Suchergebnisse

Floods continue to hit many countries, both less developed and industrialized, bringing human suffering and immense economic damage (see floodobservatory.colorado.edu/). Hurricane Florence and Typhoon Mangkhut were just the most recent reminders of the disruption that flooding can bring. Hence, striving to improve the flood-risk governance system has broad relevance. Yet, the reduction of flood risk, understood globally as a combination of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability, is a rather distant goal (Fig. 1).Fig. 1. In January 2018, the Seine flooded in Paris. When it comes to flood policies around the world, both social and engineering factors must be further explored and scrutinized—as should notions of justice as they relate to flooding impacts and responses. Image courtesy of Shutterstock.com/Ekaterina Pokrovsky.Several weaknesses of flood-risk management in the United States, recognized in a recent PNAS Opinion (1), generally apply to many European countries as well, despite all the political, economic, and social differences between the United States and Europe. From our European perspective, this panoply of approaches suggests that both social and engineering factors must be further explored and scrutinized across the globe—as should notions of justice related to flooding impacts and responses.The European Union (EU) has dedicated legislation, called Directive 2007/60/EC, on the assessment and management of flood risks (2). This "Floods Directive" aims to reduce and manage the risks that floods pose to human health, economic activity, the environment, and cultural heritage. The Directive requires all 28 EU Member States to identify areas at risk of flooding, to map the flood extent as well as assets and humans at risk in these areas, and to take adequate measures to reduce this flood risk. The Directive takes a procedural approach and allows EU Member States policy discretion in designing flood-risk management. The Directive, as well as national obligations related to it, … ↵1To whom correspondence ...

AbstractWho worries first about an invasive alien species: scientists or the general public, or do both become concerned simultaneously? Taking thirteen invasive alien species in the Netherlands, this article reconstructs the development of their public and scientific salience: the attention they attracted and the knowledge about them. Salience was assessed from the number of publications from 1997 onwards in the LexisNexis newspaper database and Scopus scientific database. Three trajectories were derived for a species to move from being a latent problem with low salience toward a manifest status with high public and scientific salience. In the most common trajectory, scientific salience increased first, followed by an increase in public salience. We probed the merit of this concept of trajectories by examining the action undertaken for a representative species of the trajectories. We assigned each of these three species a code for inertia and inaction based on the content of a hundred newspaper articles and all available government documents. Knowing the scientific and public salience of these species clarifies why the actions to deal with them differed even though from an ecological perspective they warranted similar attention. The typology of public and scientific salience and the problem trajectories developed in this article together offer a structured approach for understanding an invasive alien species and provide pointers for engaging a community in managing that species.

Who worries first about an invasive alien species: scientists or the general public, or do both become concerned simultaneously? Taking thirteen invasive alien species in the Netherlands, this article reconstructs the development of their public and scientific salience: the attention they attracted and the knowledge about them. Salience was assessed from the number of publications from 1997 onwards in the LexisNexis newspaper database and Scopus scientific database. Three trajectories were derived for a species to move from being a latent problem with low salience toward a manifest status with high public and scientific salience. In the most common trajectory, scientific salience increased first, followed by an increase in public salience. We probed the merit of this concept of trajectories by examining the action undertaken for a representative species of the trajectories. We assigned each of these three species a code for inertia and inaction based on the content of a hundred newspaper articles and all available government documents. Knowing the scientific and public salience of these species clarifies why the actions to deal with them differed even though from an ecological perspective they warranted similar attention. The typology of public and scientific salience and the problem trajectories developed in this article together offer a structured approach for understanding an invasive alien species and provide pointers for engaging a community in managing that species.

Who worries first about an invasive alien species: scientists or the general public, or do both become concerned simultaneously? Taking thirteen invasive alien species in the Netherlands, this article reconstructs the development of their public and scientific salience: the attention they attracted and the knowledge about them. Salience was assessed from the number of publications from 1997 onwards in the LexisNexis newspaper database and Scopus scientific database. Three trajectories were derived for a species to move from being a latent problem with low salience toward a manifest status with high public and scientific salience. In the most common trajectory, scientific salience increased first, followed by an increase in public salience. We probed the merit of this concept of trajectories by examining the action undertaken for a representative species of the trajectories. We assigned each of these three species a code for inertia and inaction based on the content of a hundred newspaper articles and all available government documents. Knowing the scientific and public salience of these species clarifies why the actions to deal with them differed even though from an ecological perspective they warranted similar attention. The typology of public and scientific salience and the problem trajectories developed in this article together offer a structured approach for understanding an invasive alien species and provide pointers for engaging a community in managing that species.

The challenges of water, waste, and climate change in cities are overwhelming and underpin the importance of overcoming governance issues impeding adaptation. These "governance challenges" typically have fragmented scopes, viewpoints, and responsibilities. As there are many causes leading to this uncertainty and disagreement, there is no single best approach to solve these governance challenges. In fact, what is necessary is iterative and requires governance capacity to find dynamic long-term solutions that are supported by flexible interim targets, so as to anticipate emerging barriers and changing situations. The literature contains a plethora of governance gaps, barriers, and capacities, which sometimes overlap, are contradictory and case-specific, and reflect disciplinary scopes. We argue that a balanced set of well-developed conditions is needed, to obtain the governance capacity that enables effective change. Therefore, we aim to obtain deeper understanding of the key conditions determining the urban water governance capacity, by developing an integrated empirical-based approach that enables consistent city comparisons and facilitates decision-making. We propose a governance capacity framework focusing on five governance challenges: 1) water scarcity, 2) flood risk, 3) wastewater treatment, 4) solid waste treatment and 5) urban heat islands. Nine governance conditions, each with three indicators, are identified and empirically assessed using a Likert-type scoring method. The framework is illustrated by a case study on Amsterdam, the Netherlands. We conclude our approach shows great potential to improve our understanding of the key conditions determining the governance capacity to find solutions to the urban challenges of water, waste, and climate change.

Background: Internet-based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (iCBT) is found effective in treating common mental disorders. However, the use of these interventions in routine care is limited. The international ImpleMentAll study is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 programme. It is concerned with studying and improving methods for implementing evidence-based iCBT services for common mental disorders in routine mental health care. A digitally accessible implementation toolkit (ItFits-toolkit) will be introduced to mental health care organizations with the aim to facilitate the ongoing implementation of iCBT services within local contexts. This study investigates the effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit by comparing it to implementation-as-usual activities. Methods: A stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (SWT) design will be applied. Over a trial period of 30 months, the ItFits-toolkit will be introduced sequentially in twelve routine mental health care organizations in primary and specialist care across nine countries in Europe and Australia. Repeated measures are applied to assess change over time in the outcome variables. The effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit will be assessed in terms of the degree of normalization of the use of the iCBT services. Several exploratory outcomes including uptake of the iCBT services will be measured to feed the interpretation of the primary outcome. Data will be collected via a centralized data collection system and analysed using generalized linear mixed modelling. A qualitative process evaluation of routine implementation activities and the use of the ItFits-toolkit will be conducted within this study. Discussion: The ImpleMentAll study is a large-scale international research project designed to study the effectiveness of tailored implementation. Using a SWT design that allows to examine change over time, this study will investigate the effect of tailored implementation on the normalization of the use of iCBT services and their uptake. It will provide a better understanding of the process and methods of tailoring implementation strategies. If found effective, the ItFits-toolkit will be made accessible for mental health care service providers, to help them overcome their context-specific implementation challenges. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883. Retrospectively registered on 29 August 2018