Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Multi-risk, multi-scale and multi-stakeholder – the contribution of a bow-tie analysis for risk management in the trilateral Wadden Sea Region

  • Published:
Journal of Coastal Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Risk management processes increasingly call for enhanced stakeholder participation, and aim to integrate different risk perceptions, concerns and interests. Frequently, this goal is driven by the increased complexity of risk management processes, as risk management processes continuously have to deal with multi-risk situations including impacts resulting from risks of natural hazards and risks caused by misguided social or economic development. Although stakeholder participation is required by different policies, major challenges still arise from the question of how to perform multi-stakeholder participation in practice. In order to find answers, we tested the so-called ‘bow-tie analysis’ as a potential tool to facilitate multi-stakeholder participation with a major effort on integrating stakeholders risk perceptions and interest in the risk management processes. The bow-tie analysis is a commonly used risk assessment technique (IEC 2009) to analyse cause-and-effect pathways of risks, but its application in multi-stakeholder processes in risk management of natural hazards, especially in a European context, is rather new. Using practical experiences from the trilateral Wadden Sea Region we demonstrate the bow-tie analysis’ contribution to coastal risk management processes in this coastal area by facilitating collaborative identification, comprehension and analysis of the management system. The use of a modified bow-tie analysis in collaboration with stakeholders from the Wadden Sea Region proved to be an appropriate framework for enhancing the understanding of risk management processes and fostered disclosure of different perceptions and concerns of multi-risk problematics. The bow-tie can be beneficial as a communication and co-construction tool in risk management processes in a multi-risk context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Beck is referring to an accumulation of ecological, terrorist, military, financial, biomedical and informational risks that has an overwhelming presence in our world today (Beck 2009)

  2. In contrast to a technological perspective, in which risks are defined as the algorithmic calculation: risk = threat x vulnerability x cost (c.f. Ratter 2013).

  3. In the Netherlands, there are the Ijssel and the Reitdiep, the river Ems at the border between the Netherlands and Germany, in Germany the Weser, Elbe and Eider rivers and in Denmark, the river Ribe Å has already caused some flooding events in the past.

  4. In IEC 31010 the bow-tie analysis is highlighted as one of two tools (out of more than 30 risk assessment tools), which is able to assess a given system of management control; and it is highlighted as the only method which is able to integrate multiple causes and consequences in relation to a central event: the bow-tie analysis (IEC 2009)

  5. The Standard 31000 of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) provide a framework for management of any risk characterized by a strong focus on practical implementation of risk management processes (Creed et al. 2016, p. 410).

References

  • Ballinger R (2014) On the edge: coastal governance and risk. In: Fra Paleo U (ed) Risk governance - the articulation of hazard, politic and ecology. Springer, Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck U (2007) Weltrisikogesellschaft, 3rd edn. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck U, (2009) World Risk Society and Manufactured Uncertainties, European Journal of Philosophy and Policy Debates, p. 291–299. <http://www.fupress.net/index.php/iris/article/view/3304>. Accessed 15 December 2015

  • Church J, Gregory J, Huybrechts P, Kuhn M, Lambeck K, Nhuan M, Qin D, Woodworth P (2001) Changes in sea level. In: Houghton J, Ding Y, Griggs D, Noguer M, van der Linden P, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson C (eds) Climate change 2001: working group I: the scientific basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Creed IF, Cormier R, Laurent KL, Accitino F, Igras J, Henley P, Friedman KB, Johnson LB, Crssman J, Dillon PJ, Trick CG (2016) Formal integration of science and management systems needed to achieve thriving and prosperous great lakes. Biogeosciences 66(5):408–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CWSS; Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, (2014) Toender Declaration. Ministerial Council Declaration of the 12th Trilateral Governmental Conference on the Protection of the Wadden Sea. Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven, Germany.

  • Enemark J (2005) The wadden Sea protection and management scheme – towards an integrated coastal management approach? Ocean Coast Manag 48:996–1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JP (2012) Environmental governance. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • FAK, Fachausschuss für Küstenschutzbauwerke (2009) Küstenschutzstrategien bericht der FAK-arbeitsgruppe. Die Küste 76:1–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Gall M, Cutter SL, Nguyen K (2014) Governance in Disaster Risk Management. IRDR AIRDR Publication No. 3, Beijing: Integrated Research on Disaster Risk. http://www.irdrinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/AIRDR-Project-Report-No.-3-WEB-6MB.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2015

  • Gerritsen H (2005) What happened in 1953? the big flood in the Netherlands. Phil Trans R Soc A. doi:10.1098/rsta.2005.1568

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Riancho P, Gerkensmeier B, Ratter B, Gonzalez M, Medina R (2015) Storm surge risk perception and resilience: a pilot study in the German North Sea coast. Ocean Coast Manag 112:40–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greiving S, Glade T (2013) Risk governance. In: Bobrowsky PT (ed.) Encyclopedia of Natural Hazards, pp 804–806.

  • IEC; International Electrotechnical Commission International Organization for Standardization (2009) Risk Assessment Techniques. ISO. IEC/ISO 31010:2009

  • IPCC; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) The physical science basis. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2013) Summary for policymakers. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • IRGC; International Risk Governance Council (2005) Risk governance: Towards an integrative approach. White paper No 1, Author O. Renn with Annex by P. Graham. Geneva.

