Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Urban Disaster Resilience and Security pp 347–359Cite as

Urban Riskscapes—Social and Spatial Dimensions of Risk in Urban Infrastructure Settings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: The Urban Book Series ((UBS))

Abstract

A central challenge of urban risk governance lies in the complexity of the overlapping of multiple risks. This problem is particularly relevant and obvious in urban infrastructure settings. The concept of riskscapes addresses and integrates various aspects of risks: the overlapping of different risks, the multiplicity of perspectives on the same spatial area and spatially different meanings and consequences. An important aspect of the riskscapes concept lies in the range of perspectives regarding the risks. This article takes a closer look at aspects of multiplicity and overlaps of different riskscapes as well as the spatial and temporal dynamics of risks and riskscapes while turning to empirical findings on the transportation of hazardous goods. This is discussed with a specific focus on stationary and mobile forms of risk in the context of urban infrastructures. Based on a comparison of risk management in the Netherlands and in Germany, an aligned risk management strategy in regard to spatial planning and hazardous incidents regulation is recommendable. A context-sensitive, practice-oriented, and socio-spatial understanding of risks is necessary to grasp the context of specific urban situations and to get an in-depth understanding of risk situations—including the aspects stationary and mobile risks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    The tension between chances and risks is different with regard to urban areas and rural areas. Rural areas might not have the same advantages from transport lines as urban areas do, where the goods are shipped to and away from. Rural areas might just be passed through and are only spaces to be overcome, while the side effects are observable nevertheless. Since this chapter (and the main part of the book) focuses on urban risks, this cannot be elaborated any further although it is an important issue.

  2. 2.

    Primary effects are characterized by direct impacts by hazardous materials themselves. In the case of an accident, subjects of protection (Schutzgüter; humans, real assets, and the environment) may be affected directly, by explosions, chemical burns or contamination, for example. Secondary effects may be additional consequences such as temporally delayed explosions and fires (Söder 1996, 7; Wiesmann 1995).

  3. 3.

    Meaning external to hazardous (stationary) facilities.

  4. 4.

    It has to be noted that the implementation of the Seveso directive varies greatly among different countries (Haastrup 1994, p. 495).

References

  • 12. BImSchV - Zwölfte Verordnung zur Durchführung des Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetzes. Störfall-Verordnung in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 8. Juni 2005 (BGBl. I S. 1598), die zuletzt durch Artikel 1 der Verordnung vom 14. August 2013 (BGBl. I S. 3230) geändert worden ist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ale BJM (2005) Living with risk: a management question. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 90(2–3):196–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson B (2010) Preemption, precaution, preparedness: Anticipatory action and future geographies. Prog Hum Geogr 34(6):777–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appadurai A (1990) Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Public Cult 2(2):1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appadurai A (1998) Modernity at large. Cultural dimensions of globalization. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Aradau C (2013) Infrastructure. In: Salter MB, Mutlu CE (eds) Research methods in critical security studies. An introduction. Routledge, New York. pp 181–185

    Google Scholar 

  • BauGB - Baugesetzbuch in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 23. September 2004 (BGBl. I S. 2414), das zuletzt durch Artikel 6 des Gesetzes vom 20. Oktober 2015 (BGBl. I S. 1722) geändert worden ist.

    Google Scholar 

  • BauNVO - Baunutzungsverordnung in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 23. Januar 1990 (BGBl. I S. 132), die zuletzt durch Artikel 2 des Gesetzes vom 11. Juni 2013 (BGBl. I S. 1548) geändert worden ist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck U (1995) Risiko Stadt - Architektur in der reflexiven Moderne. In: Schwarz U (ed) Risiko Stadt? Perspektiven der Urbanität. Junius, Hamburg, pp 32–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickerstaff K, Simmons P (2009) Absencing/presencing risk: rethinking proximity and the experience of living with major technological hazards. Geoforum 40(5):864–872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BImSchG - Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetz in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 17. Mai 2013 (BGBl. I S. 1274), das zuletzt durch Artikel 1 des Gesetzes vom 20. November 2014 (BGBl. I S. 1740) geändert worden ist.

