Coproducing flood risk management through citizen involvement: insights from cross-country comparison in Europe

Article


Mees, H., Crabbé, A., Alexander, M., Kaufmann, M., Bruzzone, S., Lévy, L. and Lewandowski, J. 2016. Coproducing flood risk management through citizen involvement: insights from cross-country comparison in Europe. Ecology & Society. 21 (3). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08500-210307
TypeArticle
TitleCoproducing flood risk management through citizen involvement: insights from cross-country comparison in Europe
AuthorsMees, H., Crabbé, A., Alexander, M., Kaufmann, M., Bruzzone, S., Lévy, L. and Lewandowski, J.
Abstract

Across Europe, citizens are increasingly expected to participate in the implementation of flood risk management (FRM), by engaging in voluntary-based activities to enhance preparedness, implementing property-level measures, etc. While citizen participation in FRM decision-making is widely addressed in academic literature, citizens' involvement in the delivery of FRM measures is comparatively understudied. Drawing from public administration literature, this paper adopts the notion of 'co-production' as an analytical framework for studying the interaction between citizens and public authorities, from the decision making process through to the implementation of FRM in practice. The paper considers to what extent co-production is evident in selected EU Member States, drawing from research conducted within the EU project 'STAR-FLOOD'. On the basis of a cross-country comparison between Flanders (Belgium), England (UK), France, the Netherlands and Poland, this research highlights the varied forms of co-production and reflects on how these have been established within divergent settings. Co-production is most outspoken in discourse and practice in England, and is emergent in France and Flanders. By contrast, FRM in the Netherlands and Poland remains almost exclusively reliant on governmental protection measures and thereby consultation-based forms of co-production. Analysis reveals how these actions are motivated by different underlying rationales, which in turn shape the type of approaches and degree of institutionalization of co-production. In the Netherlands, co-production is primarily encouraged to increase societal resilience, while public authorities in the other countries use it as well to improve cost-efficiency and redistribute responsibilities to its beneficiaries.

Keywordscodelivery; coproduction; cross-country comparison; flood risk governance; flood risk responsibilities; legitimacy; public participation; resilience
Research GroupFlood Hazard Research Centre
PublisherResilience Alliance
JournalEcology & Society
ISSN1708-3087
Publication dates
Print01 Sep 2016
Publication process dates
Deposited17 Jun 2016
Accepted25 Apr 2016
Output statusPublished
Publisher's version
Copyright Statement

Copyright © 2016 by the author(s). Published under license by The Resilience Alliance.

Additional information

Article no = 7

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08500-210307
LanguageEnglish
Permalink -

https://repository.mdx.ac.uk/item/86759

Download files


Publisher's version
  • 32
    total views
  • 8
    total downloads
  • 3
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

