Suchergebnisse

This paper presents how the approaches to flood risk in Poland have evolved over the last 25 years. The reliance on structural defence and on the state as the key responsible actor was challenged by four triggering events: two large floods; the collapse of the communist system; and the European Union accession. The paper reveals that (1) the radical transformation of the political system did not lead to significant changes in flood risk governance; (2) changes in response to disastrous floods are incremental. Despite the pressures, the Polish flood risk governance preserved its core functional characteristics. Until the 1997 flood, it exhibited the exhaustion mode of institutional dynamics, with issue marginalisation and poor financing, while after this flood, the layering‐type mode prevailed, where innovative ideas were accommodated by the established system. The analysis of the Polish flood risk governance dynamics suggests that changes cannot be taken for granted, even facing significant pressures and windows of opportunities.

Across Europe, citizens are increasingly expected to participate in the implementation of flood risk management (FRM), by engaging in voluntary-based activities to enhance preparedness, implementing property-level measures, and so forth. Although citizen participation in FRM decision making is widely addressed in academic literature, citizens' involvement in the delivery of FRM measures is comparatively understudied. Drawing from public administration literature, we adopted the notion of "coproduction" as an analytical framework for studying the interaction between citizens and public authorities, from the decision-making process through to the implementation of FRM in practice. We considered to what extent coproduction is evident in selected European Union (EU) member states, drawing from research conducted within the EU project STAR-FLOOD (Strengthening and Redesigning European Flood Risk Practices towards Appropriate and Resilient Flood Risk Governance Arrangements). On the basis of a cross-country comparison between Flanders (Belgium), England (United Kingdom), France, the Netherlands, and Poland, we have highlighted the varied forms of coproduction and reflected on how these have been established within divergent settings. Coproduction is most prominent in discourse and practice in England and is emergent in France and Flanders. By contrast, FRM in the Netherlands and Poland remains almost exclusively reliant on governmental protection measures and thereby consultation-based forms of coproduction. Analysis revealed how these actions are motivated by different underlying rationales, which in turn shape the type of approaches and degree of institutionalization of coproduction. In the Netherlands, coproduction is primarily encouraged to increase societal resilience, whereas public authorities in the other countries also use it to improve cost-efficiency and redistribute responsibilities to its beneficiaries.