This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.

Unclaimed
Magdalena Rauter
Institute of Mountain Risk Engineering, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria

Honors and Awards

The user has no records in this section


Career Timeline

The user has no records in this section.


Short Biography

The user biography is not available.
Following
Followers
Co Authors
The list of users this user is following is empty.
Following: 0 users

Feed

Journal article
Published: 20 August 2020 in Land Use Policy
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The frequency and magnitude of extreme weather events are expected to increase due to the effects of climate change and socio-economic development. Potentially higher flood risk, hence, triggered debate about a shift in flood risk management from mainly public to increasingly private involvement. So far, public flood mitigation schemes were standard modes to deal with flood hazards in many countries, including Austria. With high implementation and maintenance costs as well as substantial losses remaining, alternative management approaches have increasingly been discussed. This paper analyses the debate on shifting responsibilities in flood risk management from public to private actors and whether or not the current governance arrangement would accommodate this shift in the public-private divide. Based on qualitative research, we explicitly analyse this potential shift from an institutional perspective and not from the perspective of individual homeowners, taking the case study of Dornbirn (Austria) as an example. The results show that, firstly, the current governance arrangement hardly encourages property-level flood risk adaptation measures. Secondly, several factors stabilise the current governance arrangement and prevent a shift in the public-private divide. Although the need for an increased sense of responsibility among private actors seems to be evident among interviewees, strong historical narratives and adaptive expectations lead to a society seeing public authorities to be responsible for flood risk management and trust their expertise as well as the technical flood infrastructure. However, such areas of expertise and law are fragmented and therefore impede a redistribution or enforcement of responsibilities. Furthermore, fixed costs delay a shift in the public-private divide as the traditional engineering approach (i.e. structural measures) is predominant with high investments in the current system but limited investment in risk communication to raise awareness. Yet, a shift towards sharing responsibility might contribute to flood risk management for risks to remain manageable.

ACS Style

Magdalena Rauter; Maria Kaufmann; Thomas Thaler; Sven Fuchs. Flood risk management in Austria: Analysing the shift in responsibility-sharing between public and private actors from a public stakeholder's perspective. Land Use Policy 2020, 99, 105017 .

AMA Style

Magdalena Rauter, Maria Kaufmann, Thomas Thaler, Sven Fuchs. Flood risk management in Austria: Analysing the shift in responsibility-sharing between public and private actors from a public stakeholder's perspective. Land Use Policy. 2020; 99 ():105017.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Magdalena Rauter; Maria Kaufmann; Thomas Thaler; Sven Fuchs. 2020. "Flood risk management in Austria: Analysing the shift in responsibility-sharing between public and private actors from a public stakeholder's perspective." Land Use Policy 99, no. : 105017.

Journal article
Published: 04 October 2019 in Sustainability
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Environmental change is subject to discussion among scientists, practitioners, and policymakers. As increasing threats to both environment and society are on the agenda, alternative management approaches are gaining importance. This paper focuses on the influence of policy changes on flood risk management. There is evidence that shifts in settlement patterns and population growth might influence the dynamics of flood damage and loss. There is increased pressure to intensify land use, but also to keep free spaces for hazard mitigation and adaptation. In this paper, we focus on new regulative and management approaches associated with the implementation of the European (EU) Floods Directive in Austria. The concept of tipping points, which are defined as turning points for system change, has been applied. Based on semi-structured interviews we evaluate whether or not the implementation of the EU Floods Directive has triggered a system change in flood risk management. Our results show that triggers for change are past flood events and a general need for action rather than the implementation of the directive itself. Changes related to the EU Floods Directive are likely to happen in the long-term; however, these cannot yet be determined. The main challenges are associated with transparency and communication between policymakers and the affected society. So far, the requirements of the first policy cycle of the directive have been fulfilled. The second policy cycle will show further outcomes and potential needs.

ACS Style

Magdalena Rauter; Thomas Thaler; Marie-Sophie Attems; Sven Fuchs. Obligation or Innovation: Can the EU Floods Directive Be Seen as a Tipping Point Towards More Resilient Flood Risk Management? A Case Study from Vorarlberg, Austria. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5505 .

AMA Style

Magdalena Rauter, Thomas Thaler, Marie-Sophie Attems, Sven Fuchs. Obligation or Innovation: Can the EU Floods Directive Be Seen as a Tipping Point Towards More Resilient Flood Risk Management? A Case Study from Vorarlberg, Austria. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (19):5505.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Magdalena Rauter; Thomas Thaler; Marie-Sophie Attems; Sven Fuchs. 2019. "Obligation or Innovation: Can the EU Floods Directive Be Seen as a Tipping Point Towards More Resilient Flood Risk Management? A Case Study from Vorarlberg, Austria." Sustainability 11, no. 19: 5505.

Articles
Published: 04 July 2019 in Water International
Reads 0
Downloads 0

This article aims to analyze the legal framework for flood risk management in Austria, focusing on planning. Austria’s legal basis for flood risk management is fairly complex because its federal organization involves various administrative bodies and a fragmented legal framework. Regulations are numerous, as are competencies, which poses challenges. Implementation mechanisms vary between provinces; nevertheless, provincial regulations impose basic regulations regarding the building process. Regulations concerning private protection and mitigation measures for existing buildings are, however, limited.

ACS Style

Magdalena Rauter; Arthur Schindelegger; Sven Fuchs; Thomas Thaler. Deconstructing the legal framework for flood protection in Austria: individual and state responsibilities from a planning perspective. Water International 2019, 44, 571 -587.

AMA Style

Magdalena Rauter, Arthur Schindelegger, Sven Fuchs, Thomas Thaler. Deconstructing the legal framework for flood protection in Austria: individual and state responsibilities from a planning perspective. Water International. 2019; 44 (5):571-587.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Magdalena Rauter; Arthur Schindelegger; Sven Fuchs; Thomas Thaler. 2019. "Deconstructing the legal framework for flood protection in Austria: individual and state responsibilities from a planning perspective." Water International 44, no. 5: 571-587.