|
|
|
|
|
| van Doorn-Hoekveld, Willemijn J.; Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law, Utrecht University School of Law, The Netherlands; w.j.hoekveld@uu.nl; Suykens, Cathy; KU Leuven, Belgium; cathy.suykens@kuleuven.be; Homewood, Stephen; Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex University London, England; stephenhomewood@yahoo.co.uk; Chmielewski, Piotr J.; Institute for Agricultural and Forest Environment, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland; piotr.chmielewski1990@gmail.com; Matczak, Piotr; Institute for Agricultural and Forest Environment, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland; Institute of Sociology, Adam Mickiewicz University; matczak@amu.edu.pl; van Rijswick, Helena F.M.W; Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law, Utrecht University School of Law, The Netherlands; H.vanRijswick@uu.nl. |
| We seek to examine the manner in which either the EU member states of France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden or parts of them, such as the country of England in the UK or the Flemish Region in Belgium, deal with the distributional effects of the flood risk management strategies prevention, defense, and mitigation. Measures carried out in each of these strategies can cause preflood harm, as in the devaluation of property or loss of income. However, different member states and authorities address this harm in different ways. A descriptive overview of the different compensation regimes in the field of flood risk management is followed by an analysis of these differences and an explanation of what may cause them, such as the geographical differences that... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Reports |
Palavras-chave: Defense; é Galité Devant les charges publiques; Equity; Flood risk management; Legitimacy; Loss; No-fault liability; Preflood compensation; Prevention; Protection of property rights; Solidarity; Spatial planning. |
| Ano: 2016 |
|
| |
|
|
|
