Refine
Document Type
- Article (7)
- Report (3)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (1)
- Postprint (1)
- Review (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (13)
Keywords
- Klimaanpassung (4)
- August 2002 flood (3)
- Central Europe (3)
- Floods Directive (3)
- Germany (3)
- June 2013 flood (3)
- governance (3)
- risk management cycle (3)
- City ranking (2)
- Climate adaptation (2)
Institute
Aufgrund der hohen Konzentration von Bevölkerung, ökonomischen Werten und Infrastrukturen können Städte stark von extremen Wetterereignissen getroffen werden. Insbesondere Hitzewellen und Überflutungen in Folge von Starkregen verursachen in Städten immense gesundheitliche und finanzielle Schäden. Um Schäden zu verringern oder gar zu vermeiden, ist es notwendig, entsprechende Vorsorge- und Klimaanpassungsmaßnahmen zu implementieren.
Im Projekt „Urbane Resilienz gegenüber extremen Wetterereignissen – Typologien und Transfer von Anpassungsstrategien in kleinen Großstädten und Mittelstädten” (ExTrass) lag der Fokus auf den beiden extremen Wetterereignissen Hitze und Starkregen sowie auf kleineren Großstädten (100.000 bis 500.000 Einwohner:innen) und kreisfreien Mittelstädten mit mehr als 50.000 Einwohner:innen. Im Projekt wurde die Stärkung der Klimaresilienz als Verbesserung der Fähigkeiten von Städten, aus vergangenen Ereignissen zu lernen sowie sich an antizipierte Gefahren anzupassen, verstanden. Klimaanpassung wurde demnach als ein Prozess aufgefasst, der durch die Umsetzung von potenziell schadensreduzierenden Maßnahmen beschreib- und operationalisierbar wird.
Das Projekt hatte zwei Ziele: Erstens sollte die Klimaresilienz in den drei Fallstudienstädten Potsdam, Remscheid und Würzburg messbar gestärkt werden. Zweitens sollten Transferpotenziale zwischen Groß- und Mittelstädten in Deutschland identifiziert und besser nutzbar gemacht werden, damit die Wirkung von Pilotvorhaben über die direkt involvierten Städte hinausgehen kann. Im Projekt standen folgende vier Leitfragen im Fokus:
• Wie verbreitet sind Klimaanpassungsaktivitäten in Großstädten und größeren kreisfreien Mittelstädten in Deutschland?
• Welche hemmenden und begünstigenden Faktoren beeinflussen die Klimaanpassung?
• Welche Maßnahmen der Klimaanpassung werden tatsächlich umgesetzt, und wie kann die Umsetzung verbessert werden? Was behindert?
• Inwiefern lassen sich Beispiele guter Praxis auf andere Städte übertragen, adaptieren oder weiterentwickeln?
Die Hauptergebnisse zu diesen Fragestellungen sind im vorliegenden Bericht zusammengefasst.
Widespread flooding in June 2013 caused damage costs of €6 to 8 billion in Germany, and awoke many memories of the floods in August 2002, which resulted in total damage of €11.6 billion and hence was the most expensive natural hazard event in Germany up to now. The event of 2002 does, however, also mark a reorientation toward an integrated flood risk management system in Germany. Therefore, the flood of 2013 offered the opportunity to review how the measures that politics, administration, and civil society have implemented since 2002 helped to cope with the flood and what still needs to be done to achieve effective and more integrated flood risk management. The review highlights considerable improvements on many levels, in particular (1) an increased consideration of flood hazards in spatial planning and urban development, (2) comprehensive property-level mitigation and preparedness measures, (3) more effective flood warnings and improved coordination of disaster response, and (4) a more targeted maintenance of flood defense systems. In 2013, this led to more effective flood management and to a reduction of damage. Nevertheless, important aspects remain unclear and need to be clarified. This particularly holds for balanced and coordinated strategies for reducing and overcoming the impacts of flooding in large catchments, cross-border and interdisciplinary cooperation, the role of the general public in the different phases of flood risk management, as well as a transparent risk transfer system. Recurring flood events reveal that flood risk management is a continuous task. Hence, risk drivers, such as climate change, land-use changes, economic developments, or demographic change and the resultant risks must be investigated at regular intervals, and risk reduction strategies and processes must be reassessed as well as adapted and implemented in a dialogue with all stakeholders.
