The catalogue contains study descriptions in various languages. The system searches with your search terms from study descriptions available in the language you have selected. The catalogue does not have ‘All languages’ option as due to linguistic differences this would give incomplete results. See the User Guide for more detailed information.
Understanding Environmental Knowledge Controversies: the Case for Flood Risk Management, 2007-2010
Creator
Whatmore, S., University of Oxford, Oxford University Centre for the Environment, School of Geography
Study number / PID
6620 (UKDA)
10.5255/UKDA-SN-6620-1 (DOI)
Data access
Restricted
Series
Not available
Abstract
Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.This is a qualitative data collection. The study is part of the Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU) programme.
This project was conceived in order to address the public controversies generated by the risk management strategies and forecasting technologies associated with diffuse environmental problems such as flooding and pollution. Environmental issues play an ever-increasing role in all of our daily lives. However, controversies surrounding many of these issues, and confusion surrounding the way in which they are reported, mean that sectors of the public risk becoming increasingly disengaged. To try to reverse this trend and regain public trust and engagement, this project aimed to develop a new approach to interdisciplinary environmental science, involving non-scientists throughout the process. Examining the relationship between science and policy, and in particular how to engage the public with scientific research findings, a major diffuse environmental management issue was chosen as a focus - flooding.
As part of this approach, non-scientists were recruited alongside the investigators in forming Competency Groups - an experiment in democratising science. The Competency Groups were composed of researchers and laypeople for whom flooding is a matter of particular concern. The groups worked together to share different perspectives - on why flooding is a problem, on the role of science in addressing the problem, and on new ways of doing science together.
We aimed to achieve four substantive contributions to knowledge:
1. To analyse how the knowledge claims and modelling technologies of hydrological science are developed and put into practice by policy makers and commercial organisations (such as insurance companies) in flood risk management.2. To develop an integrated model for forecasting the in-river and floodplain effects of rural land management practices.3. To experiment with a new...
Terminology used is generally based on DDI controlled vocabularies: Time Method, Analysis Unit, Sampling Procedure and Mode of Collection, available at CESSDA Vocabulary Service.
Methodology
Data collection period
01/09/2007 - 01/09/2008
Country
England
Time dimension
Cross-sectional (one-time) study
Analysis unit
Individuals
National
Subnational
Universe
Selected consultants, software developers and academics (wide geographical spread) and local stakeholders (Ryedale district)
Sampling procedure
Purposive selection/case studies
Kind of data
Text
Data collection mode
Face-to-face interview
Funding information
Grant number
RES-227-25-0018
Access
Publisher
UK Data Service
Publication year
2011
Terms of data access
The Data Collection is available to UK Data Service registered users subject to the End User Licence Agreement.
Commercial use of the data requires approval from the data owner or their nominee. The UK Data Service will contact you.