Search results

Abstract. Insurance can be an important mechanism to stimulate flood risk reduction and thus decrease losses. However, there is a gap between the theoretical potential described by academic scholars and the actual engagement of insurers. In the analysis, I have collected examples of insurers' engagement in flood risk reduction, focusing on household and business insurance in developed countries. Insurers engaged either directly, e.g., through co-financing risk reduction, or more indirectly by giving incentives to policyholders or governmental actors to adopt risk reduction measures. I analyzed their engagement with the framing conditions of the market they were acting in, such as market penetration or private or public insurance schemes. I found risk reduction measures like awareness-raising campaigns targeting citizens to be quite common across several countries. There was less insurance engagement in risk reduction measures such as warning or land-use planning, which are perceived to be mainly governmental tasks. The use of risk-based pricing as an incentive for the adoption of risk reduction measures as suggested by academia is difficult in practice, due to barriers such as information gaps on the effectiveness of property-level protection measures and requirements concerning the affordability of insurance. New approaches to overcome these shortfalls include organized data collection on property-level protection measures or the insurance of high-risks for affordable premiums in public–private partnership constellations with the government.

Insurance can be an important mechanism to stimulate flood risk reduction and thus decrease losses. However, there is a gap between the theoretical potential described by academic scholars and the actual engagement of insurers. In the analysis, I have collected examples of insurers' engagement in flood risk reduction, focusing on household and business insurance in developed countries. Insurers engaged either directly, e.g., through co-financing risk reduction, or more indirectly by giving incentives to policyholders or governmental actors to adopt risk reduction measures. I analyzed their engagement with the framing conditions of the market they were acting in, such as market penetration or private or public insurance schemes. I found risk reduction measures like awareness-raising campaigns targeting citizens to be quite common across several countries. There was less insurance engagement in risk reduction measures such as warning or land-use planning, which are perceived to be mainly governmental tasks. The use of risk-based pricing as an incentive for the adoption of risk reduction measures as suggested by academia is difficult in practice, due to barriers such as information gaps on the effectiveness of property-level protection measures and requirements concerning the affordability of insurance. New approaches to overcome these shortfalls include organized data collection on property-level protection measures or the insurance of high-risks for affordable premiums in public–private partnership constellations with the government. ; publishedVersion

A need for multi-functional assessment tools evaluating trade-offs and co-benefits for various types of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) has been increasingly identified in recent years. Methodologically, concepts for a tool are presented which include quantifying the demand and potential for NBS to enhance ecosystem service (ES) provision, and linking ESs to readily quantifiable and legislatively-relevant environmental quality indicators (EQIs). The objective of tool application is to identify optimal NBS placement across a diverse set of socio-environmental indicators, whilst also incorporating issues of relative location of areas of implementation and benefit accrual. Embedded within the tool is the importance of evaluating outcomes in terms of economic benefits and of sustainable development goals. The concepts are illustrated with simplified examples, relating to the case of implementing urban forestry as an exemplar NBS. By summarising the knowledge base it is demonstrated that benefits of NBS are substantially scale-dependent in two main respects; those of extent and proximity to receptors. Evaluation tools should be capable of quantifying scale-dependence. The substantive importance of these considerations and how their dynamics vary between indicators and services is illustrated graphically through schematic functions. When developed, the tool should be used as a focus for consultation and co-design to pinpoint the size of NBS necessary to achieve a sufficient level of benefit for a particular receptor. This could be measured against target levels of benefit for each indicator, distinguishing between primary intended outcomes and those co-benefits or trade-offs that are secondary or unintended. ; publishedVersion

