Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Publications (8 of 8) Show all publications
Goytia, S. (2021). Issues of Natural Resources Law for Adopting Catchment-Based Measures for Flood Risk Management in Sweden. Sustainability, 13(4), Article ID 2072.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Issues of Natural Resources Law for Adopting Catchment-Based Measures for Flood Risk Management in Sweden
2021 (English)In: Sustainability, E-ISSN 2071-1050, Vol. 13, no 4, article id 2072Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The EU Floods Directive calls for integrated flood risk management at a catchment scale. The potential of this directive to integrate relevant policy areas and deliver catchment-based measures may however be undermined by sectoral laws and policies in the Member States. This article focuses on the legal issues affecting the integration of catchment-based measures for managing flood risk in three relevant policy areas, namely, energy (in the form of hydropower production), agriculture, and forestry, in Sweden. The results show that that the present legal frameworks not only can restrict attempts to introduce catchment-based measures through compulsory means, but in some cases can also encumber collaborative and voluntary initiatives. It is therefore important to reinforce the catchment perspective in the processes leading to the adoption of flood risk management plans, in terms of assessing flood risks, evaluating measures and engaging stakeholders.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
MDPI, 2021
Keywords
catchment approach, flood risk management, hydropower, agriculture, forestry, Sweden
National Category
Law and Society
Research subject
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-83398 (URN)10.3390/su13042072 (DOI)000624786100001 ()2-s2.0-85101275812 (Scopus ID)
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme, 308364Luleå University of Technology
Note

Validerad;2021;Nivå 2;2021-03-25 (alebob)

Available from: 2021-03-25 Created: 2021-03-25 Last updated: 2022-02-10Bibliographically approved
Ek, K., Goytia, S., Lundmark, C., Nysten-Haarala, S., Pettersson, M., Sandström, A., . . . Stage, J. (2017). Challenges in Swedish hydropower: politics, economics and rights. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 3, Article ID e21305.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Challenges in Swedish hydropower: politics, economics and rights
Show others...
2017 (English)In: Research Ideas and Outcomes, E-ISSN 2367-7163, Vol. 3, article id e21305Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Two systems working in parallel have contributed to implementation difficulties in Swedish water governance. While the old system is designed to be predictable and stable over time, the new system is intended to be transparent and holistic, guided by the principles of Integrated Water Resource Management. The paper disentangles the challenges in Swedish water governance and proposes a blueprint for future research. The proposed research project is unique in the sense that it explores the imbalances between the new and the old water governance systems from a multi-disciplinary perspective, elaborating upon the clashes between the traditional, nationally based regulatory system and the new holistic water governance system from legal, political and economic perspectives.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Pensoft Publishers, 2017
National Category
Economics Law and Society Political Science Law (excluding Law and Society) Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)
Research subject
Economics; Law; Political Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-66029 (URN)10.3897/rio.3.e21305 (DOI)
Available from: 2017-10-10 Created: 2017-10-10 Last updated: 2024-05-06Bibliographically approved
Ek, K., Goytia, S., Pettersson, M. & Spegel, E. (2016). Analysing and evaluating flood risk governance in Sweden: Adaptation to Climate Change? (ed.). Utrecht: STAR-FLOOD Consortium
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Analysing and evaluating flood risk governance in Sweden: Adaptation to Climate Change?
2016 (English)Report (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Utrecht: STAR-FLOOD Consortium, 2016. p. 104
National Category
Economics Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
Economics; Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-22121 (URN)19dcb211-4722-49f2-b67d-cc034e9aa443 (Local ID)978-94-91933-10-3 (ISBN)19dcb211-4722-49f2-b67d-cc034e9aa443 (Archive number)19dcb211-4722-49f2-b67d-cc034e9aa443 (OAI)
Note
Godkänd; 2016; 20160531 (suscas)Available from: 2016-09-29 Created: 2016-09-29 Last updated: 2023-09-05Bibliographically approved
Goytia, S., Pettersson, M., Schellenberger, T., van Doorn-Hoekveld, W. J. & Priest, S. J. (2016). Dealing with change and uncertainty within the regulatory frameworks for flood defense infrastructure in selected European countries. Ecology & Society, 21(4), Article ID 23.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Dealing with change and uncertainty within the regulatory frameworks for flood defense infrastructure in selected European countries
Show others...
2016 (English)In: Ecology & Society, E-ISSN 1708-3087, Vol. 21, no 4, article id 23Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Whereas existing literature on the interactions among law, adaptive governance, and resilience in the water sector often focuses on quality or supply issues, this paper addresses adaptation in national water laws in relation to increasing flood risks. In particular, this paper analyzes the extent to which legal rules governing flood defense infrastructure in a selection of European countries (England, France, Sweden, and The Netherlands) allow for response and adaptation to change and uncertainty. Although there is evidence that the legal rules on the development of new infrastructure require that changing conditions be considered, the adaptation of existing infrastructure is a more complicated matter. Liability rules fail to adequately address damages resulting from causes external to the action or inaction of owners and managers, in particular extreme events. A trend toward clearer, and in some cases, increased public powers to ensure the safety of flood defense infrastructure is observed. The paper concludes that legal rules should ensure not only that decisions to build flood defenses are based on holistic and future-oriented assessments, but also that this is reflected in the implementation and operation of these structures.

