Utrecht, Netherlands
Utrecht, Netherlands

Time filter

Source Type

Van Rijswick M.,University Utrecht | Van Rijswick M.,Utrecht Center for Water | Wouters P.,Xiamen University
Journal of Water Law | Year: 2014

China and Europe face serious water challenges. Europe has developed a comprehensive and adaptive legal framework for addressing water-related management issues. China continues to go forward with its water management schemes. Legal approaches to water resources management across Europe and China have shared issues to address. In the first instance, transboundary water resources must be managed according to the rules of international law that govern this field at the international level. Secondly, domestic legislation needs to address main challenges regarding water quality, water scarcity and flood risks in what is frequently a multi-actor, multi-level and multi-sector setting.


Grant
Agency: Narcis | Branch: Project | Program: Completed | Phase: Social Sciences | Award Amount: | Year: 2001

The European Community (EC) and its Member States have competencies in the environmental field. This may affect the implementation of their obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOS Convention) concerning the protection and preservation of the marine environment in two ways. The EC may adopt legislation on the same subject matter as global and regional organizations in the field of the marine environment, leading to duplication and inconsistencies, impacting on its Member States. Secondly, uncertainty or dispute about the division of competencies between the EC and its Member States may negatively affect the decision making process in such international organizations. The research intends to establish how these consequences of shared competencies impact on the implementation of the LOS Convention in the field of the marine environment, especially looking at relevant global and regional organizations in which the EC


Grant
Agency: Narcis | Branch: Project | Program: Completed | Phase: Social Sciences | Award Amount: | Year: 2002

None


Wiering M.,Radboud University Nijmegen | Green C.,Flood Hazard Research Center | van Rijswick M.,Utrecht Center for Water | Priest S.,Flood Hazard Research Center | Keessen A.,Utrecht Center for Water
Journal of Water and Climate Change | Year: 2015

We compared the governance of flood risk in England and the Netherlands, focusing on the general policies, instruments used and underlying principles. Both physical and political environments are important in explaining how countries evolved towards very different rationales of resilience. Answering questions as ‘who decides’, ‘who should act’ and ‘who is responsible and liable for flood damage’ systematically, results in a quite fundamental difference in what resilience means, and how this affects the governance regime. In the Netherlands, there is nationwide collective regime with a technocracy based on the merit of water expertise, legitimated by a social contract of government being responsible and the general public accepting and supporting this. In England there also is a technocracy, but this is part of a general-political and economic-rational decision-making process, with responsibilities spread over state, insurance companies, individuals and communities. The rationales are connected to specific conceptions of the public interest, leading to specific governance principles. In both countries, flood risk strategies are discussed in the light of climate change effects, but resilience strategies show more persistence, although combined with gradual adaptation of practices on lower scales, than great transformations. © IWA Publishing 2015.


Hegger D.L.T.,University Utrecht | Driessen P.P.J.,University Utrecht | Dieperink C.,University Utrecht | Wiering M.,Radboud University Nijmegen | And 2 more authors.
Water Resources Management | Year: 2014

European urban agglomerations face increasing flood risks due to urbanization and the effects of climate change. These risks are addressed at European, national and regional policy levels. A diversification and alignment of Flood Risk Management Strategies (FRMSs) can make vulnerable urban agglomerations more resilient to flooding, but this may require new Flood Risk Governance Arrangements (FRGAs) or changes in existing ones. While much technical knowledge on Flood Risk Management is available, scientific insights into the actual and/or necessary FRGAs so far are rather limited and fragmented. This article addresses this knowledge gap by presenting a research approach for assessing FRGAs. This approach allows for the integration of insights from policy scientists and legal scholars into one coherent framework that can be used to identify Flood Risk Management Strategies and analyse Flood Risk Governance Arrangements. In addition, approaches for explaining and evaluating (shifts in) FRGAs are introduced. The research approach is illustrated by referring to the rise of the Dutch risk-based approach called 'multi-layered safety' and more specifically its application in the city of Dordrecht. The article is concluded with an overview of potential next steps, including comparative analyses of FRGAs in different regions. Insights in these FRGAS are crucial to enable the identification of action perspectives for flood risk governance for actors at the level of the EU, its member states, regional authorities, and public-private partnerships. © 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.


Keessen A.M.,Utrecht Center for Water | Hamer J.M.,University Utrecht | van Rijswick H.F.M.W.,Utrecht Center for Water | Wiering M.,Radboud University Nijmegen
Ecology and Society | Year: 2013

Both in academic literature and political practice, resilience is becoming a central evaluative concept for assessing climate adaptation policies. This makes sense because society's main challenge in an altering the environment is to adapt to the inevitable changes. However, applying the concept of resilience to devise adaptation strategies reveals that social-ecological resilience acquires different meanings depending on the social context. There is no straightforward application of resilience. In this contribution, it will be argued that giving meaning to the concept of resilience in adaptation strategies requires making normative choices. These choices concern whether there is a public interest in adaptation, the distribution of private and public responsibilities, and striking a balance between individual rights and general interests. Because these normative choices can be questioned and revised, it is important that they are made explicit to enable a democratic debate on the direction that adaptation strategies should take. Simply referring to the concept of resilience in an adaptation strategy does not suffice, but occludes this discussion. Through formulating and applying a condensed scheme of politico-theoretical approaches that underpin diverging adaptation approaches, this contribution reveals the various underlying normative assumptions and explicates the relevant political choices. Three Dutch adaptation strategies serve as empirical examples. They illustrate the importance of the societal context in giving meaning to resilience in the development of adaptation strategies. © 2013 by the author(s).


Hegger D.L.T.,University Utrecht | Driessen P.P.J.,University Utrecht | Dieperink C.,University Utrecht | Wiering M.,Radboud University Nijmegen | And 2 more authors.
Water Resources Management | Year: 2014

European urban agglomerations face increasing flood risks due to urbanization and the effects of climate change. These risks are addressed at European, national and regional policy levels. A diversification and alignment of Flood Risk Management Strategies (FRMSs) can make vulnerable urban agglomerations more resilient to flooding, but this may require new Flood Risk Governance Arrangements (FRGAs) or changes in existing ones. While much technical knowledge on Flood Risk Management is available, scientific insights into the actual and/or necessary FRGAs so far are rather limited and fragmented. This article addresses this knowledge gap by presenting a research approach for assessing FRGAs. This approach allows for the integration of insights from policy scientists and legal scholars into one coherent framework that can be used to identify Flood Risk Management Strategies and analyse Flood Risk Governance Arrangements. In addition, approaches for explaining and evaluating (shifts in) FRGAs are introduced. The research approach is illustrated by referring to the rise of the Dutch risk-based approach called ‘multi-layered safety’ and more specifically its application in the city of Dordrecht. The article is concluded with an overview of potential next steps, including comparative analyses of FRGAs in different regions. Insights in these FRGAS are crucial to enable the identification of action perspectives for flood risk governance for actors at the level of the EU, its member states, regional authorities, and public-private partnerships. © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014.

Loading Utrecht Center for Water collaborators
Loading Utrecht Center for Water collaborators