Cross-sectoral coordination and integration: journey planner 3
Priest, S. and Alexander, M. 2021. Cross-sectoral coordination and integration: journey planner 3. UK Environment Agency.
A journey towards accountable and legitimate partnerships, Journey planner on internal partnership dynamics
Priest, S. and Alexander, M. 2021. A journey towards accountable and legitimate partnerships, Journey planner on internal partnership dynamics. Environment Agency.
A journey towards accountable and legitimate partnerships, Journey planner for legitimate partnerships
Priest, S. and Alexander, M. 2021. A journey towards accountable and legitimate partnerships, Journey planner for legitimate partnerships. Environment Agency.
Self-assessment framework: measuring the effectiveness of partnership governance arrangements
Alexander, M. and Priest, S. 2021. Self-assessment framework: measuring the effectiveness of partnership governance arrangements. Environment Agency.
Evaluating the effectiveness of flood and coastal erosion risk governance in England and Wales
Alexander, M., Priest, S., Penning-Rowsell, E. and Cobbing, P. 2021. Evaluating the effectiveness of flood and coastal erosion risk governance in England and Wales. Bristol, UK Environment Agency.
Supporting flood and coastal erosion risk management through partnerships: key lessons
Priest, S., Alexander, M., McCarthy, S., Penning-Rowsell, E., Cumiskey, L. and Cobbing, P. 2021. Supporting flood and coastal erosion risk management through partnerships: key lessons. Bristol, UK Environment Agency.
Shaping flood risk governance through science-policy interfaces: Insights from England, France and The Netherlands
Hegger, D., Alexander, M., Raadgever, G., Priest, S. and Bruzzone, S. 2020. Shaping flood risk governance through science-policy interfaces: Insights from England, France and The Netherlands. Environmental Science & Policy. 106, pp. 157-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.02.002
A framework linking ecosystem services and human well‐being: Saltmarsh as a case study
Rendón, O., Garbutt, A., Skov, M., Möller, I., Alexander, M., Ballinger, R., Wyles, K., Smith, G., McKinley, E., Griffin, J., Thomas, M., Davidson, K., Pagès, J., Read, S. and Beaumont, N. 2019. A framework linking ecosystem services and human well‐being: Saltmarsh as a case study. People and Nature. 1 (4), pp. 486-496. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10050
The risk of ill-informed reform: the future for English flood risk management
Alexander, M., Priest, S. and Penning-Rowsell, E. 2018. The risk of ill-informed reform: the future for English flood risk management. Area. 50 (3), pp. 426-429. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12393
Assessing the legitimacy of flood risk governance arrangements in Europe: insights from intra-country evaluations
Pettersson, M., Van Rijswick, M., Suykens, C., Alexander, M., Ek, K. and Priest, S. 2017. Assessing the legitimacy of flood risk governance arrangements in Europe: insights from intra-country evaluations. Water International. 42 (8), pp. 929-944. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2017.1393716
Bridging the legitimacy gap—translating theory into practical signposts for legitimate flood risk governance
Alexander, M., Doorn, N. and Priest, S. 2018. Bridging the legitimacy gap—translating theory into practical signposts for legitimate flood risk governance. Regional Environmental Change. 18 (2), pp. 397-408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1195-4
A framework for evaluating flood risk governance
Alexander, M., Priest, S. and Mees, H. 2016. A framework for evaluating flood risk governance. Environmental Science & Policy. 64, pp. 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.004
Bridges over troubled waters: an interdisciplinary framework for evaluating the interconnectedness within fragmented domestic flood risk management systems
Gilissen, H., Alexander, M., Beyers, J., Chmielewski, P., Matczak, P., Schellenberger, T. and Suykens, C. 2016. Bridges over troubled waters: an interdisciplinary framework for evaluating the interconnectedness within fragmented domestic flood risk management systems. Journal of Water Law. 25 (1), pp. 12-26.
Analysing and evaluating flood risk governance in England – enhancing societal resilience through comprehensive and aligned flood risk governance arrangements
Alexander, M., Priest, S., Micou, P., Tapsell, S., Green, C., Parker, D. and Homewood, S. 2016. Analysing and evaluating flood risk governance in England – enhancing societal resilience through comprehensive and aligned flood risk governance arrangements. Middlesex University.
Social vulnerability to natural hazards
Tapsell, S., McCarthy, S., Faulkner, H., Alexander, M., Steinführer, A., Kuhlicke, C., Brown, S., Walker, G., Pellizzoni, L., Scolobig, A., De Marchi, B., Bianchizza, C., Supramaniam, M. and Kallis, G. 2010. Social vulnerability to natural hazards. European Commission.
Constructions of flood vulnerability across an etic-emic spectrum
Alexander, M. 2014. Constructions of flood vulnerability across an etic-emic spectrum. PhD thesis Middlesex University Flood Hazard Research Centre
Translating the complexities of flood risk science using KEEPER - a knowledge exchange exploratory tool for professionals in emergency response
Alexander, M., Viavattene, C., Faulkner, H. and Priest, S. 2014. Translating the complexities of flood risk science using KEEPER - a knowledge exchange exploratory tool for professionals in emergency response. Journal of Flood Risk Management. 7 (3), pp. 205-216. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12042