The levee effect poses a challenge for flood risk management. While there is research on the consequences of the levee effect in general, a detailed understanding of policies addressing residual risk is lacking. The aim of this research is to understand how coercive and cooperative policy designs are applied in spatial planning provisions dealing with residual flood risk and which context conditions influence planning authorities when deciding on a certain policy design. We applied a qualitative research approach, including expert interviews and examining relevant documents. The results show that coercive planning policies can regulate the use of areas with residual risk either by limiting the extension of building land or by prescribing flood adaptation of buildings. However, the formulation of such regulations is connected to the spatial context, the actors involved, past flood events and risk awareness. Cooperative planning policies address residual risk either as recommendations or by providing local authorities scope for decision-making when it comes to land use planning in residual risk areas. The interview partners also discussed possibilities that go beyond spatial planning, such as emergency management. The research shows the variety of policies that can offer ways of dealing with flooding beyond the expected level.

The paradigmatic shift from traditional flood defense toward integrated flood risk management has widened the sectors and policies affected and has spurred a growing interest of scholars to understand cross-sectoral flood policy integration. In this paper we argue that the cross-sectoral goal relationship-ranging from complementary to conflictual policy goals-is a useful conceptual framework to understand (1) the policy integration challenge at hands and (2) in particular the unfolding policy integration from a processual perspective. For our empirical analysis we identify three policy subsystems that are highly important for sectoral interplay in flood risk management: agriculture, hydropower generation, and spatial planning. Using Austria as a case study we illustrate the goal relationships and sectoral policy integration challenges in each of these fields of interaction. Based on 45 expert interviews in the selected policy sectors we provide useful insights into the current processes of flood policy integration. The empirical findings from our case studies show that sectoral goal relationships and the nature of the policy integration challenge drive flood policy integration. More pronounced land use conflicts are more strongly reflected in different actor interests, policy frames, policy goals, and the choice of policy instruments. Sectoral goal relationships are an important factor to explain the unfolding policy integration process. Complementary policy goals result in rather informal, harmonious integrative negotiations on strengthening synergies by using soft policy instruments. On the contrary, conflictual policy goals lead to more formal negotiations among the affected sectors relying on hard, regulative instruments.

Demographic trends across Europe indicate that many regions face sustained population decline due to aging and out-migration. Rural regions are often prone to flood hazards and have repeatedly been affected by damaging events in the past. However, we lack in-depth knowledge about how demographic trends challenge their capacities, abilities, and plans to manage flood risks. In this paper, we aim to close this gap. We employed a mixed-methods approach in the Gailtal-region in Carinthia (Austria), which combines the assessment of exposure to flood risk, social vulnerability, coping ability and adaptation capacity, as well as a discourse analysis. This comprehensive approach was designed to assess how demographic change impacts flood risk management. The findings do not support the hypothesis that population decline increases communities' social vulnerability and reduces their coping ability and adaptation capacity. Additionally, the selected municipalities showed a strong increase in exposure. This is an example of the exposure paradox, which describes the phenomenon that settlement and population dynamics are not interconnected at all, especially in regions with a limited share of suitable land. Finally, our results show that current flood risk management and the corresponding social and political discourse mainly neglect the challenge of population decline. Overall, this study indicates that public administrations need to address the challenges of weak communities in flood risk management and consider how they might empower local authorities and citizens to adapt to future events – in full consideration of the demographic trends they have to expect.

Flood damages are increasing and thus flood resilience is gaining importance. Various definitions of resilience and the identification of different resilience dimensions have been the focus of past research, but there is a lack of understanding how these dimensions systemically interrelate. Using an exploratory research design, this study examines multidimensional resilience in the context of flood recovery on private land. The results show that physical, social and financial resilience dimensions are part of the recovery process. The dimensions can have conflicting impacts on each other, meaning that a trade-off has to take place between two dimensions. Further, dependencies have been detected, the increase of one resilience dimension depends on others. In the case study there are also projects being implemented that create synergies between different resilience dimensions. This requires coordination between the involved stakeholders. Only limited attention has been put on the interrelations between different resilience dimensions, increased coordination is therefore necessary. Applying a multidimensional resilience under-standing allows the inclusion of different perspectives, which helps to reach an understanding on flood resilience of a whole system.

Increasing flood damage has led to a rising importance of land use in flood risk management policies, commonly referred to as the spatial turn in flood risk management. This includes policies aiming at making space for rivers, which, in practice, lead to an increasing demand for land. Although research has been conducted on the variety of policies, the resulting land use conflicts in flood-prone areas have not been paid much attention to. This paper therefore analyses the current land use and its changes in Alpine flood-prone areas in Austria. The results show that space for rivers has been decreasing due to human activities (e.g., river straightening and channel narrowing) since the middle of the 19th century, and settlements have been expanding into flood-prone areas. Furthermore, the share of valuable agricultural land (which is important for food production) located in flood hazard zones is higher in more mountainous areas. Given the limited space for permanent settlement in Alpine regions, these land use changes exert pressure on the availability of land suitable for flood risk management. Therefore, making space for rivers as part of flood risk management policies faces considerable restrictions in Alpine areas.

Mountain hazards such as floods, torrents or landslides pose a serious threat to human lives and repeatedly cause considerable damage in the Alpine region. Shrinking populations also provide a socio-political challenge for regional and local authorities. Within the ÖAW-ESS funded DemoHazAlps project, the aim is to develop a better understanding of demographic change as a key driver in transforming risk patterns. A transdisciplinary research strategy was chosen to address these challenges in the Gailtal, in the Austrian province of Carinthia. This paper describes the use of transdisciplinary research above all to integrate the knowledge of those who are affected by, and those who can affect the planning of, risk management. Transdisciplinary research has a high potential to contribute to overcoming conflicts in flood risk management triggered by, and linked to, demographic change. However, in practice there are many limitations and barriers to consider, such as the negative connotations of risk management or a pandemic. This paper provides some critical reflection on transdisciplinary research to address limitations and barriers; the lessons learnt could be applied in similar situations, for example within UNESCO biosphere reserves.