作者: K.M. De Bruijn , C. Green , C. Johnson , L. McFadden
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-4200-3_4
关键词: Flood myth 、 Hazard 、 Vulnerability 、 Risk management 、 Resilience (network) 、 Knowledge management 、 Risk analysis (engineering) 、 Engineering 、 Ambiguity 、 Meaning (linguistics) 、 Set (psychology)
摘要: Flood management is increasingly discussed as a risk process, encapsulating this does, terms such ‘resilience’, vulnerability’, ‘hazard and ‘uncertainty’. The question is, there common consensus about what flood means? discussion of often confused by the use language, which in turn obscures meaning. It not always clear whether concepts ‘vulnerability’ ‘resilience’ are new concepts, labels applied to existing or they being consistently applied. There consequently that we either talking entirely different things using same labels, Diluting ambiguity aim paper. After all, if advance practice then need coherent set concepts. This paper explores range currently employed literature an attempt provide consistent unambiguous language improve communication knowledge dissemination. To do so, requires examination important including, ’resistance’, In these defined adopting dynamic systems approach recognizing both climate constantly changing developing