Question 3-
3 How is flood risk management organized in my country?
Table 1: Comparison of flood risk governance arrangements (FRGAs), adapted from Matzcak et al., 2016:72, completed for Germany and Denmark by using Buijs et al., 2018.
| Characteristics of governance | Belgium | Germany | Denmark | the Netherlands | United Kingdom |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diversification & dominance | Moderately diversified, defence still important | High diversified, focus on defence | Highly diversified, focus on defence | Low diversification, defence dominant | Highly diversified, quite balanced |
| Multi-sector | Water sector and spatial planning gaining equal importance; water sector still important | Multi-sector involvement & integrated by spatial planning | Multi-sector involvement (landowners and farmers have a say; landowners do not pay) | Water sector dominant | Multi-sector involvement & integrated by spatial planning |
| Multi-actor | Public (state dominant) | Public (state and federal states) dominant | Public & private | Public (state dominant) | Public & private |
| Multi-level | Decentralised, tendency towards centralisation | Central guidance & decentralization to federal state & local level | Central guidance & ongoing decentralization to local level | Both central and regional level | Central and local level |
Referenties
- Etkin 2016, Etkin, D., 1 januari 2016.
Hier wordt aan gewerkt of naar verwezen door: Adaptive planning, Community resilience, Critical infrastructure, Flood proof design and planning, Layer 3- Preparedness and response, Natural flood management, Preparedness and emergency planning, Recovery learning