Widespread flooding in June 2013 caused damage costs of €6 to 8 billion in Germany, and awoke many memories of the floods in August 2002, which resulted in total damage of €11.6 billion and hence was the most expensive natural hazard event in Germany up to now. The event of 2002 does, however, also mark a reorientation toward an integrated flood risk management system in Germany. Therefore, the flood of 2013 offered the opportunity to review how the measures that politics, administration, and civil society have implemented since 2002 helped to cope with the flood and what still needs to be done to achieve effective and more integrated flood risk management. The review highlights considerable improvements on many levels, in particular (1) an increased consideration of flood hazards in spatial planning and urban development, (2) comprehensive property-level mitigation and preparedness measures, (3) more effective flood warnings and improved coordination of disaster response, and (4) a more targeted maintenance of flood defense systems. In 2013, this led to more effective flood management and to a reduction of damage. Nevertheless, important aspects remain unclear and need to be clarified. This particularly holds for balanced and coordinated strategies for reducing and overcoming the impacts of flooding in large catchments, cross-border and interdisciplinary cooperation, the role of the general public in the different phases of flood risk management, as well as a transparent risk transfer system. Recurring flood events reveal that flood risk management is a continuous task. Hence, risk drivers, such as climate change, land-use changes, economic developments, or demographic change and the resultant risks must be investigated at regular intervals, and risk reduction strategies and processes must be reassessed as well as adapted and implemented in a dialogue with all stakeholders.
Widespread flooding in June 2013 caused damage costs of (sic)6 to 8 billion in Germany, and awoke many memories of the floods in August 2002, which resulted in total damage of (sic)11.6 billion and hence was the most expensive natural hazard event in Germany up to now. The event of 2002 does, however, also mark a reorientation toward an integrated flood risk management system in Germany. Therefore, the flood of 2013 offered the opportunity to review how the measures that politics, administration, and civil society have implemented since 2002 helped to cope with the flood and what still needs to be done to achieve effective and more integrated flood risk management. The review highlights considerable improvements on many levels, in particular (1) an increased consideration of flood hazards in spatial planning and urban development, (2) comprehensive property-level mitigation and preparedness measures, (3) more effective flood warnings and improved coordination of disaster response, and (4) a more targeted maintenance of flood defense systems. In 2013, this led to more effective flood management and to a reduction of damage. Nevertheless, important aspects remain unclear and need to be clarified. This particularly holds for balanced and coordinated strategies for reducing and overcoming the impacts of flooding in large catchments, cross-border and interdisciplinary cooperation, the role of the general public in the different phases of flood risk management, as well as a transparent risk transfer system. Recurring flood events reveal that flood risk management is a continuous task. Hence, risk drivers, such as climate change, land-use changes, economic developments, or demographic change and the resultant risks must be investigated at regular intervals, and risk reduction strategies and processes must be reassessed as well as adapted and implemented in a dialogue with all stakeholders.
Weltweit verursachen Städte etwa 70 % der Treibhausgasemissionen und sind daher wichtige Akteure im Klimaschutz bzw. eine wichtige Zielgruppe von Klimapolitiken. Gleichzeitig sind Städte besonders stark von möglichen Auswirkungen des Klimawandels betroffen: Insbesondere extreme Wetterereignisse wie Hitzewellen oder Starkregenereignisse mit Überflutungen verursachen in Städten hohe Sachschäden und wirken sich negativ auf die Gesundheit der städtischen Bevölkerung aus. Daher verfolgt das Projekt ExTrass das Ziel, die städtische Resilienz gegenüber extremen Wetterereignissen in enger Zusammenarbeit mit Stadtverwaltungen, Strukturen des Bevölkerungsschutzes und der Zivilgesellschaft zu stärken. Im Fokus stehen dabei (kreisfreie) Groß- und Mittelstädte mit 50.000 bis 500.000 Einwohnern, insbesondere die Fallstudienstädte Potsdam, Remscheid und Würzburg.
