Advertisement

Designing with Risk: Balancing Global Risk and Project Risks

  • Matthijs BouwEmail author
Chapter
  • 651 Downloads
Part of the Climate Change Management book series (CCM)

Abstract

The World Economic Forum, in their yearly global risk report which highlights the most significant long-term risks worldwide, consistently indicates that the ‘failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation’, as well the interconnected ‘water crises’, ‘greater incidence of extreme weather events’ and ‘food crises’, are among the top 10 global risks of highest concern. It is evident that the built environment will play a central role in fostering resilience towards such risks. Within the production of the built environment, at the same time, there is a concern with an altogether different set of risks, those related to the feasibility of a project. ‘Project resilience’, the capacity of a project to cope with shocks and stresses that are related to its feasibility, is often in conflict with ‘global’ resilience goals. Successful implementation of resilience projects in the built environment, such as ‘The Big U’ (of which the author is a co-design- lead), depends on designing the right balance between the two. In this paper, based on the author’s work on ‘The Big U’ and its successor projects, as well as on two interdisciplinary seminars at PennDesign, ‘Designing with Risk’, the author presents the research into this question, and propose that designers can have agency in balancing the two risk types in resilience projects.

Keywords

Climate-adaptive design Urban resilience Community engagement Risk management Adaptation pathways Big U Rebuild by design New York City 

References

  1. Alliance for a Greater New York (ALIGN), Alliance for a Just Rebuilding (AJR), Community Voices Heard, Faith in New York, Families United for Racial and Economic Equality (FUREE), Good Old Lower East Side (GOLES), New York Communities for Change, and Red Hook Initiative (2014) Weathering the storm, rebuilding a more resilient New York City housing authority post-sandy, report, March 2014Google Scholar
  2. Arcadis NV (2009), ARCADIS presents conceptual design for storm surge barrier to protect the New York Metropolitan area, from http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/arcadis-presents-conceptual-design-for-storm-surge-barrier-to-protect-the-new-york-metropolitan-area-61649597.html. Accessed 4 July 2016
  3. Boschma R (2015) Towards an evolutionary perspective on regional resilience, regional studies. 49, Issue 5Google Scholar
  4. City of New York (2013) A stronger, more resilient New York, SIRR report, via: http://www.nyc.gov/html/sirr/html/report/report.shtml
  5. City of New York (2015) One New York; the plan for a strong and just cityGoogle Scholar
  6. Flyvbjerg B, Bruzelius N, Rothengatter W (2003) Megaprojects and risk: an anatomy of ambition. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hauer ME, Evans JM, Mishra DR (2016) Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States. Nat Clim ChangeGoogle Scholar
  8. Hill D (ed) (1996) The baked apple? Metropolitan New York in the greenhouse. New York Academy of Sciences 1996, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. HUD (Department of Housing and Development) (2016) website, http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/sandyrebuilding/rebuildbydesign. Accessed 13 Aug 2016
  10. Ingels B (2012) Rethinking social infrastructure, CNN, sun April 22, 2012, from http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/22/tech/rethinking-social-infrastructure/index.html. Accessed 4 July 2016
  11. Keenan JM, King DA, Willis D (2015) Understanding conceptual climate change meanings and preferences of multi-actor professional leadership in New York. J Environ Policy PlannGoogle Scholar
  12. Lynch D (2012) Engineers lead calls for New York flood barrier, New Civil Engineer, from http://www.newcivilengineer.com/engineers-lead-calls-for-new-york-flood-barrier/8638544.article. Accessed 14 July 2016
  13. Malesevic DS (2014) 2 years after Sandy, who will get shelter from the storm? Only some downtown, http://www.downtownexpress.com/2014/10/29/2-years-after-sandy-who-will-get-shelter-from-the-storm-only-some-downtown/. Accessed 15 July 2016
  14. Martin-Breen P, Anderies JM (2011) ‘Resilience: a literature review’ Bellagio initiative. IDS, BrightonGoogle Scholar
  15. New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) (2010) Climate change adaptation in New York City: building a risk management response. In: Rosenzweig C, Solecki W (eds) Prepared for use by the New York City climate change adaptation task force. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Office of the Federal Register (2014) Third allocation, waivers, and alternative requirements for grantees receiving community development block grant (CDBG) Disaster recovery funds in response to Hurricane Sandy. Federal Register/Vol 79, No. 200/Thursday, 16 Oct 2014Google Scholar
  17. Rosenzweig C, Solecki W (ed) (2001) Climate change and a global city: the potential consequences of climate variability and change. Metro East Coast. Report for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, Columbia Earth Institute, National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change for the United StatesGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosenzweig C, Solecki WD, Blake R, Bowman M, Faris C, Gornitz V, Horton R, Jacob K, LeBlanc A, Leichenko R, Linkin M, Major D, O’Grady M, Patrick L, Sussman E, ohe G, Zimmerman R (2011) Developing coastal adaptation to climate change in the New York City infrastructure-shed: process, approach, tools, and strategies. Clim Change 106:93–127Google Scholar
  19. Rosenzweig C, Solecki W (2014) Hurricane Sandy and adaptation pathways in New York: lessons from a first-responder city. Global Environmental Change 28Google Scholar
  20. Seto KC, Dhakal S, Bigio A, Blanco H, Delgado GC, Dewar D, Huang L, Inaba A, Kansal A, Lwasa S, McMahon JE, Müller DB, Murakami J, Nagendra H, Ramaswami A (2014) Human settlements, infrastructure and spatial planning. In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx JC (eds) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. Sjöstedt M (2015) Resilience revisited: taking institutional theory seriously. Ecology and Society 20(4):23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Special Initiative for Rebuilding and Resiliency (SIRR) (2013) A strong, more resilient New York. The city of New York. Available at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/sirr/html/report/report.shtml. Accessed 4 Mar 2017
  23. The BIG Team (2014) Consisted of co-leads BIG (Bjarke Ingels Group) and One Architecture, with Starr-Whitehouse, James Lima P + D, Arcadis, Buro Happold, Level Engineering, Green Shield Ecology, AEU Consultancy, Project Projects and Parsons School of the Constructed EnvironmentsGoogle Scholar
  24. The Lo-Down (2015) Residents voice hyperlocal concerns about East river Levee Plan, in http://www.thelodownny.com/leslog/2015/10/residents-voice-hyperlocal-concerns-about-east-river-levee-plan.html. Accessed 15 July 2016
  25. U.S. Congress (2013) Disaster relief appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113–2, enacted January 29, 2013)Google Scholar
  26. Vermeer M, Rahmstorf S (2009) Global sea level linked to global temperature. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:21527–21532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wesselink AJ, Bijker WE, de Vriend HJ, Krol MS (2007) Dutch dealings with the selta. In: Nature and culture (vol 2, No 2), Autumn 2007, pp 188–209Google Scholar
  28. World Economic Forum (2016) The global risk report 2016, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  29. Ysebaerta T, van der Hoekc D-J, Wortelboerc R, Wijsmana JWM, Tangeldera M, Nolted A (2016) Management options for restoring estuarine dynamics and implications for ecosystems: a quantitative approach for the Southwest Delta in the Netherlands. Ocean Coastal Manag 121, pp 33–48Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of DesignUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations