首页> 外文会议>The Sustainable City V: Urban Regeneration and Sustainability >Risk assessment of the cities of Estonia and the UK: comparative study
【24h】

Risk assessment of the cities of Estonia and the UK: comparative study

机译:爱沙尼亚和英国城市的风险评估:比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This paper presents a comparative study of city risk assessment in Estonia, as a so-called 'new member' and in the UK as an 'old member' of the EU. The comparison of the outcomes was carried out on the basis of four strategically selected risk assessments of Estonian cities and the same number of British cities. The selected indicators of comparison were legislative requirements, provision and performance, methodologies, types of analysed risks, risk assessment outcomes on a wide scale, risk assessment results, usage of risk matrixes and also publication and availability.rnThe risk assessments in both countries were required not only on a local community level, but on regional and state levels as well. In the UK the legal requirements and anchors in methodology were in general more clearly defined, which guarantees the similarity and better compatibility of the risk assessments of different cities and parishes. For example the division of risk matrix between risk rankings is precisely determined in British methodology, however in the Estonian, different interpretations are currently allowable. British legislation also sets concrete requirements for the publication of the community risk register, but in Estonia the availability of similar material depends on the decision and good will of the local government.rnThe final conclusion is that the territorial risk assessment methodologies of different European countries cannot be overtaken one-for-one or converted. At the same time, British risk assessment methodology and organisation can undoubtedly serve as one of the examples in the process of the further development of territorial risk assessment methodology in Estonia and maybe also for other 'new members' of the European Union, as was previously expected.
机译:本文提供了对爱沙尼亚所谓的“新成员”和英国作为欧盟的“老成员”的城市风险评估的比较研究。结果的比较是基于对爱沙尼亚城市和相同数量的英国城市进行的四项战略选择的风险评估而进行的。选择的比较指标是立法要求,规定和绩效,方法,分析的风险类型,广泛的风险评估结果,风险评估结果,风险矩阵的使用以及发布和可用性。rn两国都需要进行风险评估不仅在地方社区一级,在区域和州一级也是如此。在英国,总体上对法律要求和方法论的主旨进行了更明确的定义,这保证了不同城市和教区的风险评估的相似性和更好的兼容性。例如,风险等级之间的风险矩阵划分在英国方法学中是精确确定的,但是在爱沙尼亚语中,当前允许使用不同的解释。英国立法也对发布社区风险登记册提出了具体要求,但在爱沙尼亚,是否提供类似材料取决于当地政府的决定和善意。最终结论是,不同欧洲国家的领土风险评估方法不能被一对一超越或转换。同时,英国的风险评估方法和组织无疑可以作为进一步发展爱沙尼亚的领土风险评估方法的范例之一,或许也可以像以前一样为欧盟的其他“新成员”预期。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号