首页> 外文期刊>Natural Hazards >Justice and flood risk management: reflecting on different approaches to distribute and allocate flood risk management in Europe
【24h】

Justice and flood risk management: reflecting on different approaches to distribute and allocate flood risk management in Europe

机译:司法与洪水风险管理:反思欧洲不同的洪灾风险分配和分配方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This paper compares the inherent notions of justice in four different approaches to flood risk management in Europe. As protection against flood risks becomes increasingly difficult, dilemmas of justice emerge: some benefits from flood protection measures whereas others loose. Decisions on whom to protect differentiate between upstream and downstream or left and right side of a river. This raises a central but barely discussed conflict: what (or rather who) should be protected against inundations? This question deals in essence with justice. Justice concerns questions over fairness in the allocation of resources, capital and wealth across different members of society. There are different and contradicting concepts of justice, which differ in interpretations of fair resource allocation and distributions. 'What's the right thing to protect' is thus a question of concepts of justice. This contribution is not an attempt to answer this fundamental question, but it offers a debate on how different concepts of justice provide different answers. These answers will then be related to flood risk management approaches in England, the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria.
机译:本文比较了欧洲在四种不同的洪水风险管理方法中固有的正义概念。随着针对洪水风险的保护变得越来越困难,正义的困境出现了:一些洪水保护措施带来的好处而另一些则失去了。河流上游和下游或左右两侧的保护对象决定。这就引发了一个集中但鲜有讨论的冲突:应保护哪些(或更确切地说是谁)免受淹没?这个问题实质上涉及正义。正义关系到社会不同成员在资源,资本和财富分配方面的公平性问题。正义的概念是相互矛盾的,在公平资源分配和分配的解释上也有所不同。因此,“什么是正确的保护”是正义概念的问题。这项贡献不是试图回答这个基本问题,而是就不同的司法概念如何提供不同的答案展开了辩论。这些答案将与英国,荷兰,德国和奥地利的洪水风险管理方法有关。

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