Aufgrund des Klimawandels nehmen Naturgefahren wie Hochwasser, Dürre und Hitze verstärkt zu. Dabei können naturbasierte Lösungen weltweit zunehmend zum Hochwasserrisikomanagement beitragen. In den vergangenen Jahren wurden weltweit vermehrt naturbasierte Lösungen umgesetzt, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf öffentlichem Eigentum lag. Die größte Herausforderung für naturbasierte Lösungen ist aber, Maßnahmen auf Privateigentum, wie z. B. Land- und Forstwirtschaft oder Privatgebäuden, umzusetzen. Ein wichtiger Grund dafür ist, dass naturbasierte Lösungen für eine effiziente und effektive Wirkung Flächen erfordern. Flächen, die in der Regel nicht im öffentlichen Eigentum liegen. Um diese erfolgreich umzusetzen, bedarf es einer weitreichenden partizipativen Planung und Umsetzung der Maßnahmen. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass neben dem Hochwasserrisikomanagement insbesondere die Verbesserung der Biodiversität, der Klimaregulation sowie des Nährstoff- und Sedimentrückhalts die wichtigsten Gründe für die Umsetzung naturbasierter Lösungen sind. Wobei die Flächenkonkurrenz in der Land- und Forstwirtschaft sowie die höheren Pflegekosten zu den größten Herausforderungen zählten. Für eine erfolgreiche Umsetzung benötigt man daher (a) die frühzeitige Einbindung von Landwirt:innen, (b) die Schaffung ökonomischer Anreize, (c) langfristiges Monitoring und (d) die Anpassung der rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen.

Small and medium-sized islands (SMI) combine high ecological value with limited resources and vulnerability to climatic and environmental risks. Nature-based solutions (NbS) can contribute to addressing some of these challenges, but studies on the uptake and effectiveness of NbS in SMI remain scattered, with few systematic syntheses. Here, we introduce the SMI-NbS compendium, a comprehensive and open-access dataset compiling 280 NbS case studies implemented across SMI worldwide, developed through a systematic review of published and grey literature. Each SMI-NbS case study includes information on the location, NbS category, ecosystem types, societal challenges addressed, associated co-benefits, and links to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SMI-NbS compendium provides practical information on NbS implementation and identifies current research trends and gaps, such as the dominance of ecological and climate-focused NbS, with limited integration of other socio-economic challenges, thereby supporting further research and enabling knowledge exchange across the science-policy-practice interface to inform sustainable development pathways in SMI.

Nature-based solutions (NBS) can act as a valuable complement to conventional 'grey' infrastructure for stormwater management (e.g. dams and dikes) in reducing flood risks as these 'green' solutions are perceived to be more flexible and multifunctional. However, to achieve effective NBS, a multi-actor approach in developing appropriate measures for specific sites is required as NBS occupy more space than 'grey' infrastructure and often overlap with private land. NBS also necessitate a multidisciplinary approach, to maximise environmental, social, and economic benefits. Thus, a transdisciplinary approach is needed for the effective implementation of NBS. Viewing NBS as a boundary concept, focusing on the common ground for different disciplines and actors, can facilitate communication and provide a first step towards effective flood risk mitigation.

This article was published open access under a CC BY licence: https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0 .

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.

This paper investigates the role of flood risk experts in supporting homeowners to implement property-level flood risk adaption (PLFRA). Homeowners can reduce their flood risks by implementing PLFRA. However, oftentimes they need advice on what sort of and how to implement PLFRA. This means that tailored experts advice is necessary to inform homeowners on such measures. But experience shows that mere information is often insufficient to motivate homeowners to realise measures. This contribution explores the reasons for the ineffectiveness of expert advice by investigating how expert advice responds to homeowners' rationalities. Based on a case study from Flanders, Belgium, this paper reveals how the relation between experts and homeowners differs related to different rationalities of homeowners. The paper uses Cultural Theory to discuss strategies on how experts, providing advice on property-level risk adaption, could move beyond engineering skills by also using risk communication skills in order to involve homeowners in flood risk governance.

