Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk management

This paper presents an analysis of the nature and effectiveness of community direct action self-help (DASH) groups and includes a case study analysis of a river conveyance management group and a sea wall management group. DASH groups are found to be motivated by the need to deal with increasing floo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Simm Jonathan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: EDP Sciences 2016-01-01
Series:E3S Web of Conferences
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160715001
id doaj-e83b5c78f4bc427b96428ad0038c2564
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e83b5c78f4bc427b96428ad0038c25642021-02-02T07:42:24ZengEDP SciencesE3S Web of Conferences2267-12422016-01-0171500110.1051/e3sconf/20160715001e3sconf_flood2016_15001Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk managementSimm Jonathan0HR WallingfordThis paper presents an analysis of the nature and effectiveness of community direct action self-help (DASH) groups and includes a case study analysis of a river conveyance management group and a sea wall management group. DASH groups are found to be motivated by the need to deal with increasing flood risk in the face of reduced public funding, alongside sense of stewardship and community solidarity. Channel maintenance work by a DASH group can be effective and efficient at reducing some aspects of local fluvial flood risk for lower order flood events. Maintenance of existing sea walls by a DASH group may be less efficient because of the need for significant expenditure on materials and only efficacious if the engineering is quality-controlled; its longer term effectiveness is also limited by sea level rise. DASH groups require nurture to be sustainable but can deliver community benefits. Professional FCRM coordination and support of DASH activity was examined using a case study of an Environment Agency (EA) area coordinator and comparisons with alternative approaches. Support of DASH groups by FCRM professionals was found to be essential to avoid unwise activities and involves not only controlling consents, but also providing advice on the nature and extent to which DASH activity might be appropriate and arranging practical support and seed-corn funding. The most effective form of DASH facilitation requires a quality and quantity of involvement that cannot readily be supplied by dispersed arrangements from a number of individuals.http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160715001
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Simm Jonathan
spellingShingle Simm Jonathan
Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk management
E3S Web of Conferences
author_facet Simm Jonathan
author_sort Simm Jonathan
title Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk management
title_short Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk management
title_full Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk management
title_fullStr Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk management
title_full_unstemmed Direct action self-help (DASH) groups in UK flood risk management
title_sort direct action self-help (dash) groups in uk flood risk management
publisher EDP Sciences
series E3S Web of Conferences
issn 2267-1242
publishDate 2016-01-01
description This paper presents an analysis of the nature and effectiveness of community direct action self-help (DASH) groups and includes a case study analysis of a river conveyance management group and a sea wall management group. DASH groups are found to be motivated by the need to deal with increasing flood risk in the face of reduced public funding, alongside sense of stewardship and community solidarity. Channel maintenance work by a DASH group can be effective and efficient at reducing some aspects of local fluvial flood risk for lower order flood events. Maintenance of existing sea walls by a DASH group may be less efficient because of the need for significant expenditure on materials and only efficacious if the engineering is quality-controlled; its longer term effectiveness is also limited by sea level rise. DASH groups require nurture to be sustainable but can deliver community benefits. Professional FCRM coordination and support of DASH activity was examined using a case study of an Environment Agency (EA) area coordinator and comparisons with alternative approaches. Support of DASH groups by FCRM professionals was found to be essential to avoid unwise activities and involves not only controlling consents, but also providing advice on the nature and extent to which DASH activity might be appropriate and arranging practical support and seed-corn funding. The most effective form of DASH facilitation requires a quality and quantity of involvement that cannot readily be supplied by dispersed arrangements from a number of individuals.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160715001
work_keys_str_mv AT simmjonathan directactionselfhelpdashgroupsinukfloodriskmanagement
_version_ 1724298949588680704