Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31570966›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2019

Flood Risk Management in Canada's Prairie Provinces: an Analysis of Decision-Maker Priorities and Policy Preferences.

Alasdair Morrison, Bram F Noble, Cherie J Westbrook

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alasdair MorrisonDepartment of Geography and Planning, University of Saskatchewan, Kirk Hall, 117 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5C8, Canada. adm085@mail.usask.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8948-1733
Bram F NobleDepartment of Geography and Planning, University of Saskatchewan, Kirk Hall, 117 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5C8, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8575-2281
Cherie J WestbrookDepartment of Geography and Planning, University of Saskatchewan, Kirk Hall, 117 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5C8, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1666-3979

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

If the aim of flood risk management (FRM) is to increase society's resilience to floods, then a holistic treatment of flood risk is required that addresses flood prevention, defence, mitigation, preparation, and response and recovery. Progressing resilience-based management to flood risk requires both diversity and coordination of policy across multiple jurisdictions. Decision makers and the types of FRM policy decisions they make play a key role in implementing FRM policies and strategies that progress flood resilience. This paper explores how policy preferences held by FRM decision makers relate to the characteristics of resilient FRM policy. The research was conducted in three flood-prone provinces in western Canada using a multi-criteria analytical approach. The results show that while decision maker FRM priorities are similar across the Canadian Prairies, their preferred FRM policies differ. Further, preferred FRM policies were largely resistance-based and influenced at least as much by flood experiences and perceptions of flood risk as by more obvious administrative pressures such as cost, public acceptability, and environmental protection. Several observations emerge from these results for advancing a coordinated, diversified approach to FRM which is required for resilience, both for western Canada and for FRM more broadly.

Indexed as

FloodsGrasslandCanadaDecision MakingRisk ManagementDecision supportFlood adaptationFlood governanceFlood resilienceFlood risk management

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.