a framework for profiling the characteristics of risk governance in natural hazard contexts
Clicks: 162
ID: 170169
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
162 views
19 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #87 of 190 articles by views in anziam journal
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 190 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Over recent decades there have been moves away from traditional forms of
government towards broader practices of "governance". These moves are as
relevant to the handling of natural hazards as they are to other societal
concerns. Key characteristics of such changes include the emergence of
multi-level governance processes, shifts away from the exercise of
centralised authority towards the involvement and collaboration of a
multiplicity of actors, the creation of new forms of authority and control,
and changing distributions of responsibilities between the state and other
actors. However, the extent to which these shifts have taken place across
the varied national contexts in Europe and can be observed specifically in
relation to the governance of natural hazards is not at all clear. Such
developments may also be evaluated in different ways; where some might see
progressive reforms, others might see damaging undermining of established
arrangements.
In this paper, we propose a risk governance profiling framework that can be used to draw out the key characteristics of the ways in which natural hazards are governed in a particular governance setting. The framework can be flexibly applied in relation to a specific hazard and national, regional or local context, and enables qualitative profiling across a spectrum of eight key governance characteristics. Past trends and likely future changes can also be represented. We discuss the formulation of this framework as well as giving examples of profiles for different hazards in different parts of Europe. We suggest ways in which comparisons can be made between governance profiles, providing a stimulus and focus for debate and discussion around the trends of change in governance practice that have been, and are continuing, to take place.
In this paper, we propose a risk governance profiling framework that can be used to draw out the key characteristics of the ways in which natural hazards are governed in a particular governance setting. The framework can be flexibly applied in relation to a specific hazard and national, regional or local context, and enables qualitative profiling across a spectrum of eight key governance characteristics. Past trends and likely future changes can also be represented. We discuss the formulation of this framework as well as giving examples of profiles for different hazards in different parts of Europe. We suggest ways in which comparisons can be made between governance profiles, providing a stimulus and focus for debate and discussion around the trends of change in governance practice that have been, and are continuing, to take place.
| Reference Key |
walker2014naturala
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;G. Walker;F. Tweed;R. Whittle |
| Journal | anziam journal |
| Year | 2014 |
| DOI |
10.5194/nhess-14-155-2014
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.