Stakeholder perspectives on barriers to landslide risk governance

European Union directives as well as national legislation are placing great emphasis on the inclusion of stakeholder perspectives in the governance of risks from natural hazards. This should help decision makers formulate better policies. However, to date, there is little information on stakeholders’ perspectives with respect to landslide risk governance. This paper addresses the gap by reporting on research in Nocera Inferiore, Italy. The research is based on a documentary analysis, 43 semi-structured interviews and a survey submitted to 373 residents. The political instability, the unfairness of national funding allocation across municipalities and the residents’ lack of knowledge about risk assessment and emergency planning are some of the main barriers to effective risk governance. Moreover, there are divergent, sometimes even opposite, stakeholders’ views on several issues, such as the relevance of illegal development in risky areas. The results highlight the importance of addressing these divergent views and including the plurality of voices as a prerequisite for inclusive risk governance. The research provided essential background information for a participatory process, which was designed to support decisions on landslide risk mitigation measures in Nocera Inferiore (Linnerooth-Bayer et al. this issue). The methodology will be of more general interest to researchers and policymakers intent upon including stakeholder perspectives in natural risk governance.

     

Expert engagement in participatory processes: translating stakeholder discourses into policy options

This paper demonstrates an innovative role for experts in supporting participatory policy processes with an application to landslide risk management in the Italian town of Nocera Inferiore. Experts co-produce risk mitigation options based on their specialized knowledge taking account of local knowledge and values by directly coupling stakeholder discourses with option design. Drawing on the theory of plural rationality and based on a literature review, interviews and a public questionnaire, stakeholder discourses are elicited on the landslide risk problem and its solution. Armed with the discourses and in close interaction with stakeholders, experts provide a range of technical mitigation options, each within a given budget constraint. These options are subsequently deliberated in the participatory process with the intent of reaching compromise recommendations for landslide risk mitigation. As we show in an accompanying paper, “Compromise not consensus. Designing a participatory process for landslide risk mitigation” (this issue), the provision of multiple co-produced policy options enhances stakeholder deliberation by respecting legitimate differences in values and worldviews.     

Compromise not consensus: designing a participatory process for landslide risk mitigation

With the escalating costs of landslides, the challenge for local authorities is to develop institutional arrangements for landslide risk management that are viewed as efficient, feasible and fair by those affected. For this purpose, the participation of stakeholders in the decision-making process is mandated by the European Union as a way of improving its perceived legitimacy and transparency. This paper reports on an analytical-deliberative process for selecting landslide risk mitigation measures in the town of Nocera Inferiore in southern Italy. The process was structured as a series of meetings with a group of selected residents and several parallel activities open to the public. The preparatory work included a literature/media review, semi-structured interviews carried out with key local stakeholders and a survey eliciting residents’ views on landslide risk management. The main point of departure in the design of this process was the explicit elicitation and structuring of multiple worldviews (or perspectives) among the participants with respect to the nature of the problem and its solution. Rather than eliciting preferences using decision analytical methods (e.g. utility theory or multi-criteria evaluation), this process built on a body of research—based on the theory of plural rationality—that has teased out the limited number of contending and socially constructed definitions of problem-and-solution that are able to achieve viability. This framing proved effective in structuring participants’ views and arriving at a compromise recommendation (not, as is often aimed for, a consensus) on measures for reducing landslide risk. Experts played a unique role in this process by providing a range of policy options that corresponded to the different perspectives held by the participants.     

Compromise not consensus: designing a participatory process for landslide risk mitigation

With the escalating costs of landslides, the challenge for local authorities is to develop institutional arrangements for landslide risk management that are viewed as efficient, feasible and fair by those affected. For this purpose, the participation of stakeholders in the decision-making process is mandated by the European Union as a way of improving its perceived legitimacy and transparency. This paper reports on an analytical-deliberative process for selecting landslide risk mitigation measures in the town of Nocera Inferiore in southern Italy. The process was structured as a series of meetings with a group of selected residents and several parallel activities open to the public. The preparatory work included a literature/media review, semi-structured interviews carried out with key local stakeholders and a survey eliciting residents’ views on landslide risk management. The main point of departure in the design of this process was the explicit elicitation and structuring of multiple worldviews (or perspectives) among the participants with respect to the nature of the problem and its solution. Rather than eliciting preferences using decision analytical methods (e.g. utility theory or multi-criteria evaluation), this process built on a body of research—based on the theory of plural rationality—that has teased out the limited number of contending and socially constructed definitions of problem-and-solution that are able to achieve viability. This framing proved effective in structuring participants’ views and arriving at a compromise recommendation (not, as is often aimed for, a consensus) on measures for reducing landslide risk. Experts played a unique role in this process by providing a range of policy options that corresponded to the different perspectives held by the participants.

     

Expert engagement in participatory processes: translating stakeholder discourses into policy options

This paper demonstrates an innovative role for experts in supporting participatory policy processes with an application to landslide risk management in the Italian town of Nocera Inferiore. Experts co-produce risk mitigation options based on their specialized knowledge taking account of local knowledge and values by directly coupling stakeholder discourses with option design. Drawing on the theory of plural rationality and based on a literature review, interviews and a public questionnaire, stakeholder discourses are elicited on the landslide risk problem and its solution. Armed with the discourses and in close interaction with stakeholders, experts provide a range of technical mitigation options, each within a given budget constraint. These options are subsequently deliberated in the participatory process with the intent of reaching compromise recommendations for landslide risk mitigation. As we show in an accompanying paper, “Compromise not consensus. Designing a participatory process for landslide risk mitigation” (this issue), the provision of multiple co-produced policy options enhances stakeholder deliberation by respecting legitimate differences in values and worldviews.

     

A common methodology for risk assessment and mapping for south-east Europe: an application for heat wave risk in Romania

This paper reports on a quantitative estimation of the risk to residents at the toe of Mount Albino, a carbonatic relief covered by shallow deposits of pyroclastic soils, which threatens the municipality of Nocera Inferiore (southern Italy). The quantitative risk analysis (QRA) focuses on one type of mass transport phenomena typical for the context at hand, namely the hyperconcentrated flows. The methodological approach includes three main steps: hazard analysis, consequence analysis and risk estimation. Based on historical incident data, the hazard analysis makes use of a high-resolution digital terrain model and advanced models that incorporate relevant geological and geotechnical input data collected via in situ investigations and laboratory tests. The consequence analysis takes into account information on the exposed persons (age, gender) and their vulnerability. The estimated risk to life is calculated at the individual level (risk to the average and most exposed person). The reported procedure is one of the first QRA’s applications to instabilities which potentially affect natural slopes in Italy, and it was successfully used as technical basis for a public participatory process in Nocera Inferiore, designed and developed to support decisions about risk mitigation measures.     

Quantitative risk analysis for hyperconcentrated flows in Nocera Inferiore (southern Italy)

This paper reports on a quantitative estimation of the risk to residents at the toe of Mount Albino, a carbonatic relief covered by shallow deposits of pyroclastic soils, which threatens the municipality of Nocera Inferiore (southern Italy). The quantitative risk analysis (QRA) focuses on one type of mass transport phenomena typical for the context at hand, namely the hyperconcentrated flows. The methodological approach includes three main steps: hazard analysis, consequence analysis and risk estimation. Based on historical incident data, the hazard analysis makes use of a high-resolution digital terrain model and advanced models that incorporate relevant geological and geotechnical input data collected via in situ investigations and laboratory tests. The consequence analysis takes into account information on the exposed persons (age, gender) and their vulnerability. The estimated risk to life is calculated at the individual level (risk to the average and most exposed person). The reported procedure is one of the first QRA’s applications to instabilities which potentially affect natural slopes in Italy, and it was successfully used as technical basis for a public participatory process in Nocera Inferiore, designed and developed to support decisions about risk mitigation measures.

     

The missing link between flood risk awareness and preparedness: findings from case studies in an Alpine Region

The low risk awareness of the residents living in flood-prone areas is usually considered among the main causes of their low preparedness, which in turns generates inadequate response to natural disasters. In this paper, we challenge this assumption by reporting on the results of a sociological research in four communities exposed to flood risk in the Eastern Italian Alps. The research design included semi-structured interviews and focus groups with key local stakeholders and a standardized questionnaire submitted to 400 residents. Results revealed that residents felt both slightly worried about flood risk and slightly prepared to face an event. Considerable differences were found between the evaluations of individual subjects as opposed to overall communities. There was also a clear discrepancy between the actual adoption of household preparatory measures and the willingness to take self-protection actions. Overall, the risk awareness was significantly higher among those residents who had been personally affected by a flood in the past, were living in isolated (vs. urban) communities, in the most risky areas or had a lower level of trust in local authorities. The improvement of residents?? knowledge about their environment and the residual risk seemed to be crucial to increase risk awareness, and the same was true for the strengthening of local support networks to foster preparedness. The link between risk awareness and preparedness was not at all straightforward. Results revealed instead the complexity of residents?? perspectives, attitudes, behaviours and decisions about risk-related issues.     

A landslide inventory system as a base for automated process and risk analyses

Landslide research requires consistent and widespread data. Many countries within the European Union have national landslide inventories to fulfill these demands for their respective research. However, those inventories were usually not intended to provide the technical basis for automated process and risk analyses during their design phase. The ongoing development of Germany’s national landslide database offers the opportunity to do this differently. This paper introduces a landslide inventory system called WISL suitable for data handling as well as for novel automated process and risk analyses on a national scale. WISL is designated to form the technical infrastructure for a German national database. Its core consists of an open source relational database management system (PostgreSQL), standardized input and registration methods as well as integrated analyses modules, which avoid large data movement and allow for rapid risk analyses. We present proof-of-concept results of endangered infrastructure related to automated risk mappings based on topography and proximity of active landslides. The use of open source software and the application of a standardized input and data acquisition system for experts, coupled with custom analysis modules, constitutes a step toward automated risk maps by a mere ‘button-press’. Future developments for the inventory lie in the field of refining and inventing analysis modules and collecting data, for which WISL provides a firm technical base.     

The district of North Vancouver’s landslide management strategy: role of public involvement for determining tolerable risk and increasing community resilience

This paper examines the public involvement processes contained within the Landslide Management Strategy for the District of North Vancouver in British Columbia, Canada. Following a fatal landslide in the Berkley neighborhood in 2005, the District of North Vancouver convened a community-based Natural Hazards task force to establish risk-tolerance criteria for natural hazards. This paper describes the community task force approach and evaluates it against four criteria for successful public involvement: representative participation; early involvement; information availability; and impact on policy. It is identified that the District could have incorporated a broader understanding of risk, allowing public perspectives to influence the initial framing of the risk issue before charging the Natural Hazards task force to arrive at quantitative risk-tolerance criteria. The District could also have sought to engage a somewhat more representative portion of the population to serve on the Natural Hazards task force, seeking to incorporate a broader set of public values and types of knowledge. Notwithstanding, the Natural Hazards task force successfully utilized social, legal, and scientific information for informed decision-making, and their recommended risk-tolerance criteria were enacted into policy by the District of North Vancouver as a result of the process. The paper also investigates the District’s ongoing public involvement and education efforts with respect to landslide risks, considering information accessibility and its usefulness for increasing individual capacity and community resilience. Overall, the District’s ongoing, dynamic approach to risk management promises to empower individuals and foster resilient communities in the aftermath of the tragic Berkley landslide.     

Multi-risk governance for natural hazards in Naples and Guadeloupe

Technical and institutional capacities are strongly related and must be jointly developed to guarantee effective natural risk governance. Indeed, the available technical solutions and decision support tools influence the development of institutional frameworks and disaster policies. This paper analyses technical and institutional capacities, by providing a comparative evaluation of governance systems in Italy and France. The focus is on two case studies: Naples and Guadeloupe. Both areas are exposed to multiple hazards, including earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, floods, tsunamis, fires, cyclones, and marine inundations Cascade and conjoint effects such as seismic swarms triggered by volcanic activity have also been taken into account. The research design is based on a documentary analysis of laws and policy documents informed by semi-structured interviews and focus groups with stakeholders at the local level. This leads to the identification of three sets of governance characteristics that cover the key issues of: (1) stakeholders and governance level; (2) decision support tools and mitigation measures; and (3) stakeholder cooperation and communication. The results provide an overview of the similarities and differences as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the governance systems across risks. Both case studies have developed adequate decision support tools for most of the hazards of concern. Warning systems, and the assessment of hazards and exposure are the main strengths. While technical/scientific capacities are very well developed, the main weaknesses involve the interagency communication and cooperation, and the use and dissemination of scientific knowledge when developing policies and practices. The consequences for multi-risk governance are outlined in the discussion.     

综合统计模型和物理模型的地质灾害精细评估——以福建省龙山社区为例

地质灾害易发性和危险性评价对象相同但评价内容有差异,即两者表达地质灾害的时间、空间和强度信息各有不同。本文将崩塌滑坡易发性中的统计模型和危险性评价中的物理模型进行结合,综合统计模型客观预测空间位置信息的优点以及物理模型模拟包含地质灾害发生机制的优势,弥补了区域统计模型无法预测灾害强度信息的不足,也对物理模型模拟的空间位置进行了有效的控制和修正,进而完成区域崩塌滑坡的易发性和危险性等级综合分析,实现对区域崩塌滑坡潜在高风险位置的精细评估。本文以福建省福鼎市龙山社区为例,利用野外获取的高清影像、地形、钻孔和地质灾害等数据,通过综合统计模型评价和物理模型危险性评估,完成潜在高风险位置的精细化分析。研究结果表明:需要进行重点排查治理的区域约占社区附近山体总面积的26.92%;研究区域内需要进行集中排查与治理的区域有5个,其中3个区域需要进行重点治理,其潜在高风险区域与野外地质灾害调查区域隐患点吻合;5个高风险区域直接对180幢左右楼房（约360余户居民）的安全构成威胁,该评估将野外调研中划定的大范围高风险区域精细化处理,并验证了该评价方法体系的可行性。该评价方法体系为区域崩塌滑坡地质灾害精细化排查和治理提供了工作思路和指导。     

Vulnerability assessment for preliminary flood risk mapping and management in coastal areas

Despite continuing technological advancement in hazard and vulnerability assessment, risk modelling and hazard mitigation techniques, losses to disasters associated with natural hazards continue and in some cases are increasing across Europe and worldwide. This paper focuses on the need to bridge the gap between technical solutions and the sociopolitical contexts in which these are produced, to better understand and create more effective risk management regimes. We do so with application of the science–policy co-production frame to landslide risk management in Italy. The methodology deployed included a desk study informed by semi-structured interviews carried out with selected key stakeholders at national, regional and municipal level. We propose a normative and analytical framework for transferring co-production into natural hazard research by presenting a matrix identifying four contexts within which co-production may unfold. The matrix is based on two axes, which distinguish between innovation and its absence in science and policy domains. We examine several examples of co-production, such as the water–soil integrated approach to risk management or the implementation of hazard/risk assessment. The results highlight that the insulation of science from the institutional context within which knowledge is produced and used is a very problematic issue. This often hinders the implementation of desirable policies and undermines the effectiveness of interventions. Moreover, innovation in science and policy does not automatically result in successful solutions for landslide risk management. Finally, results confirm the utility of co-production but also highlight methodological challenges associated with the introduction of this new conceptual paradigm into the well-structured communities of scientists and policy-makers.     

The Second World Landslide Forum, Rome, 3�C9 October 2011: state of art at May 2011

The World Landslide Forum (WLF) is a triennial mainstream conference aimed at gathering scientists, stakeholders, policy makers and industry members dealing with the management of landslide risk. The First World Landslide Forum, organised by the International Consortium of Landslides, UNESCO, WMO, Food and Agriculture Organization, UNISDR, UNU, UNEP, IBRD, UNDP, ICSU, WFEO, KU and the Japan Landslide Society, was held in 2008 at the United Nations University, Tokyo. The 1st WLF adopted the 2008 Tokyo Declaration “Strengthening the International Programme on Landslides with UNISDR”. The Second World Landslide Forum has the objective to further develop the outcomes of the First Forum in Tokyo 2008 by providing a global cross-cutting information and cooperation platform for all types of organisations representing academia, United Nations organisations, governments, private enterprises and individuals that contribute to landslide research, practice, education and decision making and are willing to strengthen landslide and other related Earth system risk reduction strategies. The emphasis of this forum will be “Putting Science into Practice” with special attention given to actual implementation of technology and research in everyday applications and procedures with the direct involvement of researchers, engineers, private enterprises, stakeholders as well as policy and decision makers. The abstract submission and pre-registration of participants was quite successful with 649 received abstracts and more than 800 participants at May 2011. The full organisation of the event is now in progress taking into consideration the new figure and interest in scientific community and stakeholders.     

A nine-step approach for developing and implementing an “agricultural drought risk management plan”; case study: Alamut River basin in Qazvin,Iran

Occurrence of drought, as an inevitable natural climate feature, cannot be ceased while happening. However, costs of the consequences could be alleviated using mature scientific integrated approaches. To reduce the amount of damage, it is required to provide “Contingency” and “Mitigation” action plans. For this reason, development of efficient operating instructions for various regions based on weather conditions and field studies is needed as well as having a sophisticated understanding of socioeconomic situations. This paper describes an approach to provide the first national agricultural drought risk management plan for a river basin in Iran country as a pilot. The study lasted for 3 years as a national technical research project for the “soil conservation and watershed management research institute.” To reach the objectives, besides holding workshops and specialized think-tank meetings, field researches were done. Based on the socioeconomic data sources in the basin and the results of meetings by participation of local managers and residents, the final plan was developed. Moreover, in order to carry out this research, different climatic, agricultural and local information were collected in the watershed. In the next steps, potential risks and vulnerabilities of various agricultural sectors due to the hazard were evaluated. In this study, a nine-step approach to develop an agricultural drought risk management plan proposing different scientific–managerial phases based on the latest experts’ opinions, released international scientific best practices, and existing conditions governing the region was followed. With respect to the average income of US$ one million from agriculture and animal husbandry in the river basin, total drought loss varies from US$ 86,000 to US$ 258,000 for a range of light to very intense drought conditions, respectively. The setup of these nine executive phases defined monitoring, forecasting, and warning steps in working teams and managed the subprograms in partnership with stakeholders and decision-makers to mitigate the rate of drought damage from 30 to 47% (depending on the severity of the drought condition).

     

Perception of landslides risk and responsibility: a case study in eastern Styria, Austria

This paper presents a case study about the perception of landslide risk. Following a major set of landslides in the eastern part of Austria in June 2009, we surveyed local experts, residents who had suffered losses from the landslides, and others living in the affected communities. Overall, the risk perception was significantly higher among those who had been personally affected by a landslide, had knowledge of the geology in the study region, had been affected by another natural hazard, or spent a lot of time outdoors and in touch with nature. Non-experts viewed natural factors as the main causes for the occurrence of landslides, while experts viewed anthropogenic factors as more important. Likewise, non-experts placed a greater emphasis on hard measures (such as retaining walls) to reduce the risk, whereas the experts tended to focus on better information and land-use planning. In terms of responsibility for mitigative actions, a majority of inhabitants believed that public authorities should undertake most of the costs, whereby those who had personal experience with landslides were more likely to favor the government paying for it.     

Understanding experts’ views and risk perceptions on carbon capture and storage in three European countries

The challenge of making the transition to a sustainable energy regime is not limited to engineering; it has important social and political dimensions. Therefore, implementation of new technologies, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), requires not only economic and technical capacities but also an understanding of social factors. These factors include experts’ views and risk perceptions. Understanding them will contribute to the risk governance of CCS by demonstrating who is concerned about what and why with respect to CCS and how risk perception and stakeholders’ concerns vary in different countries. This research is based on analysis and mapping of data collected from case studies of three countries: Germany, Norway and Finland. Our analysis shows that in countries where opposition to CCS is the strongest, like Germany, risk perceptions can be driven by such factors such as the lack of trust and doubts about the need of the project. At the same time as in countries with moderate opposition, such as Norway or Finland, risk perceptions are more connected with the risk for investment. We also conclude that the strongest polarization in risk perceptions is among NGOs in different countries, followed by scientists. The positions of private sector stakeholders and government are more homogenous. Such large variation in risk perceptions of experts could be influenced by several factors, including cultural orientation, attitudes and views of stakeholders, and the social, political and technical settings for deployment of technology in each country.     

数字滑坡技术及其典型应用

为了改变传统滑坡遥感技术方法效率低、调查精度难以提高的状况,经多年实践与探索,笔者于 1999 年提出了“数字滑坡”概念。该概念使传统的“地学滑坡”拓展为能以数字形式表达的,具有三维空间、“多维”时间信息的,由“多元”要素组成的“数字滑坡”。数字滑坡技术系统由滑坡解译基础技术、遥感识辨滑坡技术、滑坡数据库及滑坡模型4部分构成。多年来,数字滑坡技术已成功应用于我国大型水电站建设、山区交通线建设、区域开发环境治理以及抗震减灾等领域,也用于大规模个体滑坡调查研究,并取得了显著的经济和社会效益,有效服务于国家防灾减灾战略。该文主要以西藏帕里河及川东天台乡2个典型滑坡调查为例,阐述数字滑坡技术的创新应用。     

滑坡堰塞湖溃决风险与过程研究进展

滑坡堰塞湖是山区常见的一种自然灾害,对其溃决风险与过程的科学认知和合理评估是应急处置的关键。外荷载作用下滑坡堰塞体的力学响应、滑坡堰塞湖渐进破坏机理与溃决洪水预测理论是滑坡堰塞湖风险评估研究领域的关键科学问题。本文围绕滑坡堰塞湖形成后的溃决风险与过程展开综述,从定性和定量的角度分别对堰塞湖危险性评价方法进行分析总结,从小尺度、大尺度和超重力场试验技术的角度总结了堰塞湖的溃决机理、溃决过程及其影响因素,从数学方法的角度对堰塞湖溃决洪水预测中经验公式法、简化和精细化数值模拟方法的进展进行总结评价。然而,国内外关于滑坡堰塞湖风险评估领域的研究仍处于起步阶段,空-天-地一体化监测技术、堰塞湖危险性评价中的不确定性问题、堰塞体材料冲蚀特性与溃决机理、堰塞湖溃决洪水精细化模拟等将是未来的重点研究方向。本综述可为堰塞湖防灾减灾和流域水工程风险管理提供有价值的参考。     

Politico-economic determinants of forestry policy in Cameroon

Factors that influence the policy choices of forest and environmental policy-makers in developing countries are yet to be completely understood. The study reported in this paper seeks to contribute to efforts addressed to promoting knowledge of these factors. It does so by analyzing the forest and environmental policy and policy field of Cameroon. The field is shown to be crowded, involving entities and individuals with disparate goals. The state emerges as the most powerful stakeholder in the field. It is argued that despite their seemingly inconsistent and contradictory nature, major provisions of Cameroon’s forestry and environmental policy have a unified purpose, viz., to serve the interests of powerful domestic and international stakeholders. It is concluded that the interests of these stakeholders, rather than the country’s national development goals, constitute the major determinant of the policy choices of its forest and environmental policy-makers.