Department of Public Leadership and Social Enterprise, The Open University, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK.
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2020 Apr 3;378(2168):20190206. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2019.0206. Epub 2020 Feb 17.
In academic and professional circles, 'resilience thinking' has emerged as the dominant paradigm in flood risk management, which emphasizes the need to plan and design cities that can absorb water and replicate natural processes more closely. In this paper, we explore how planners in England are expected to respond to the resilience agenda against the realities in practice, zoning in on the delivery of sustainable (urban) drainage systems (SuDS). Our exploration highlights that, while SuDS are being implemented, they are largely characterized by a 'bog standard' design. We found that there are three main institutional factors that are constraining the implementation of SuDS: the lack of legislative backing, the power afforded to private commercial interests in the neoliberalized planning process, compounded by the severe lack of resources in local authorities. What is missing at the moment is SuDS process and design that is flexible, integrated, collaborative and innovative. There are clear implications that, without the necessary institutional support, resilience thinking will remain largely aspirational, and professionals will struggle to gain traction and translate the larger flood resilience policy agenda into England's future climate-resilient places. This article is part of the theme issue 'Urban flood resilience'.
在学术和专业领域，“韧性思维”已成为洪水风险管理的主导范式，它强调需要规划和设计能够更紧密地吸收水分并复制自然过程的城市。本文探讨了英国的规划者在实践中如何应对弹性议程，关注可持续（城市）排水系统（SuDS）的交付。我们的探索表明，虽然 SuDS 正在实施，但它们在很大程度上具有“标准”设计的特点。我们发现，有三个主要的制度因素限制了 SuDS 的实施：缺乏立法支持、新自由主义规划过程中赋予私人商业利益的权力，加上地方当局严重缺乏资源。目前缺少的是灵活、综合、协作和创新的 SuDS 流程和设计。很明显，如果没有必要的制度支持，韧性思维仍将主要是一种愿望，专业人员将难以获得牵引力，并将更大的洪水弹性政策议程转化为英国未来具有气候弹性的地方。本文是“城市洪水弹性”主题问题的一部分。
