Risk social contracts: Exploring responsibilities through the lens of citizens affected by flooding in Germany in 2021

IF 2.6 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Progress in Disaster Science Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.pdisas.2024.100315
Joy Ommer , Sophie Blackburn , Milan Kalas , Jess Neumann , Hannah L. Cloke
{"title":"Risk social contracts: Exploring responsibilities through the lens of citizens affected by flooding in Germany in 2021","authors":"Joy Ommer ,&nbsp;Sophie Blackburn ,&nbsp;Milan Kalas ,&nbsp;Jess Neumann ,&nbsp;Hannah L. Cloke","doi":"10.1016/j.pdisas.2024.100315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Citizen priorities, needs, and rights have been moving to the centre of ‘good’ risk management and governance in theory, but what is their role in practice? The disastrous impacts of the flooding event across western Europe in 2021 highlighted many gaps and challenges in flood risk governance (FRG) structures in Germany. To better understand these, this study explored responsibilities as perceived by citizens and compares these with legal-institutional social contracts. These perceptions of citizens were captured in an online survey in the affected regions. The results indicate that German FRG remains a predominantly top-down system with citizens being dependent on the functioning of the risk and emergency system. The results of the survey highlight the need for: 1) clarifying and co-defining roles and responsibilities in FRG and making them more transparent; 2) enhancing citizen active involvement in governance and deliberating interactions; 3) rebuilding trust; and 4) creating joint responsibilities between citizens and local authorities. Based on the findings of the study, it became apparent that research on citizen centred FRG is steps ahead of policy and practice. To enhance policy and practice, recommendations were developed to foster collaboration between citizens and local authorities to strengthen local FRG.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":52341,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Disaster Science","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100315"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259006172400005X/pdfft?md5=6850cf60cc708b306b9b6959f9bf90d2&pid=1-s2.0-S259006172400005X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Disaster Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259006172400005X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Citizen priorities, needs, and rights have been moving to the centre of ‘good’ risk management and governance in theory, but what is their role in practice? The disastrous impacts of the flooding event across western Europe in 2021 highlighted many gaps and challenges in flood risk governance (FRG) structures in Germany. To better understand these, this study explored responsibilities as perceived by citizens and compares these with legal-institutional social contracts. These perceptions of citizens were captured in an online survey in the affected regions. The results indicate that German FRG remains a predominantly top-down system with citizens being dependent on the functioning of the risk and emergency system. The results of the survey highlight the need for: 1) clarifying and co-defining roles and responsibilities in FRG and making them more transparent; 2) enhancing citizen active involvement in governance and deliberating interactions; 3) rebuilding trust; and 4) creating joint responsibilities between citizens and local authorities. Based on the findings of the study, it became apparent that research on citizen centred FRG is steps ahead of policy and practice. To enhance policy and practice, recommendations were developed to foster collaboration between citizens and local authorities to strengthen local FRG.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
风险社会契约:从 2021 年德国洪灾受灾公民的视角探索责任
从理论上讲,公民的优先事项、需求和权利已成为 "良好 "风险管理和治理的核心,但在实践中,它们的作用又是什么呢?2021 年西欧洪灾造成的灾难性影响凸显了德国洪灾风险治理(FRG)结构中的许多不足和挑战。为了更好地理解这些问题,本研究探讨了公民眼中的责任,并将这些责任与法律制度上的社会契约进行了比较。受灾地区的在线调查收集了公民的这些看法。结果表明,德国联邦共和国政府仍然是一个主要由上至下的系统,公民依赖于风险和应急系统的运作。调查结果表明有必要1) 明确并共同界定联邦共和国政府的角色和责任,使其更加透明;2) 加强公民对治理和审议互动的积极参与;3) 重建信任;4) 在公民和地方当局之间建立共同责任。根据研究结果,关于以公民为中心的 FRG 的研究显然领先于政策和实践。为加强政策和实践,提出了促进公民与地方当局合作的建议,以加强地方的 FRG。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Progress in Disaster Science
Progress in Disaster Science Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
14.60
自引率
3.20%
发文量
51
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Progress in Disaster Science is a Gold Open Access journal focusing on integrating research and policy in disaster research, and publishes original research papers and invited viewpoint articles on disaster risk reduction; response; emergency management and recovery. A key part of the Journal's Publication output will see key experts invited to assess and comment on the current trends in disaster research, as well as highlight key papers.
期刊最新文献
Fire risk vulnerability and safety assessment of Farmgate area using fire risk index, Dhaka City and optimization of fire hydrant placement Small-grid urban flood prediction model using Twitter data and population GPS data - an example of the 2019 Nagano city flood Improving community understanding of cascading effects of critical infrastructure service failure: An experimental interactive learning process Climate-induced coastal occupational vulnerability and livelihood insecurity: Insights from coastal Bangladesh Morphological changes of river Bank Erosion and channel shifting assessment on Arial Khan River of Bangladesh using Landsat satellite time series images
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1