Keywords
Adaptive governance, flood defense, flood risk, flood risk management, water law
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-60267 (URN)10.5751/ES-08908-210423 (DOI)000391199400041 ()2-s2.0-85008177095 (Scopus ID)
Projects
STAR-FLOOD
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme
Note

Validerad; 2016; Nivå 2; 2016-11-21 (andbra)

Available from: 2016-11-11 Created: 2016-11-10 Last updated: 2023-09-05Bibliographically approved
van Doorn-Hoekveld, W. J., Goytia, S., Suykens, C., Homewood, S., Thuillier, T., Manson, C., . . . van Rijswick, M. (2016). Distributional effects of flood risk management: a cross-country comparison of preflood compensation. Ecology & Society, 21(4), Article ID 26.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Distributional effects of flood risk management: a cross-country comparison of preflood compensation
Show others...
2016 (English)In: Ecology & Society, E-ISSN 1708-3087, Vol. 21, no 4, article id 26Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

We seek to examine the manner in which either the EU member states of France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden or parts of them, such as the country of England in the UK or the Flemish Region in Belgium, deal with the distributional effects of the flood risk management strategies prevention, defense, and mitigation. Measures carried out in each of these strategies can cause preflood harm, as in the devaluation of property or loss of income. However, different member states and authorities address this harm in different ways. A descriptive overview of the different compensation regimes in the field of flood risk management is followed by an analysis of these differences and an explanation of what may cause them, such as the geographical differences that lead to differences in the way that they interfere with private rights and the dominant legal principles that underlie compensation regimes. An elaborated compensation regime could lead to more equitable and legitimate flood risk management because the burdens are fairly spread and all interests—including those of injured parties—are considered in the decision-making process. Our aim is to stimulate the hardly existent discussion on the financial harm that is caused by measures to prevent floods (preflood), in addition to the already existing discussion on the ex post flood distributional effects.

Keywords
defense, égalité devant les charges publiques, equity, flood risk management, legitimacy, loss, no-fault liability, preflood compensation, prevention, protection of property rights, solidarity, spatial planning
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-60613 (URN)10.5751/ES-08648-210426 (DOI)000391199400007 ()2-s2.0-85008164007 (Scopus ID)
Projects
STAR-FLOOD
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme
Note

Validerad; 2017; Nivå 2; 2017-01-13 (andbra)

