ABSTRACT. Across Europe, citizens are increasingly expected to participate in the implementation of flood risk management (FRM), by engaging in voluntary-based activities to enhance preparedness, implementing property-level measures, and so forth. Although citizen participation in FRM decision making is widely addressed in academic literature, citizens' involvement in the delivery of FRM measures is comparatively understudied. Drawing from public administration literature, we adopted the notion of "coproduction" as an analytical framework for studying the interaction between citizens and public authorities, from the decision-making process through to the implementation of FRM in practice. We considered to what extent coproduction is evident in selected European Union (EU) member states, drawing from research conducted within the EU project STAR-FLOOD (Strengthening and Redesigning European Flood Risk Practices towards Appropriate and Resilient Flood Risk Governance Arrangements). On the basis of a cross-country comparison between Flanders (Belgium), England (United Kingdom), France, the Netherlands, and Poland, we have highlighted the varied forms of coproduction and reflected on how these have been established within divergent settings. Coproduction is most prominent in discourse and practice in England and is emergent in France and Flanders. By contrast, FRM in the Netherlands and Poland remains almost exclusively reliant on governmental protection measures and thereby consultation-based forms of coproduction. Analysis revealed how these actions are motivated by different underlying rationales, which in turn shape the type of approaches and degree of institutionalization of coproduction. In the Netherlands, coproduction is primarily encouraged to increase societal resilience, whereas public authorities in the other countries also use it to improve cost-efficiency and redistribute responsibilities to its beneficiaries.

ABSTRACT. Flood events that have proven to create shock waves in society, which we will call shock events, can open windows of opportunity that allow different actor groups to introduce new ideas. Shock events, however, can also strengthen the status quo. We will take flood events as our object of study. Whereas others focus mainly on the immediate impact and disaster management, we will focus on the long-term impact on and resilience of flood risk governance arrangements. Over the last 25 years, both the Netherlands and Poland have suffered several flood-related events. These triggered strategic and institutional changes, but to different degrees. In a comparative analysis these endogenous processes, i.e., the importance of framing of the flood event, its exploitation by different actor groups, and the extent to which arrangements are actually changing, are examined. In line with previous research, our analysis revealed that shock events test the capacity to resist and bounce back and provide opportunities for adapting and learning. They "open up" institutional arrangements and make them more susceptible to change, increasing the opportunity for adaptation. In this way they can facilitate a shift toward different degrees of resilience, i.e., by adjusting the current strategic approach or by moving toward another strategic approach. The direction of change is influenced by the actors and the frames they introduce, and their ability to increase the resonance of the frame. The persistence of change seems to be influenced by the evolution of the initial management approach, the availability of resources, or the willingness to allocate resources.

This paper presents how the approaches to flood risk in Poland have evolved over the last 25 years. The reliance on structural defence and on the state as the key responsible actor was challenged by four triggering events: two large floods; the collapse of the communist system; and the European Union accession. The paper reveals that (1) the radical transformation of the political system did not lead to significant changes in flood risk governance; (2) changes in response to disastrous floods are incremental. Despite the pressures, the Polish flood risk governance preserved its core functional characteristics. Until the 1997 flood, it exhibited the exhaustion mode of institutional dynamics, with issue marginalisation and poor financing, while after this flood, the layering‐type mode prevailed, where innovative ideas were accommodated by the established system. The analysis of the Polish flood risk governance dynamics suggests that changes cannot be taken for granted, even facing significant pressures and windows of opportunities.

Abstract. The STAR-FLOOD (Strengthening and Redesigning European Flood Risk Practices Towards Appropriate and Resilient Flood Risk Governance Arrangements) project, funded by the European Commission, investigates strategies for dealing with flood risk in six European countries: Belgium, the UK, France, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden and in 18 vulnerable urban regions in these countries. The project aims to describe, analyse, explain, and evaluate the main similarities and differences between the selected EU Member States in terms of development and performance of flood risk governance arrangements. It also discusses the scientific and societal importance of these similarities and differences.Attention is paid to identification and characterization of shifts in flood risk governance arrangements and in flood risk management strategies and to determination of triggering factors and restraining factors.An assessment of a change of resilience and appropriateness (legitimacy, effectiveness, efficiency) of flood risk governance arrangements in Poland is presented and comparison with other European countries is offered.

No abstract