  • ISO, International Organization for Standardization (2009) Risk management - Principles and guidelines. ISO

  • Kabat P, Bazelmans J, van Dijk J, Herman PMJ, van Oijen T, Pejrup M, Reise K, Speelman H, Wolff WJ (2012) The wadden Sea region: towards a science for sustainable development. Ocean & Coastal Manag 68:4–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katsman C, Hazeleger W, Drijfhout S, van Oldenborgh G, Burgers G (2008) Climate scenarios of sea level rise for the northeast Atlantic ocean: a study including the effects of ocean dynamics and gravity changes induced by ice melt. Climate Change. doi:10.1007/s10584e008e9442e9

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsman CA, Sterl A, Beersma JJ, van den Brink HW, Church JA, Hazeleger W, Kopp RE, Kroon D, Kwadijk J, Lammersen R, Lowe J, Oppenheimer M, Plag HP, Ridley J, von Storch H, Vaughan DG, Vellinga P, Vermerrsen LLA, van de Wal RSW, Weisse R (2011) Exploring high end scenarios for local sea level rise to develop flood protection strategies for a low lying delta – the Netherlands as an example. Clim Chang 109(3–4):617–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann N (1993) Risk: a sociological theory. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratter BMW (2012) Complexity and emergence - Key concepts in non-linear dynamic systems. In: Glaser M, Krause G, Ratter BMW, Welp M (ed) Human-nature interactions in the anthropocene. Potentials of social-ecological systems analysis. New York, pp 90–104

  • Ratter BMW, Sobiech C (2011) Heimat, Umwelt und Gefahren - Wahrnehmungen der Bevölkerung an der deutschen Nordseeküste. In: Fischer L, Reise K (eds) Küstenmentalität und Klimawandel - Küstenwandel als kulturelle und soziale Herausforderung. Ökom, Munich, pp 181–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Rausand M (2011) Risk assessment – theory, methods, and applications. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O (2008) Risk governance. Coping with uncertainty in a complex world. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvi O, Debray B (2006) A global view on ARAMIS, a risk assessment methodology for industries in the framework of the SEVESO II directive. J Hazard Mater 130(3):187–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations ISDR; International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (2015) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Geneva, Switzerland available at: http://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2015

  • van Dijk J, Broersma L, Mehnen N (2016) Options for socioeconomic developments in ICZM for the tri-national wadden area. Ocean Coast Manag 119:76–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Storch H, Gönnert G, Meine M (2008) Storm surge - an option for Hamburg, Germany to mitigate expected future aggravation of risk. Environ Sci Pol 11:735–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wadden Sea Forum (2004), Sector-specific analysis and perspectives for the Wadden Sea Region, available at: http://www.waddensea-forum.org/images/archive/studies/waddensearegional-analysis-en.pdf

  • Wadden Sea Forum (2005) Breaking the Ice. Wilhelmshaven. http://www.waddensea-forum.org/strategy/breaking-the-ice Accesse 07 June 2016

  • Wadden Sea Forum (2010) Without Frontiers – achievements in cross-border, cross-sector, communication and cooperation.Wilhelmshaven. http://www.waddensea-forum.org/strategy/without-frontiers Accessed 07 June 2016

  • Wadden Sea Forum (2013) ICZM Strategy for the Wadden Sea Region. Wilhelmshaven. http://www.waddensea-forum.org/strategy/iczm-strategy Accessed 07 June 2016

  • Wadden Sea Long-Term Ecosystem Research (WaLTER), Waddenacademie KNAW, Common Wadden Sea Secretariat (CWSS) (eds.) (2014) Wadden monitoring in the spotlight. http://www.waddenacademie.nl/fileadmin/inhoud/pdf/04-bibliotheek/2014Waddenmonitoring_in_the_spotlight.pdf Accessed 06 June 2016

  • Wanczura S, Fleischhauer M, Greiving S, Fourman M, Sucker K, d’Andrea A (2007) Analysis of recent EU, international and national research and policy activities in the field of risk governance. Del. 1.1 MIDIR ProjectWard.

  • Weisse R, Bellafiore D, Menendez M, Mendez F, Nicholls R, Umgiesser G, Willems P (2014) Changing extreme sea levels along European Coasts. Coast Eng 87:4–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woth K, Weisse R, von Storch H (2006) Climate change and North Sea storm surge extremes: an ensemble study of storm surge extremes expected in a changed climate projected by four different regional climate models. Ocean Dyn 56:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research underlying this paper has received funding from the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement No. 308438 (ENHANCE: Enhancing risk management partnerships for catastrophic natural hazards in Europe). We thank all the participating Wadden Sea Forum members for their contribution as well as fruitful and inspiring discussions during the stakeholder workshops. We would also like to thank Roland Cormier, Cormac Walsh and our anonymous reviewers for the very helpful and supportive comments on earlier versions of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Birgit Gerkensmeier.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gerkensmeier, B., Ratter, B.M.W. Multi-risk, multi-scale and multi-stakeholder – the contribution of a bow-tie analysis for risk management in the trilateral Wadden Sea Region. J Coast Conserv 22, 145–156 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-016-0454-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-016-0454-8

Keywords

Navigation