Votre recherche

Abstract Characterizing and identification of flood‐susceptible areas can be a solution to mitigate the damages and fatality rate. This study proposes a novel hybrid MCDM framework to assess flood susceptibility in large ungauged watersheds dealing with data scarcity issues. The proposed method examines the interdependencies and causal relationships between various criteria affecting the flooding procedure using the DEcision‐MAking Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL). Moreover, since experts' opinions contain uncertainty, the fuzzy logic is integrated with DEMATEL to overcome this shortcoming. Then, the local weights of criteria were estimated using the Best–Worst Method (BWM) to enhance the pairwise comparisons process. Final criteria weights were obtained using Fuzzy DEMATEL and BWM results in Analytical Network Process (ANP) super‐matrix. Finally, the criteria were distributed spatially using the Complex Proportional Assessment of Alternatives (COPRAS) method based on obtained weights. The proposed method was compared with different approaches such as Fuzzy‐DEMATEL ANP, BWM, and AHP using several statistical measures. We concluded that the novel hybrid proposed method outperformed other approaches based on our results. Moreover, by overlaying classified maps with the historical flood events locations, it was concluded that 85.96% of flooded areas were classified as “high” and “very high.”

The fall 2021 climate events in British Columbia raise questions about the resiliency of communities, but also of critical systems, with respect to the allocation of roads, telecommunications, drinking water, electricity, etc. The interdependence of these systems can quickly generate serious consequences for populations and socio-economic activities that local and regional authorities must manage. The diversity and number of stakeholders require these authorities to coordinate well. How then can the risks to which they are exposed be better assessed? How can we ensure coherence in the measures put in place in terms of planning, preparation and response? The concepts and results presented in this article are the result of an action-research project carried out with the participation of numerous partners, particularly, but not exclusively, from municipal milieus in two regions of Quebec (Argenteuil and Brome-Missisquoi MRCs). This active collaboration with these regional partners has made it possible to propose an approach for implementing a collaborative governance framework combined with a risk assessment process. The tools and mechanisms associated with this approach will allow regional authorities to better understand the impact of climate change on the territory and to ensure consistency in the risk management actions of the various stakeholders. , Les événements climatiques de l’automne 2021 en Colombie-Britannique soulèvent des questions sur la résilience des communautés, mais aussi des systèmes essentiels, en regard de l’affectation des réseaux routiers, de télécommunication, d’eau potable, d’électricité, etc. L’interdépendance de ces systèmes génère rapidement des conséquences graves pour la population et les activités socioéconomiques que les autorités locales et régionales doivent gérer. La diversité des intervenants ainsi que leur nombre exigent de ces autorités de bien se coordonner. Comment alors peut-on mieux apprécier les risques auxquels ils sont exposés ? Comment s’assurer d’une cohérence dans les mesures mises en place autant dans la planification, la préparation que l’intervention ? Les concepts et résultats présentés dans cet article sont issus d’un projet de recherche-action réalisé avec la participation de nombreux partenaires, particulièrement, mais non exclusivement du milieu municipal dans deux régions du Québec (MRC d’Argenteuil et de Brome-Missisquoi). Cette collaboration active avec ces partenaires régionaux permet de proposer une démarche pour mettre en place un cadre de gouvernance collaboratif combiné à un processus d’appréciation des risques. Les outils et mécanismes associés à cette démarche permettront, alors, aux autorités régionales de mieux comprendre l’impact des changements climatiques sur le territoire et d’assurer une cohérence dans les actions de gestion des risques des différentes parties prenantes.

