Since 1990, natural hazards have led to over 1.6 million fatalities globally, and economic losses are estimated at an average of around USD 260–310 billion per year. The scientific and policy communities recognise the need to reduce these risks. As a result, the last decade has seen a rapid development of global models for assessing risk from natural hazards at the global scale. In this paper, we review the scientific literature on natural hazard risk assessments at the global scale, and we specifically examine whether and how they have examined future projections of hazard, exposure, and/or vulnerability. In doing so, we examine similarities and differences between the approaches taken across the different hazards, and we identify potential ways in which different hazard communities can learn from each other. For example, there are a number of global risk studies focusing on hydrological, climatological, and meteorological hazards that have included future projections and disaster risk reduction measures (in the case of floods), whereas fewer exist in the peer-reviewed literature for global studies related to geological hazards. On the other hand, studies of earthquake and tsunami risk are now using stochastic modelling approaches to allow for a fully probabilistic assessment of risk, which could benefit the modelling of risk from other hazards. Finally, we discuss opportunities for learning from methods and approaches being developed and applied to assess natural hazard risks at more continental or regional scales. Through this paper, we hope to encourage further dialogue on knowledge sharing between disciplines and communities working on different hazards and risk and at different spatial scales.
Coastal and marine cultural heritage (CMCH) is at risk due to its location and its often indefinable value. As these risks are likely to intensify in the future, there is an urgent need to build CMCH resilience. We argue that the current CMCH risk management paradigm narrowly focuses on the present and preservation. This tends to exclude debates about the contested nature of resilience and how it may be achieved beyond a strict preservationist approach. There is a need, therefore, to progress a broader and more dynamic framing of CMCH management that recognises the shift away from strict preservationist approaches and incorporates the complexity of heritage’s socio-political contexts. Drawing on critical cultural heritage literature, we reconceptualise CMCH management by rethinking the temporality of cultural heritage. We argue that cultural heritage may exist in four socio-temporal manifestations (extant, lost, dormant, and potential) and that CMCH management consists of three broad socio-political steering processes (continuity, discontinuity, and transformation). Our reconceptualisation of CMCH management is a first step in countering the presentness trap in CMCH management. It provides a useful conceptual framing through which to understand processes beyond the preservationist approach and raises questions about the contingent and contested nature of CMCH, ethical questions around loss and transformation, and the democratisation of cultural heritage management.
MULTIFILE
Since the early work on defining and analyzing resilience in domains such as engineering, ecology and psychology, the concept has gained significant traction in many fields of research and practice. It has also become a very powerful justification for various policy goals in the water sector, evident in terms like flood resilience, river resilience, and water resilience. At the same time, a substantial body of literature has developed that questions the resilience concept's systems ontology, natural science roots and alleged conservatism, and criticizes resilience thinking for not addressing power issues. In this study, we review these critiques with the aim to develop a framework for power-sensitive resilience analysis. We build on the three faces of power to conceptualize the power to define resilience. We structure our discussion of the relevant literature into five questions that need to be reflected upon when applying the resilience concept to social–hydrological systems. These questions address: (a) resilience of what, (b) resilience at what scale, (c) resilience to what, (d) resilience for what purpose, and (e) resilience for whom; and the implications of the political choices involved in defining these parameters for resilience building or analysis. Explicitly considering these questions enables making political choices explicit in order to support negotiation or contestation on how resilience is defined and used.
MULTIFILE
INXCES will use and enhance innovative 3D terrain analysis and visualization technology coupled with state-of-the-art satellite remote sensing to develop cost-effective risk assessment tools for urban flooding, aquifer recharge, ground stability and subsidence. INXCES will develop quick scan tools that will help decision makers and other actors to improve the understanding of urban and peri-urban terrains and identify options for cost effective implementation of water management solutions that reduce the negative impacts of extreme events, maximize beneficial uses of rainwater and stormwater for small to intermediate events and provide long-term resilience in light of future climate changes. The INXCES approach optimizes the multiple benefits of urban ecosystems, thereby stimulating widespread implementation of nature-based solutions on the urban catchment scale.INXCES will develop new innovative technological methods for risk assessment and mitigation of extreme hydroclimatic events and optimization of urban water-dependent ecosystem services at the catchment level, for a spectrum of rainfall events. It is widely acknowledged that extreme events such as floods and droughts are an increasing challenge, particularly in urban areas. The frequency and intensity of floods and droughts pose challenges for economic and social development, negatively affecting the quality of life of urban populations. Prevention and mitigation of the consequences of hydroclimatic extreme events are dependent on the time scale. Floods are typically a consequence of intense rainfall events with short duration. In relation to prolonged droughts however, a much slower timescale needs to be considered, connected to groundwater level reductions, desiccation and negative consequences for growing conditions and potential ground – and building stability.INXCES will take a holistic spatial and temporal approach to the urban water balance at a catchment scale and perform technical-scientific research to assess, mitigate and build resilience in cities against extreme hydroclimatic events with nature-based solutions.INXCES will use and enhance innovative 3D terrain analysis and visualization technology coupled with state-of-the-art satellite remote sensing to develop cost-effective risk assessment tools for urban flooding, aquifer recharge, ground stability and subsidence. INXCES will develop quick scan tools that will help decision makers and other actors to improve the understanding of urban and peri-urban terrains and identify options for cost effective implementation of water management solutions that reduce the negative impacts of extreme events, maximize beneficial uses of rainwater and stormwater for small to intermediate events and provide long-term resilience in light of future climate changes. The INXCES approach optimizes the multiple benefits of urban ecosystems, thereby stimulating widespread implementation of nature-based solutions on the urban catchment scale.
Cities: Action-perspectives for a climate-proof, drought-resilient, and water-sensitive built environment Recurring droughts severely impacted the Dutch built Environment , causing financial, environmental, and social effects. Climate change and urban developments are expected to aggravate this. Although municipalities recognize drought as critical risk, few have prepared for it. This is due to a lack of understanding of the urban water balance under drought and the vulnerability of urban water use(r)s, ambiguity in role and responsibility, and missing action-perspectives. Thirsty Cities aims to address this by developing, collecting, connecting and delivering in a transdisciplinary approach the needed knowledge, insights, tooling, principles, designs, infrastructures and action-perspectives for a climate-proof, drought-resilient, and water-sensitive built environment.Dorstige Steden: Handelingsperspectieven voor een klimaatbestendige, droogteweerbare, en waterrobuuste bebouwde omgeving.De Nederlandse bebouwde omgeving is herhaaldelijk geraakt door droogte, met financiële, ecologische en maatschappelijke effecten. Klimaatverandering en stedelijke ontwikkelingen zullen het droogte-risico naar verwachting doen toenemen. Alhoewel overheden droogte als een risico erkennen, hebben weinigen zich daarop voorbereid. Gebrek aan inzicht in de stedelijke waterbalans onder droogte, de kwetsbaarheid van stedelijke watergebruikers, onduidelijkheid in rol en verantwoordelijkheid van betrokken actoren, en ontbrekende handelingsperspectieven liggen hieraan ten grondslag. ‘Dorstige Steden’ draagt middels trans-disciplinair onderzoek bij aan een klimaatbestendige, droogteweerbare, en waterrobuuste bebouwde omgeving door de benodigde kennis, inzichten, instrumentaria, principes en ontwerpen te ontwikkelen, verzamelen en verbinden en handelingsperspectieven te formuleren.
