Rethinking flood resilience: from policy to practice. The case of flood risk management in England.

重新思考防洪能力：从政策到实践。

• 批准号: 2886975
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: King's College London
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2023
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2023 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2886975
• 关键词: Rethinking; flood; resilience; policy; practice.

Despite an annual budget of £1 billion to manage flood risk, the Environment Agency cannot offer total protection from flooding to all households in England. Difficult decisions must be made over which communities receive funding, what level of protection those communities receive, and what to do when at-risk communities fail to meet the funding criterion.Realizing that it can no longer act alone on flood risk, the Environment Agency has increasingly involved local communities in carrying out flood risk management tasks,e.g. assessing their vulnerability, applying for funding, and proposing flood schemes. Recently, the Agency set out its vision for "a nation ready for, and resilient to, flood and coastal change - today, tomorrow, and to the year 2100"where floods "cause much less harm to people, do much less damage, and ensure life can get back to normal much quicker" (Environment Agency, 2020). For that to happen, communities and individuals within those communities must develop resilience. This involves people taking responsibility for their exposure to flood risk via the use of flood maps and/or alert systems to raise awareness, as well as being empowered to act such as purchasing door guards or retrofitting their home to speed up recovery. Yet who has the capacity, commitment, time, resources, and/or social capital to be resilient is not always clear, nor what happens to those unable to adapt.Helping communities increase their resilience may do more to address inequality in exposure to flooding than just focusing on 'vulnerability': a comparatively small flooding event may prove hard to cope with for communities with low resilience. Yet, the true meaning of these words in the practice of policy implementation depends on the definition and understanding of them in the eye of the policy-makers and stakeholders.We ask: how do the Agency and the (affected) public understand the implications of measuring and increasing 'resilience'? Can we quantify the change in public spending on flood defences that results from setting 'resilience' as a policy goal? Besides spending money, what other interventions can increase local resilience?Drawing on insights from political ecology, geography, and policy studies, this project aims to:1. Define resilience in the context of flood riskmanagement;2. Identify the variables that measure resilience to flooding;3. Study how the goal of increasing resilience to flooding is implemented on the ground.The project will fulfil its aims via a mixed method approach to compare perceptions of policy-makers and stakeholders, find and test the variables that operationalise the different conceptualisations, and outline the relevant implications. The policy goal of the project is to maximise the impact of the Agency's resources, broaden the range of 'resilience' practices, and foster a successful decentralisation of flood risk management.

尽管每年有10亿英镑的预算用于控制洪水风险，但环境署无法为英格兰所有家庭提供全面的洪水保护。必须就哪些社区获得资助、这些社区获得何种程度的保护以及在风险社区未能达到资助标准时该如何做等问题做出艰难的决定。环境署意识到它不能再单独应对洪水风险，因此越来越多地让当地社区参与到洪水风险管理任务中来，例如：评估他们的脆弱性，申请资金，提出防洪方案。最近，该机构提出了其愿景，即“一个为洪水和沿海变化做好准备并具有弹性的国家-今天，明天和2100年”，洪水“对人们造成的伤害要小得多，造成的破坏要小得多，并确保生活能够更快地恢复正常”（环境署，2020年）。要做到这一点，社区和社区中的个人必须发展恢复力。这涉及到人们通过使用洪水地图和/或警报系统来提高人们的认识，并授权采取行动，例如购买门护或改造房屋以加快恢复。然而，谁有能力、承诺、时间、资源和/或社会资本来适应，并不总是很清楚，那些无法适应的人会发生什么。帮助社区提高抗灾能力可能比仅仅关注“脆弱性”更能解决洪水暴露的不平等问题：对于抗灾能力较低的社区来说，相对较小的洪水事件可能难以应对。然而，在政策执行的实践中，这些词语的真正含义取决于决策者和利益相关者对它们的定义和理解。我们的问题是：机构和（受影响的）公众如何理解衡量和提高“复原力”的含义？我们能否量化将“抗洪能力”作为政策目标而导致的防洪公共支出的变化？除了花钱，还有什么其他干预措施可以提高当地的复原力？借鉴政治生态学、地理学和政策研究的见解，本项目旨在：在洪水风险管理的背景下定义复原力；2 .确定衡量抗洪能力的变量；研究如何在地面上实施提高抗洪能力的目标。该项目将通过一种混合方法来实现其目标，以比较政策制定者和利益相关者的看法，找到并测试使不同概念运作的变量，并概述相关影响。该项目的政策目标是最大限度地发挥工程处资源的影响，扩大“复原力”实践的范围，并促进洪水风险管理的成功下放。