, Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-26, September.
    8. Mikša, Katažyna & Kalinauskas, Marius & Inácio, Miguel & Pereira, Paulo, 2021. "Implementation of the European Union Floods Directive—Requirements and national transposition and practical application: Lithuanian case-study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p2:p:361-367. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.