Available from: 2016-11-28 Created: 2016-11-22 Last updated: 2022-09-15Bibliographically approved
Priest, S. J., Suykens, C., Van Rijswick, M., Schellenberger, T., Goytia, S., Kundzewicz, Z. W., . . . Homewood, S. (2016). The European union approach to flood risk management and improving societal resilience: Lessons from the implementation of the Floods Directive in six European countries. Ecology & Society, 21(4), Article ID 50.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The European union approach to flood risk management and improving societal resilience: Lessons from the implementation of the Floods Directive in six European countries
Show others...
2016 (English)In: Ecology & Society, E-ISSN 1708-3087, Vol. 21, no 4, article id 50Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Diversity in flood risk management approaches is often considered to be a strength. However, in some national settings, and especially for transboundary rivers, variability and incompatibility of approaches can reduce the effectiveness of flood risk management. Placed in the context of increasing flood risks, as well as the potential for flooding to undermine the European Union’s sustainable development goals, a desire to increase societal resilience to flooding has prompted the introduction of a common European Framework. We provide a legal and policy analysis of the implementation of the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC) in six countries: Belgium (Flemish region), England, France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden. Evaluation criteria from existing legal and policy literature frame the study of the Directive and its effect on enhancing or constraining societal resilience by using an adaptive governance approach. These criteria are initially used to analyze the key components of the EU approach, before providing insight of the implementation of the Directive at a national level. Similarities and differences in the legal translation of European goals into existing flood risk management are analyzed alongside their relative influence on policy and practice. The research highlights that the effect of the Floods Directive on increasing societal resilience has been nationally variable, in part because of its focus on procedural obligations, rather than on more substantive requirements. Analysis shows that despite a focus on transboundary river basin management, existing traditions of flood risk management have overridden objectives to harmonize flood risk management in some cases. The Directive could be strengthened by requiring more stringent cooperation and providing the competent authorities in international river basin districts with more power. Despite some shortcomings in directly affecting flood risk outcomes, the Directive has positively stimulated discussion and flood risk management planning in countries that were perhaps lagging behind

National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-61420 (URN)10.5751/ES-08913-210450 (DOI)000391199400042 ()2-s2.0-85008235096 (Scopus ID)
Note

Validerad; 2017; Nivå 2; 2017-01-13 (andbra)

Available from: 2017-01-13 Created: 2017-01-13 Last updated: 2022-09-15Bibliographically approved
Pettersson, M. & Goytia, S. (2016). The role of the precautionary principle and property rights in the governance of natural resources in Sweden (ed.). Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift, 2016(1), 107-121
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The role of the precautionary principle and property rights in the governance of natural resources in Sweden
2016 (English)In: Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift, E-ISSN 2000-4273, Vol. 2016, no 1, p. 107-121Article in journal (Refereed) Published
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-11631 (URN)aa5ab402-1aa8-4e68-bb04-18a4e5df94c9 (Local ID)aa5ab402-1aa8-4e68-bb04-18a4e5df94c9 (Archive number)aa5ab402-1aa8-4e68-bb04-18a4e5df94c9 (OAI)
Note

Validerad; 2016; Nivå 1; 20160603 (mariap)

Available from: 2016-09-29 Created: 2016-09-29 Last updated: 2023-11-03Bibliographically approved
Hegger, D., Green, C., Driessen, P., Bakker, M., Dieperink, C., Crabbé, A., . . . Goytia, S. (2013). Flood Risk Management in Europe: similarities and differences between the STAR-FLOOD consortium countries. Utrecht
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Flood Risk Management in Europe: similarities and differences between the STAR-FLOOD consortium countries
Show others...
2013 (English)Report (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Utrecht: , 2013
Keywords
Flood risk governance, (Institutionalisation of) Flood Risk Management strategies, Comparative approach, The Netherlands, Belgium, United Kingdom, Poland, France, Sweden, Flood Experiences, Discourses on flood risk management, Differences in actors, levels and domains, Actual flood experiences, Integration between water and spatial planning, Financing of Flood Risk Management, Stakeholder involvement in water management, Substantive and procedural norms and goals
National Category
Law
Research subject
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-61512 (URN)9789491933059 (ISBN)
Projects
STAR-FLOOD
Funder
EU, FP7, Seventh Framework Programme
Available from: 2017-01-18 Created: 2017-01-18 Last updated: 2018-05-23Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-5129-4649

Search in DiVA

Show all publications