Next Article in Journal
The Forgotten Islands: Monitoring Tourist Numbers and Managing Tourism Impacts on New Zealand’s Subantarctic Islands
Next Article in Special Issue
A Participatory Process to Develop a Landslide Warning System: Paradoxes of Responsibility Sharing in a Case Study in Upper Austria
Previous Article in Journal
Speculations Linking Monazite Compositions to Origin: Llallagua Tin Ore Deposit (Bolivia)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparing Approaches for the Integration of Stakeholder Perspectives in Environmental Decision Making
Article Menu
Issue 3 (September) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Resources 2017, 6(3), 37;

Warning System Options for Landslide Risk: A Case Study in Upper Austria

Climate Policy Group, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), Zurich 8092, Switzerland
Risk and Resilience Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg 2361, Austria
Department of Geophysics, Geological Survey of Austria (GSA), Vienna 1030, Austria
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 19 May 2017 / Revised: 4 August 2017 / Accepted: 5 August 2017 / Published: 11 August 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Difficult Decisions in Disaster Risk and Environmental Management)
Full-Text   |   PDF [1113 KB, uploaded 11 August 2017]   |  


This paper explores warning system options in the landslide-prone community of Gmunden/Gschliefgraben in Upper Austria. It describes stakeholder perspectives on the technical, social, economic, legal and institutional characteristics of a warning system. The perspectives differ on issues such as responsibility allocation in decisions regarding warnings, technologies used for monitoring and forecasting, costs and financial aspects, open data policies and the role of the residents. Drawing on the theory of plural rationality and based on a desk study and interviews, stakeholder perspectives and discourses on the warning system problem and its solution were elicited. The perspectives formed the basis for the specification of three technical policy options for a warning system in Gschliefgraben: a minimal-cost and cost-effective system; a technical-expert system; and a resident-centered system. The case demonstrates the importance of accounting for a plurality of values and preferences and of giving voice to competing discourses in communities contemplating warning systems or other public good policies. This paper concludes that understanding the different and often conflicting perspectives and technical policy options is the starting point for formulating an agreed compromise for an effective warning system. We describe the compromise solution in an accompanying paper included in this Special Issue. View Full-Text
Keywords: warning system; landslide risk; technical policy option; stakeholder perspectives; warning communication and decision making warning system; landslide risk; technical policy option; stakeholder perspectives; warning communication and decision making

Graphical abstract

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Scolobig, A.; Riegler, M.; Preuner, P.; Linnerooth-Bayer, J.; Ottowitz, D.; Hoyer, S.; Jochum, B. Warning System Options for Landslide Risk: A Case Study in Upper Austria. Resources 2017, 6, 37.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

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

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Resources EISSN 2079-9276 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top