IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v55y2016ip2p353-360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring governance learning: How policymakers draw on evidence, experience and intuition in designing participatory flood risk planning

Author

Listed:
  • Newig, Jens
  • Kochskämper, Elisa
  • Challies, Edward
  • Jager, Nicolas W.

Abstract

The importance of designing suitable participatory governance processes is generally acknowledged. However, less emphasis has been put on how decision-makers design such processes, and how they learn about doing so. While the policy learning literature has tended to focus on the substance of policy, little research is available on learning about the design of governance. Here, we explore different approaches to learning among German policymakers engaged in implementing the European Floods Directive. We draw on official planning documents and expert interviews with state-level policymakers to focus on learning about the procedural aspects of designing and conducting participatory flood risk management planning. Drawing on the policy learning and evidence-based governance literatures, we conceptualise six types of instrumental ‘governance learning’ according to sources of learning (endogenous and exogenous) and modes of learning (serial and parallel). We empirically apply this typology in the context of diverse participatory flood risk management planning processes currently unfolding across the German federal states. We find that during the first Floods Directive planning cycle, policymakers have tended to rely on prior experience in their own federal states with planning under the Water Framework Directive to inform the design and carrying out of participatory processes. In contrast, policymakers only sporadically look to experiences from other jurisdictions as a deliberate learning strategy. We argue that there is scope for more coordinated and systematic learning on designing effective governance, and that the latter might benefit from more openness to experimentation and learning on the part of policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Newig, Jens & Kochskämper, Elisa & Challies, Edward & Jager, Nicolas W., 2016. "Exploring governance learning: How policymakers draw on evidence, experience and intuition in designing participatory flood risk planning," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(P2), pages 353-360.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p2:p:353-360
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.07.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901115300459
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.07.020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dotti, Nicola Francesco, 2018. "Knowledge that matters for the ‘survival of unfittest’: The case of the new Brussels' rail junction," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 131-140.
    2. Kate Mattocks, 2021. "Policy experimentation and policy learning in Canadian cultural policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 891-909, December.
    3. Paula Kivimaa & Mikael Hildén & Dave Huitema & Andrew Jordan & Jens Newig, 2015. "Experiments in Climate Governance. Lessons from a Systematic Review of Case Studies in Transition Research," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-36, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. Baulenas, Eulàlia, 2021. "She’s a Rainbow: Forest and water policy and management integration in Germany, Spain and Sweden," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    5. Thomas Bolognesi & Andrea K. Gerlak & Gregory Giuliani, 2018. "Explaining and Measuring Social-Ecological Pathways: The Case of Global Changes and Water Security," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, November.
    6. Kristof van Assche & Raoul Beunen & Stefan Verweij, 2020. "Comparative Planning Research, Learning, and Governance: The Benefits and Limitations of Learning Policy by Comparison," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 11-21.
    7. Philipp Preuner & Anna Scolobig & JoAnne Linnerooth Bayer & David Ottowitz & Stefan Hoyer & Birgit Jochum, 2017. "A Participatory Process to Develop a Landslide Warning System: Paradoxes of Responsibility Sharing in a Case Study in Upper Austria," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p2:p:353-360. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.