Next Article in Journal
Vadose Zone Lag Time Effect on Groundwater Drought in a Temperate Climate
Previous Article in Journal
Removal of 17β-Estradiol by Activated Charcoal Supported Titanate Nanotubes ([email protected]) through Initial Adsorption and Subsequent Photo-Degradation: Intermediates, DFT calculation, and Mechanisms
Previous Article in Special Issue
What Can We Learn from Planning Instruments in Flood Prevention? Comparative Illustration to Highlight the Challenges of Governance in Europe
Editorial

Flood Risk Governance for More Resilience—Reviewing the Special Issue’s Contribution to Existing Insights

1
Faculty of Sociology, Adam Mickiewicz University, 60-568 Poznan, Poland
2
Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, 3584 CB Utrecht, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2020, 12(8), 2122; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12082122
Received: 25 June 2020 / Revised: 22 July 2020 / Accepted: 23 July 2020 / Published: 26 July 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Flood Risk Governance for More Resilience)
There is lively scholarly and societal debate on the need to diversify flood risk management strategies to contribute to more flood resilience. The latter requires dedicated governance strategies related to which relevant insights are currently emerging. However, more systematic theoretical and empirical insights on how to specify and implement governance strategies are still urgently needed. The Special Issue ‘Flood Risk Governance for More Resilience’ has brought together nine contributions by renowned flood risk governance scholars that together help to unpack lessons about these governance strategies. This Special Issue’s editorial introduces the debate on flood risk governance for more resilience and presents the key findings of the individual contributions to the Special Issue. We show that flood risk governance arrangements in specific regions in the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Bangladesh, France, and Mexico are gradually evolving. A common denominator is that more horizontal forms of governance are under development in which a more diverse array of public and private actors—including citizens, as well as different sectors, is becoming involved. Efforts are underway to establish connectivity between actors, levels, and sectors, both through regional and international exchanges. While lessons on how to do the former successfully are emerging, we notice that these should still be unpacked more fully. Moreover, there is still a need to establish a more open and inclusive societal debate on societal preferences regarding flood risk protection in which all actors with a stake in flood risk governance processes and outcomes can participate. View Full-Text
Keywords: flood risk governance; resilience; adaptation; learning; science-policy interactions; interdisciplinarity flood risk governance; resilience; adaptation; learning; science-policy interactions; interdisciplinarity
MDPI and ACS Style

Matczak, P.; Hegger, D.L.T. Flood Risk Governance for More Resilience—Reviewing the Special Issue’s Contribution to Existing Insights. Water 2020, 12, 2122. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12082122

AMA Style

Matczak P, Hegger DLT. Flood Risk Governance for More Resilience—Reviewing the Special Issue’s Contribution to Existing Insights. Water. 2020; 12(8):2122. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12082122

Chicago/Turabian Style

Matczak, Piotr, and Dries L.T. Hegger. 2020. "Flood Risk Governance for More Resilience—Reviewing the Special Issue’s Contribution to Existing Insights" Water 12, no. 8: 2122. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12082122

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop