 |
| Titel |
A framework for profiling the characteristics of risk governance in natural hazard contexts |
| VerfasserIn |
G. Walker, F. Tweed, R. Whittle |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
1561-8633
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences ; 14, no. 1 ; Nr. 14, no. 1 (2014-01-30), S.155-164 |
| Datensatznummer |
250118238
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/nhess-14-155-2014.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
Over recent decades there have been moves away from traditional forms of
government towards broader practices of "governance". These moves are as
relevant to the handling of natural hazards as they are to other societal
concerns. Key characteristics of such changes include the emergence of
multi-level governance processes, shifts away from the exercise of
centralised authority towards the involvement and collaboration of a
multiplicity of actors, the creation of new forms of authority and control,
and changing distributions of responsibilities between the state and other
actors. However, the extent to which these shifts have taken place across
the varied national contexts in Europe and can be observed specifically in
relation to the governance of natural hazards is not at all clear. Such
developments may also be evaluated in different ways; where some might see
progressive reforms, others might see damaging undermining of established
arrangements.
In this paper, we propose a risk governance profiling framework that can be
used to draw out the key characteristics of the ways in which natural
hazards are governed in a particular governance setting. The framework can
be flexibly applied in relation to a specific hazard and national, regional
or local context, and enables qualitative profiling across a spectrum of
eight key governance characteristics. Past trends and likely future changes
can also be represented. We discuss the formulation of this framework as
well as giving examples of profiles for different hazards in different parts
of Europe. We suggest ways in which comparisons can be made between
governance profiles, providing a stimulus and focus for debate and
discussion around the trends of change in governance practice that have
been, and are continuing, to take place. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|