Coastal socio-ecological systems are complex adaptive systems with nonlinear changing properties and multi-scale dynamics. They are influenced by unpredictable coastal hazards accentuated by the effects of climate change, and they can quickly be altered if critical thresholds are crossed. Additional pressures come from coastal activities and development, both of which attracting stakeholders with different perspectives and interests. While coastal defence measures (CDMs) have been implemented to mitigate coastal hazards for centuries, a lack of knowledge and tools available to make informed decision has led to coastal managers favouring the choice of seawalls or rock armours with little consideration for socio-ecological systems features, and stakeholders’ priorities. Though it is not currently widely applied in coastal zone management, multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a tool that can be useful to facilitate decision making. PROMETHEE, an outranking method, was chosen to support the multicriteria decision analysis for the evaluation of CDMs in the context of four study sites characterized by distinct environmental features. The aim was to determine the relevance and benefits of a MCDA by integrating coastal zone stakeholders in a participatory decision-making process in order to select CDMs that are better adapted to the whole socio-ecological system. First, in a series of five workshops, stakeholders were asked to identify and weigh criteria that were relevant to their local conditions. Second and third, CDMs were evaluated in relation to each criterion within the local context, then, hierarchized. Initial results show that vegetation came first in three of the four sites, while rock armour ranked first in the fourth site. A post-evaluation of the participatory process indicated that the weighting phase is an effective way to integrate local knowledge into the decision-making process, but the identification of criteria could be streamlined by the presentation of a predefined list from which participants could make a selection. This would ensure criteria that are standardized, and in a format that is compatible with the MCDA. Coupled with a participatory process MCDA proved to be a flexible methodology that can synthetize multiple aspects of the problem, and contribute in a meaningful way to the coastal engineering and management decision-making process.

Abstract Homeowners around the world elevate houses to manage flood risks. Deciding how high to elevate a house poses a nontrivial decision problem. The U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recommends elevating existing houses to the Base Flood Elevation (the elevation of the 100-year flood) plus a freeboard. This recommendation neglects many uncertainties. Here we analyze a case-study of riverine flood risk management using a multi-objective robust decision-making framework in the face of deep uncertainties. While the quantitative results are location-specific, the approach and overall insights are generalizable. We find strong interactions between the economic, engineering, and Earth science uncertainties, illustrating the need for expanding on previous integrated analyses to further understand the nature and strength of these connections. Considering deep uncertainties surrounding flood hazards, the discount rate, the house lifetime, and the fragility can increase the economically optimal house elevation to values well above FEMA’s recommendation.

What transformations do municipal administrations implement to enact a resilience policy? This article responds to this question from a comparative perspective by analyzing enabling and impeding mechanisms developed in the cities of Montreal (Canada) and London (UK) as they establish their strategies. Collaborative network governance and institutional work mechanisms used in Montreal and London are analyzed in connection with the influence of macro‐ and micro‐contextual elements under which a network can resiliently manage risk and crises. In both cases, the development of resilience emerges from their emergency management structures, as units in charge try to animate their new area of responsibility through collaborative governance. As a siloed approach this is embedded in daily routines, organizations with limited resources focused on shared motivation and values, collaboration across organizational boundaries and creation of joint capacity to implement resilience. This transformative process concerns the organization in charge of resilience in the municipal administration and the wider network that they build and animate. , 从政策挑战到落实战略: 为都市韧性网络管理创造战略 自治政府为颁布一项韧性政策会经历哪些转型?本文透过比较视角, 通过分析蒙特利尔(加拿大)和伦敦(英国)在建立各自战略时开发的推动机制和阻碍机制, 对该疑问进行了回应。分析了蒙特利尔和伦敦所使用的协作网络治理及机构工作机制与“宏观和微观情境元素的影响”之间的关系, 在这些情境元素中网络能发挥韧性管理风险和危机。在这两个案例中, 当应急管理结构中各主管单位试图通过协作治理开启新的责任区时, 韧性便得以发展。作为一项孤立的措施, 其被应用于日常活动中、应用于在共享动机和价值观方面资源有限的机构中、还被用于跨组织界限的协作以及为发挥韧性而创造的共同行动。该转型过程与负责自治政府韧性建设的机构有关, 还与后者建立和推动的更广网络有关。 , Del desafío político a la estrategia de implementación: estrategias habilitantes para la gobernanza de la red de resiliencia urbana ¿Qué transformaciones implementan las administraciones municipales para promulgar una política de resiliencia? Este artículo responde a esta pregunta desde una perspectiva comparativa analizando los mecanismos habilitadores e impedidores desarrollados en las ciudades de Montreal (Canadá) y Londres (Reino Unido) a medida que establecen sus estrategias. La gobernanza de la red colaborativa y los mecanismos de trabajo institucional utilizados en Montreal y Londres se analizan en relación con la influencia de elementos macro y micro contextuales bajo los cuales una red puede gestionar de manera resiliente los riesgos y las crisis. En ambos casos, el desarrollo de la resiliencia surge de sus estructuras de gestión de emergencias, ya que las unidades a cargo intentan animar su nueva área de responsabilidad a través de la gobernanza colaborativa. Como un enfoque aislado, esto se integra en las rutinas diarias, las organizaciones con recursos limitados se centraron en la motivación y los valores compartidos, la colaboración a través de los límites de la organización y la creación de capacidad conjunta para implementar la resiliencia. Este proceso transformador concierne a la organización a cargo de la resiliencia en la administración municipal y la red más amplia que construyen y animan.

