Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Distributional effects of flood risk management: a cross-country comparison of preflood compensation
Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law, Utrecht University School of Law.
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Social Sciences.
Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law, Utrecht University.
Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex University London.
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 9
2016 (English)In: Ecology & society, ISSN 1708-3087, E-ISSN 1708-3087, Vol. 21, no 4, 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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 21, no 4, 26
Keyword [en]
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: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-60613DOI: 10.5751/ES-08648-210426ISI: 000391199400007Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85008164007OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-60613DiVA: diva2:1050011
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: 2017-05-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopushttp://www.ecologyandsociety.org/issues/article.php/8648

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Goytia, Susana
By organisation
Social Sciences
In the same journal
Ecology & society
Law (excluding Law and Society)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 155 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf