Competing paradigms of flood management in the Scottish/English borderlands

Brian Cook (Lead / Corresponding author), John Forrester, Louise Bracken, Christopher Spray, Elizabeth Oughton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)
126 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore how flood management practitioners rationalise the emergence of sustainable flood management. Key to this analysis are differences rooted in assumptions over what flood management is and should do. Design/methodology/approach: The popularity of natural flood management offers a case with which to explore how a dominant framing persists and how individuals at the government-public interface negotiate different visions of future flood management. The authors draw on the perceptions of flood experts, elucidating a deep hold amongst a professional community “grounded” in science and economics, but also their desire to innovate and become more open to innovative practices. Findings: The authors show how the idea of “sustainable” and “natural” flood management are understood by those doing flood management, which is with reference to pre-existing technical practices. Research limitations/implications: This paper explores the views of expert decision making, which suffers from challenges associated with small sample size. As such, the findings must be tempered, but with recognition for the influence of a small group of individuals who determine the nature of flood management in Scotland. Practical implications: The authors conclude that, in the context of this study, a technical framing persists by predetermining the criteria by which innovative techniques are judged. Originality/value: Broadly, these findings contribute to debates over the evolution of flood management regimes. This recognises the importance of events while also emphasising the preparations that shape the context and norms of the flood management community between events.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)314-328
Number of pages15
JournalDisaster Prevention and Management
Volume25
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 6 Jun 2016

Fingerprint

natural disaster
paradigm
management
Paradigm
Borderlands
expert
event
Scotland
Sample Size
small group
community
popularity
Decision Making
Economics
decision making
methodology
science
economics
Research

Keywords

  • Expertise
  • Flood management
  • Flood
  • Natural flood management
  • Technical management

Cite this

Cook, Brian ; Forrester, John ; Bracken, Louise ; Spray, Christopher ; Oughton, Elizabeth. / Competing paradigms of flood management in the Scottish/English borderlands. In: Disaster Prevention and Management. 2016 ; Vol. 25, No. 3. pp. 314-328.
@article{da296c47fb5a41efbf6fd58ed21d0ed5,
title = "Competing paradigms of flood management in the Scottish/English borderlands",
abstract = "Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore how flood management practitioners rationalise the emergence of sustainable flood management. Key to this analysis are differences rooted in assumptions over what flood management is and should do. Design/methodology/approach: The popularity of natural flood management offers a case with which to explore how a dominant framing persists and how individuals at the government-public interface negotiate different visions of future flood management. The authors draw on the perceptions of flood experts, elucidating a deep hold amongst a professional community “grounded” in science and economics, but also their desire to innovate and become more open to innovative practices. Findings: The authors show how the idea of “sustainable” and “natural” flood management are understood by those doing flood management, which is with reference to pre-existing technical practices. Research limitations/implications: This paper explores the views of expert decision making, which suffers from challenges associated with small sample size. As such, the findings must be tempered, but with recognition for the influence of a small group of individuals who determine the nature of flood management in Scotland. Practical implications: The authors conclude that, in the context of this study, a technical framing persists by predetermining the criteria by which innovative techniques are judged. Originality/value: Broadly, these findings contribute to debates over the evolution of flood management regimes. This recognises the importance of events while also emphasising the preparations that shape the context and norms of the flood management community between events.",
keywords = "Expertise, Flood management, Flood, Natural flood management, Technical management",
author = "Brian Cook and John Forrester and Louise Bracken and Christopher Spray and Elizabeth Oughton",
note = "This research was funded by the UK Research Councils through the RELU programme and was also supported by Scottish Government and by assistance on the ground by Tweed Forum.",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1108/DPM-01-2016-0010",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "314--328",
journal = "Disaster Prevention and Management",
issn = "0965-3562",
publisher = "Emerald",
number = "3",

}

Competing paradigms of flood management in the Scottish/English borderlands. / Cook, Brian (Lead / Corresponding author); Forrester, John; Bracken, Louise; Spray, Christopher; Oughton, Elizabeth.

In: Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol. 25, No. 3, 06.06.2016, p. 314-328.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Competing paradigms of flood management in the Scottish/English borderlands

AU - Cook, Brian

AU - Forrester, John

AU - Bracken, Louise

AU - Spray, Christopher

AU - Oughton, Elizabeth

N1 - This research was funded by the UK Research Councils through the RELU programme and was also supported by Scottish Government and by assistance on the ground by Tweed Forum.

PY - 2016/6/6

Y1 - 2016/6/6

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore how flood management practitioners rationalise the emergence of sustainable flood management. Key to this analysis are differences rooted in assumptions over what flood management is and should do. Design/methodology/approach: The popularity of natural flood management offers a case with which to explore how a dominant framing persists and how individuals at the government-public interface negotiate different visions of future flood management. The authors draw on the perceptions of flood experts, elucidating a deep hold amongst a professional community “grounded” in science and economics, but also their desire to innovate and become more open to innovative practices. Findings: The authors show how the idea of “sustainable” and “natural” flood management are understood by those doing flood management, which is with reference to pre-existing technical practices. Research limitations/implications: This paper explores the views of expert decision making, which suffers from challenges associated with small sample size. As such, the findings must be tempered, but with recognition for the influence of a small group of individuals who determine the nature of flood management in Scotland. Practical implications: The authors conclude that, in the context of this study, a technical framing persists by predetermining the criteria by which innovative techniques are judged. Originality/value: Broadly, these findings contribute to debates over the evolution of flood management regimes. This recognises the importance of events while also emphasising the preparations that shape the context and norms of the flood management community between events.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore how flood management practitioners rationalise the emergence of sustainable flood management. Key to this analysis are differences rooted in assumptions over what flood management is and should do. Design/methodology/approach: The popularity of natural flood management offers a case with which to explore how a dominant framing persists and how individuals at the government-public interface negotiate different visions of future flood management. The authors draw on the perceptions of flood experts, elucidating a deep hold amongst a professional community “grounded” in science and economics, but also their desire to innovate and become more open to innovative practices. Findings: The authors show how the idea of “sustainable” and “natural” flood management are understood by those doing flood management, which is with reference to pre-existing technical practices. Research limitations/implications: This paper explores the views of expert decision making, which suffers from challenges associated with small sample size. As such, the findings must be tempered, but with recognition for the influence of a small group of individuals who determine the nature of flood management in Scotland. Practical implications: The authors conclude that, in the context of this study, a technical framing persists by predetermining the criteria by which innovative techniques are judged. Originality/value: Broadly, these findings contribute to debates over the evolution of flood management regimes. This recognises the importance of events while also emphasising the preparations that shape the context and norms of the flood management community between events.

KW - Expertise

KW - Flood management

KW - Flood

KW - Natural flood management

KW - Technical management

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84968880373&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/DPM-01-2016-0010

DO - 10.1108/DPM-01-2016-0010

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 314

EP - 328

JO - Disaster Prevention and Management

JF - Disaster Prevention and Management

SN - 0965-3562

IS - 3

ER -