A need for multi-functional assessment tools evaluating trade-offs and co-benefits for various types of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) has been increasingly identified in recent years. Methodologically, concepts for a tool are presented which include quantifying the demand and potential for NBS to enhance ecosystem service (ES) provision, and linking ESs to readily quantifiable and legislatively-relevant environmental quality indicators (EQIs). The objective of tool application is to identify optimal NBS placement across a diverse set of socio-environmental indicators, whilst also incorporating issues of relative location of areas of implementation and benefit accrual. Embedded within the tool is the importance of evaluating outcomes in terms of economic benefits and of sustainable development goals. The concepts are illustrated with simplified examples, relating to the case of implementing urban forestry as an exemplar NBS. By summarising the knowledge base it is demonstrated that benefits of NBS are substantially scale-dependent in two main respects; those of extent and proximity to receptors. Evaluation tools should be capable of quantifying scale-dependence. The substantive importance of these considerations and how their dynamics vary between indicators and services is illustrated graphically through schematic functions. When developed, the tool should be used as a focus for consultation and co-design to pinpoint the size of NBS necessary to achieve a sufficient level of benefit for a particular receptor. This could be measured against target levels of benefit for each indicator, distinguishing between primary intended outcomes and those co-benefits or trade-offs that are secondary or unintended.

Society's use and management of water relies on professional expertise spanning diverse fields: from biology and technology to economics and law. This book examines current issues related to regulating water through chapters summarizing various sets of regulation as well as chapters that take a scientific deep dive into selected themes. The diversity of professional expertise is also reflected in the law aspect. We explore such subjects as surface runoff, natural disasters, drinking water, groundwater, salmon, hydropower, and human rights, as well as general impact assessment requirements and duty of knowledge in environmental law administration. A key objective of the book has been to provide an interdisciplinary understanding of the legal circumstances associated with water, and in addition, deliberate the pros and cons of some of the current regulations.

This book will be particularly useful for those who in various ways support and facilitate procedures within the public sector at both the national and municipal levels. It will also be useful for private sector actors seeking familiarity with legal questions that can arise in relation to public administration and other private actors. From a broader perspective, we hope the book can help to throw light on conflicts between different interests and groups within society that occur, for example, when introducing fees, special injunctions against private actors, and requirements for knowledge basis.

This book project is the result of legal research conducted at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU) and is supplemented by national expertise in several areas. It has been edited by Steinar Taubøll, a professor at NMBU's Department of Property and Law. Taubøll has a background in both law and the natural sciences, and extensive experience with interdisciplinary work. - Håndtering og bruk av vann i samfunnet krever et faglig mangfold fra biologi og teknikk til økonomi og juss. Denne boken drøfter aktuelle temaer knyttet til rettslig regulering av vann, både i form av oversiktskapitler om ulike regelsett og gjennom vitenskapelige dypdykk i utvalgte temaer. Den faglige spennvidden gjenspeiler seg også innen det juridiske. I boken finner man stoff om overvannshåndtering, naturfare, drikkevann, grunnvann, villaks, kraftutbygging, menneskerettigheter, samt om generelle utredningskrav og kunnskapsplikter i miljørettsforvaltning. Et sentralt siktemål er å bygge opp tverrfaglig forståelse av gjeldende juridiske forhold knyttet til vann, og dessuten sette noen av dagens reguleringer under debatt.

Boken retter seg særlig til de ressurspersonene som på ulike måter støtter saksbehandlingen i stat og kommune. Boken antas også å være nyttig for private aktører som vil gjøre seg mer kjent med rettsspørsmål som kan oppstå i forhold til forvaltningen og til andre private aktører. I et bredere perspektiv er det dessuten ønskelig at boken kan bidra til å belyse konflikter mellom ulike hensyn og grupper i samfunnet, for eksempel ved innføring av gebyrer, pålegg rettet mot private, innføring av tyngende vilkår og krav til kunnskap og faktagrunnlag.

Bokprosjektet springer ut av den juridiske forskningen ved Norges miljø- og biovitenskapelige universitet, og har i tillegg knyttet til seg nasjonal spisskompetanse på mange temaer.

Bokas redaktør er dosent Steinar Taubøll ved Institutt for eiendom og juss ved NMBU, som har naturfaglig og juridisk utdannelse, samt lang erfaring med tverrfaglig arbeid.