Adopting resilience-thinking in spatial planning for flood risk management: The case of Oslo
Andrea Benedini (PhD Fellow at Politecnico di Milano & Visiting Researcher at BYREG, March-June 2024) will discuss the main outcomes from a comparative analysis of Oslo and Copenhagen on policy and planning documents, including findings from interviews with the key informants in Oslo.
Date:
Address:
Ruth Haug Room, Tivoli Building (ground floor), NMBU and online.
Contact person:
Welcome to a seminar arranged by NMBU's Centre for Landscape Democracy (CLaD):
Adopting resilience-thinking in spatial planning for flood risk management: The case of Oslo
____________________________________________________________
Tuesday 18 June, 10:00-11:30
Ruth Haug Room, Tivoli Building (ground floor), NMBU and via Zoom
Zoom link (meeting ID: 683 2180 3403, Passcode: 875754)
____________________________________________________________
In recent years, climate changes have increasingly impacted pluvial flooding occurring in our cities. In this context, flood risk management has become a priority for urban planning agendas. There is also a growing advocacy towards a paradigm shift from conventional (e.g. engineering-oriented approach and disciplinary silos) to resilient thinking (an integrated and transdisciplinary approach). This has raised the awareness of the need for new planning strategies, processes and tools for managing the flood risks.
Nonetheless, there are very limited studies focusing on how to operationalize the paradigm shift into the practice. This research aims to explore emerging planning approaches to flood risk management by conducting a comparative analysis between the two cities of Copenhagen and Oslo. Both cities are indeed vulnerable to pluvial flooding, and they have committed to adopt resilience-thinking to flood risk management. A mixed-method approach was used in this study, consisting of content analysis of municipal planning documents (including detailed planning), interviews with key informants from different city departments, and spatial analysis.
The main findings show that, on the one hand, Copenhagen has developed a comprehensive and structural plan that includes more than 300 interventions, which are being built by public and private sectors. On the other hand, Oslo has approved an action plan, the goals of which are primarily to develop knowledge on urban pluvial flooding, as well as providing regulations and guidance for detailed planning for private developers.
These two approaches have produced different spatial solutions in the cities. Copenhagen has adopted a systematic approach to transform more and less compact areas, while Oslo has developed ad-hoc interventions in the built environment.
The study discusses the legislative, financial and planning limitations and opportunities that are found in the two cities. There is a further need for the development of adaptive approaches and inter-departmental collaboration in order to plan more sustainable cities.