Der vorliegende Bericht beinhaltet die Ergebnisse der 14-monatigen Definitionsphase von ExTrass, in der vor allem die Abstimmung eines Arbeitsprogramms im Mittelpunkt stand, das in einem nachfolgenden dreijährigen Forschungsprojekt (F+E-Phase) gemeinsam von Wissenschaft und Praxispartnern umgesetzt werden soll. Begleitend wurde eine Bestandsaufnahme von Klimaanpassungs- und Klimaschutzstrategien/-plänen in 99 deutschen Groß- und Mittelstädten vorgenommen. Zudem wurden für Potsdam und Würzburg Pfadanalysen für die Klimapolitik durchgeführt. Darin wird insbesondere die Bedeutung von Schlüsselakteuren deutlich. Weiterhin wurden im Rahmen von Stakeholder-Workshops Anpassungsherausforderungen und aktuelle Handlungsbedarfe in den Fallstudienstädten identifiziert und Lösungsansätze erarbeitet, die in der F+E-Phase entwickelt und getestet werden sollen. Neben Maßnahmen auf gesamtstädtischer Ebene und auf Stadtteilebene wurden Maßnahmen angestrebt, die die Risikowahrnehmung, Vorsorge und Selbsthilfefähigkeit von Unternehmen und Bevölkerung stärken können. Daher wurde der Stand der Risikokommunikation in Deutschland für das Projekt aufgearbeitet und eine erste Evaluation von Risikokommunikationswerkzeugen durchgeführt. Der Bericht endet mit einer Kurzfassung des Arbeitsprogramms 2018-2021.
Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013
(2015)
Ranking local climate policy
(2021)
Climate mitigation and climate adaptation are crucial tasks for urban areas and can involve synergies as well as trade-offs. However, few studies have examined how mitigation and adaptation efforts relate to each other in a large number of differently sized cities, and therefore we know little about whether forerunners in mitigation are also leading in adaptation or if cities tend to focus on just one policy field. This article develops an internationally applicable approach to rank cities on climate policy that incorporates multiple indicators related to (1) local commitments on mitigation and adaptation, (2) urban mitigation and adaptation plans and (3) climate adaptation and mitigation ambitions. We apply this method to rank 104 differently sized German cities and identify six clusters: climate policy leaders, climate adaptation leaders, climate mitigation leaders, climate policy followers, climate policy latecomers and climate policy laggards. The article seeks explanations for particular cities' positions and shows that coping with climate change in a balanced way on a high level depends on structural factors, in particular city size, the pathways of local climate policies since the 1990s and funding programmes for both climate mitigation and adaptation.
The transport sector is crucial for the functioning of modern societies and their economic welfares. However, it is vulnerable to natural hazards since damage and disturbances appear recurrently. Risk management of transport infrastructure is a complex task that usually involves various stakeholders from the public and private sector. Related scientific knowledge, however, is limited so far. Therefore, this paper presents detailed information on the risk management of the Austrian railway operator gathered through literature studies, in interviews, meetings and workshops. The findings reveal three decision making levels of risk reduction: 1) a superordinate level for the negotiation of frameworks and guidelines, 2) a regional to local level for the planning and implementation of structural measures and 3) a regional to local level for non-structural risk reduction measures and emergency management. On each of these levels, multi-sectoral partnerships exist that aim at reducing the risk to railway infrastructure. Chosen partnerships are evaluated applying the Capital Approach Framework and some collaborations are analyzed considering the flood and landslide events in June 2013. The evaluation reveals that the risk management of the railway operator and its partners has been successful, but there is still potential for enhancement. Difficulties are seen for instance in obtaining continuity of employees and organizational structures which can affect personal contacts and mutual trust and might hamper sharing data and experiences. Altogether, the case reveals the importance of multi-sectoral partnerships that are seen as a crucial element of risk management in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030.