The environmental management literature suggests that resilience is key to managing complex systems and reducing vulnerability resulting from uncertainty and unexpected change. Yet, flood risk management (FRM) has emerged largely from a culture of resistance. This paper takes the pulse of the current state of FRM research, with a focus on how the scholarly community has approached governance for flood resilience. Our analysis of the FRM journal literature identified 258 articles addressing governance and flooding, resilience and adaptation. Five main research themes emerged from these articles, addressing a variety of issues, but mostly lacking the degree of integration needed to address the social‐ecological complexity of FRM. Overall, research supporting the governance of FRM for resilience lacks integration, and methods of mitigating this lack of integration are poorly studied. We conclude with a discussion about the nature and scope of FRM research for resilience, and identify opportunities for more integrative FRM research that is more tightly coupled with policy and practice.

Abstract There has been an upsurge in studies of flood risk governance (FRG): steering and decision‐making by public and private actors as a complement to risk assessments and technical management options. The scholarly debate is, however, highly fragmented, complicating the production of cumulative insights. To address this knowledge gap, we used six governance strategies for achieving flood resilience that previously have been put forward as a conceptual framework to review 121 articles published between 2016 and 2019, complemented with insights contained in recent overview articles, to gauge the state‐of‐the‐art in FRG literature: to (a) diversify flood risk management strategies; (b) align the strategies; (c) adequately involve private actors, including citizens; (d) put an adequate rule system in place; (e) cater for sufficient monetary and non‐monetary resources; (f) inspire an open and inclusive normative debate. We found, first, that literature is producing insights on increasingly technically advanced risk assessments and agent‐based models but societal debate on justice in flood risk governance is getting attention. A clearly emerging topic is that of citizen engagement in flood risk governance. Second, the geographical focus of the studies is still skewed toward the Global North. To make progress in understanding flood risk governance for better resilience more systematic and comparative empirical assessments of flood risk governance in order to derive generalizable lessons while better taking into account the context‐specificity of FRG. Testing flood risk governance solutions against comparative cases, by balancing the geographical scope of research efforts, and enhancing interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary working is a way to deliver knowledge for more resilience. This article is categorized under: Human Water > Water Governance Engineering Water > Planning Water

Parler d’inclusion démocratique, c’est chercher à impliquer les citoyen.ne.s dans les processus de prise de décision des organes politiques. Évidemment la première question qui vient, c’est celle de savoir comment le faire. Cette tâche complexe se joue sur de multiples échelles : au niveau national, au niveau des provinces ou des états, des régions, des villes; […]

In this editorial, the authors (and guest editors) introduce the Special Issue titled Understanding Game-based Approaches for Improving Sustainable Water Governance: The Potential of Serious Games to Solve Water Problems. The authors take another look at the twelve contributions, starting from the subtitle question: what is the potential? The authors summarize the insights and give directions for future research.

When analysing flood risk governance in France since the beginning of the 1980s, central government appears as a predominant actor. However, to understand contemporary French flood risk governance ( FRG ), it is also important to highlight how this domination has progressively been undermined since 1982. First, a decentralisation movement has been initiated whose main characteristics are an increasing involvement of local governments and a difficulty for national authorities to maintain their predominant role. The second main change is a diversification in flood risk strategies going together with a diversification in the definition of the flood risk issue. FRG is not a sole matter of protection through defence, preparation, and recovery strategies anymore. Both prevention and mitigation strategies have progressively gained in legitimacy. It is in the latter that local governments and stakeholders have increasingly got involved and have taken up responsibilities and initiatives. The paper focuses on the explanatory factors behind both stability and change, and especially on the ongoing tension, between path dependency factors (i.e. state power and role) and organisational capability of local actors.