The major event that hit Europe in summer 2021 reminds society that floods are recurrent and among the costliest and deadliest natural hazards. The long-term flood risk management (FRM) efforts preferring sole technical measures to prevent and mitigate floods have shown to be not sufficiently effective and sensitive to the environment. Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) mark a recent paradigm shift of FRM towards solutions that use nature-derived features, processes and management options to improve water retention and mitigate floods. Yet, the empirical evidence on the effects of NBS across various settings remains fragmented and their implementation faces a series of institutional barriers. In this paper, we adopt a community expert perspective drawing upon LAND4FLOOD Natural flood retention on private land network (https://www.land4flood.eu) in order to identify a set of barriers and their cascading and compound interactions relevant to individual NBS. The experts identified a comprehensive set of 17 barriers affecting the implementation of 12 groups of NBS in both urban and rural settings in five European regional environmental domains (i.e., Boreal, Atlantic, Continental, Alpine-Carpathian, and Mediterranean). Based on the results, we define avenues for further research, connecting hydrology and soil science, on the one hand, and land use planning, social geography and economics, on the other. Our suggestions ultimately call for a transdisciplinary turn in the research of NBS in FRM.

To achieve a more flood-resilient society, it is essential to involve citizens. Therefore, new instruments, such as tailor-made advice for homeowners, are being developed to inform homeowners about adaptive strategies in building to motivate them to implement these measures. This article evaluates if public–private interactions, such as tailored advice, change risk behaviour and therefore increase flood resilience among homeowners. The article conducted semi-structured interviews with homeowners who had received advice as well as involved experts in two case study regions in Europe: Flanders in Belgium and Vorarlberg in Austria. The results show how the tailored advice helps homeowners who are already aware of flood risks and provides them with answers on how to adapt a house. However, the tool seems to lack the ability to inform and “recruit” new groups of homeowners who are not as familiar with flood risks. As such, this article concludes that this initiative has a relatively low impact in raising flood risk awareness among homeowners but may be more successful in serving as a tool that suggests tailored property-level flood risk adaptation measures for those who are already aware. Alternatively, more automated tailored information systems might be more efficient for unaware homeowners.

Hydro-meteorological hazards annually lead to considerable economic losses worldwide. Property level flood risk adaptation (PLFRA) measures have shown to decrease potential damages by floods and other hazards. However, such measures are often implemented inadequately, frequently because of lacking communication between public administration and homeowners. Thus, risk communication systems have been created by multiple actors, ranging from the government to private companies and insurance groups, which have the goal to communicate risks to homeowners and businesses in a tailored manner. Consequently, adaptive behaviour can be triggered by risk communication. This paper conducted a cross-comparison of several risk communication systems which encompassed an output in the shape of a label or guideline, based on semi-structured interviews with relevant experts. One system, the German Hochwasserpass, was focused on in more detail. The results show that risk communication systems should include participatory approaches with experts to trigger adaptive behaviour. However, even in an example including mutual knowledge transfer a gap between knowledge about mitigation measures and actually implementing them was present. Thus, this implies going a step beyond, which ultimately questions the resource efficiency of such risk communication systems on a larger scale.

Although flood risk management is traditionally regarded as a governmental responsibility, homeowners in Flanders (Belgium) have a crucial role in flood risk reduction. With this in mind, the Flanders Environment Agency executed a pilot study in which homeowners were offered free tailor-made advice on floodproofing. To evaluate the advice, we conducted interviews and a survey of the participating homeowners. On this basis we conclude that, to improve the homeowner's contribution towards more effective flood-resilient (peri-)urban areas, there is a need for a more relational approach with other stakeholders.

Book Review| April 01 2015 What Reading Is Truly Canonical? A Brief Response Reading the Epistles of James, Peter, John and Jude as Scripture: The Shaping and Shape of a Canonical CollectionNienhuis, David R. Peter H. Davids Peter H. Davids Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Journal of Theological Interpretation (2015) 9 (1): 137–147. https://doi.org/10.2307/26373879 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Peter H. Davids; What Reading Is Truly Canonical? A Brief Response. Journal of Theological Interpretation 1 April 2015; 9 (1): 137–147. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/26373879 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectivePenn State University PressJournal of Theological Interpretation Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2015 Eisenbrauns Inc.2015Copyright © 2015 Eisenbrauns Inc. Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.