4.7 Article

Drivers of changing urban flood risk: A framework for action

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 240, Issue -, Pages 47-56

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.094

Keywords

Urban flood risk; Climate change; Urban flood management

Funding

  1. Formas (Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences, and Spatial Planning) [942-2015-149]
  2. Sweden Water Research
  3. Hoje a Water Council
  4. Skane Region
  5. Lansforsakringar Skane
  6. City of Malmo
  7. City of Goteborg

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study focuses on drivers for changing urban flood risk. We suggest a framework for guiding climate change adaptation action concerning flood risk and manageability in cities. The identified key drivers of changing flood hazard and vulnerability are used to provide an overview of each driver's impact on flood risk and manageability at the city level. We find that identified drivers for urban flood risk can be grouped in three different priority areas with different time horizon. The first group has high impact but is manageable at city level. Typical drivers in this group are related to the physical environment such as decreasing permeability and unresponsive engineering. The second group of drivers is represented by public awareness and individual willingness to participate and urbanization and urban sprawl. These drivers may be important and are manageable for the cities and they involve both short-term and long-term measures. The third group of drivers is related to policy and long-term changes. This group is represented by economic growth and increasing values at risk, climate change, and increasing complexity of society. They have all high impact but low manageability. Managing these drivers needs to be done in a longer time perspective, e.g., by developing long-term policies and exchange of ideas.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available