Search

The term ‘resilience’, which is integral to the UK Climate Resilience Programme (UKCR), has been used increasingly in academic, practice and public discourse around climate change, and crises more generally. The term’s appeal comes from its ability to frame crises not as uncontrollable and uncertain phenomena to be feared, but as challenges over which one can triumph, with the potential for improving society.

Understanding the socioeconomic, cultural, historical and political nuances of a place is essential for realising effective local decision-making for climate action. People are central to understanding place-based risk and resilience, with consideration of inequality and vulnerability required for effective place-based climate adaptation. Temporality is important. Place is not fixed, but changes over time, together with the community that inhabits it. Discussing and sharing community knowledge increases the likelihood of successful creation and implementation of climate adaptation practices. A sense of place can be deployed to build connections between people, across policy and between scales.

The benefits of pet companionship – and of dog walking in particular – has been long acknowledged across academic disciplines. Much of the research values – even romanticizes – it as mutually beneficial, catalysing both human sociability and canine well-being. However, walking a dog displaying aggressive or other unwanted behaviour – dogs that fall short of expectations – severely undermines the virtues of pet companionship, extracting a considerable social and emotional toll for those seeking greater inter-species commonality. Drawing on empirical work on walking practices and the author’s autoethnographic account, the paper solicits interpretations more attuned to the complexities of our cohabited socio-spatial worlds, particularly against contexts of discordance. The research demonstrates how these circumstances influence relationships with humans, often forcing dogs and their owners into liminal and contested socio-spatial existences, though also occasionally revealing exploratory opportunities. The dog walk therefore emerges as an activity that is heavily negotiated and contingent. Ultimately, the quest to ‘make space’ for seemingly transgressive dogs demonstrates the necessity and potentiality for a trans-species co-habitation that is more sensitive to the spectrum of animals that share our more than human worlds.

This document details the strategy of the city to develop and embed adaptation and resilience across Manchester. It has been prepared by Dr Paul O’Hare, who was seconded to Manchester Climate Change Agency in 2021, and it has been discussed and agreed with the Adaptation and Resilience Advisory Group, which advises the Agency and the Manchester Climate Change Partnership.

Urban centres worldwide are adversely affected by flooding and air pollution. Better-prepared citizens are crucial to limiting the impacts of these hazards, and both lay knowledge and personal experiences are important in complementing and challenging expert opinion. For the first time, this study offers a critical comparison of how different twoway communication formats have been used worldwide between experts and the public in relation to flooding and air pollution risk. Through a systematic review, we analyse social media, educational programmes, serious games, citizen science, and forums in terms of their effectiveness in respect of dealing with incidents, raising awareness, and promoting knowledge exchange in the context of flooding and air pollution risk. We find that there is neither a one-size-fits-all nor superior format of communication. No single format is effective in fulfilling all three communication purposes. All five formats analysed appear to be successful under different circumstances and are never suitable for all segments of the population. Communication between experts and the public is difficult and full of tensions; information alone is not enough. Our study shows different ways of incorporating strategies to build trust between experts and the public and make communication more fun and accessible, breaking down hierarchies and creating safe spaces for co-creation where everyone feels empowered to participate and everyone benefits.

Urban centres worldwide are adversely affected by flooding and air pollution. Better-prepared citizens are crucial to limiting the impacts of these hazards, and both lay knowledge and personal experiences are important in complementing and challenging expert opinion. For the first time, this study offers a critical comparison of how different two-way communication formats have been used worldwide between experts and the public in relation to flooding and air pollution risk. Through a systematic review, we analyse social media, educational programmes, serious games, citizen science, and forums in terms of their effectiveness in respect of dealing with incidents, raising awareness, and promoting knowledge exchange in the context of flooding and air pollution risk. We find that there is neither a one-size-fits-all nor superior format of communication. No single format is effective in fulfilling all three communication purposes. All five formats analysed appear to be successful under different circumstances and are never suitable for all segments of the population. Communication between experts and the public is difficult and full of tensions; information alone is not enough. Our study shows different ways of incorporating strategies to build trust between experts and the public and make communication more fun and accessible, breaking down hierarchies and creating safe spaces for co-creation where everyone feels empowered to participate and everyone benefits.

The threat of flooding poses a considerable challenge for justice. Not only are more citizens becoming exposed to risk, but they are expected to play increasingly active roles in flood risk management. However, until recently, few efforts have charted broader understandings of disadvantage relating to flood risk exposure. Drawing upon social science scholarship that has long been sensitive to concerns related to justice, we deploy and develop the notion of flood disadvantage as a means to assess the challenges to more ‘just’ flood risk management. We contend that the concept of flood disadvantage offers a useful lens to appreciate the constraints of technical approaches to flood risk management, in particular, its limited ability to incorporate complex social elements such as how individuals have differing vulnerabilities and sensitivities to flooding and uneven abilities to engage with risk agendas. The notion highlights the compounding interactions between flooding and other social disadvantages across multiple public policy areas and scales. We argue a fuller acknowledgement of the socio-spatial-temporal dimensions of intersecting disadvantages can help sensitise technical risk analyses that tend to see people and communities as homogeneous entities in a given spatiality. In doing so we can better reveal why some individuals or communities are more vulnerable to disasters or are slower to recover than others. Finally, we outline the challenges in turning more ‘just’ flood risk management from an abstract notion into one that could inform future practice.

The threat of flooding poses a considerable challenge for justice. Not only are more citizens becoming exposed to risk, but they are expected to play increasingly active roles in flood risk management. However, until recently, few efforts have charted broader understandings of disadvantage relating to flood risk exposure. Drawing upon social science scholarship that has long been sensitive to concerns related to justice, we deploy and develop the notion of flood disadvantage as a means to assess the challenges to more ‘just’ flood risk management. We contend that the concept of flood disadvantage offers a useful lens to appreciate the constraints of technical approaches to flood risk management, in particular, its limited ability to incorporate complex social elements such as how individuals have differing vulnerabilities and sensitivities to flooding and uneven abilities to engage with risk agendas. The notion highlights the compounding interactions between flooding and other social disadvantages across multiple public policy areas and scales. We argue a fuller acknowledgement of the socio-spatial-temporal dimensions of intersecting disadvantages can help sensitise technical risk analyses that tend to see people and communities as homogeneous entities in a given spatiality. In doing so we can better reveal why some individuals or communities are more vulnerable to disasters or are slower to recover than others. Finally, we outline the challenges in turning more ‘just’ flood risk management from an abstract notion into one that could inform future practice.