    Google Scholar 

  • BMI- Bundesministerium des Innern (2005) Protection of critical infrastructures - baseline protection concept. Recommendation for Companies, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • BMI - Bundesministerium des Innern (ed) (2009) National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP Strategy). Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Böschen S (2003) Katastrophe und institutionelle Lernfähigkeit. Seveso als ambivalenter Wendepunkt der Chemiepolitik. In: Clausen L, Geenen E, Macamo E (eds) Entsetzliche soziale Prozesse. Theorie und Empirie der Katastrophen. LIT, Münster. pp 139–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottelberghs PH (2000) Risk analysis and safety policy developments in the Netherlands. J Hazard Mater 71(1–3):59–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cidell J (2012) Just passing through: the risky mobilities of hazardous materials transport. Soc Geogr 7(1):13–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis M (1998) Ecology of fear. Los Angeles and the imagination of disaster. Metropolitan Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinkloh C (2004) Störfallvorsorge in der Stadt- und Regionalplanung. Raumforschung und Raumordnung 62(3):185–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EC – 96/82/EC Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances. OJ L 10, 14 Jan 1997, pp 13–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham S (ed) (2010) Disrupted cities. When infrastructure fails. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Haastrup P (1994) Overview of problems of risk management of accidents with dangerous chemicals in Europe. Eur J Oper Res 75(3):488–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hecht D (2003) Die räumliche Ausbreitung von Risiken. In: Karl H, Pohl J (eds) Raumorientiertes Risikomanagement in Technik und Umwelt. Katastrophenvorsorge durch Raumplanung. Forschungs- und Sitzungsberichte. ARL, Hannover. pp 7–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt K (1997) Regions of Risk. A geographical introduction to disasters. Addison Wesley Longman Ltd, Harlow

    Google Scholar 

  • Interprovincial Overleg; Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties & Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu (n.d.), Risicokaart - Transport of Hazardous Substances. Retrieved from: http://www.risicokaart.nl/en/informatie_over_risicos/transport_gevaarlijke_stoffen

  • Jochum C (2009) Überprüfung der praktischen Anwendbarkeit des Leitfadens (SFK/TAA-GS-1) „Empfehlungen für Abstände zwischen Betriebsbereichen nach der Störfall-Verordnung und schutzbedürftigen Gebieten im Rahmen der Bauleitplanung – Umsetzung § 50 BImSchG“. Abschlussbericht zu dem Projekt des Umweltbundesamtes FKZ 363 01 163. Bad Soden

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonkman SN, van Gelder PHJM, Vrijling JK (2003) An overview of quantitative risk measures for loss of life and economic damage. J Hazard Mater A 99(1):1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindell M, Prater C, Perry R (2007) Introduction to emergency management. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Lübbe H (2006) Der Verkehr, die Grenzen und die Demokratie. Europäische Aspekte zivilisatorischer Evolution. In: Borchard K (ed) Grenzenloser Verkehr? Verkehr an Grenzen! Academy for Spatial Research and Planning / Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung 229. ARL, Hannover. pp 80–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Maida CA (2008) Pathways through crisis. Urban risk and public culture. Altamira, Lanham

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsuoka Y, Shaw R (2014) Hyogo Framework for Action and urban disaster resilience. Community, Environment and Disaster Risk Management 16. Emerald, Bingley

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Mahn D, Everts J (2013) Riskscapes. The spatial dimension of risk. In: Müller-Mahn D (ed) The spatial dimension of risk. How geography shapes the emergence of riskscapes. Earthscan, Abingdon. pp 22–36

    Google Scholar 

  • November V (2004) Being close to risk. From proximity to connexity. Int J Sustain Dev 7(3):273–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • November V (2008) Spatiality of risk. Commentary. Environ Plan A 40(7):1523–1527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OTIF – Organisation Intergouvernementale pour les Transports Internationaux Ferroviaires/Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (2012). New legislation in the Netherlands: basisnet (base transport network). Perspective for transport of dangerous goods. 51th Session of the Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. Berne

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelling M (2003) The vulnerability of cities. Natural disasters and social resilience. Earthscan, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelling M, Wisner B (eds) (2009a) Disaster reduction. Cases from urban Africa. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelling M, Wisner B (2009b) Urbanization, Human Security and Disaster Risk in Africa. In: Pelling M, Wisner B (eds) Disaster reduction. Cases from urban Africa (pp 3–16). Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • ROG – Raumordnungsgesetz vom 22. Dezember 2008 (BGBl. I S. 2986), das durch Artikel 124 der Verordnung vom 31. August 2015 (BGBl. I S. 1474) geändert worden ist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumberg M (2011) Umgang mit Seveso-II-Anlagen im Rhein-Main-Gebiet. In: Pohl J, Zehetmair S (eds) Risikomanagement als Handlungsfeld in der Raumplanung. Arbeitsmaterial der ARL 357. ARL, Hannover. pp 127–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki T (1996) Social practices. A Wittgensteinian approach to human activity and the social. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki T (2002) The site of the social: a philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki T (2009) Timespace and the organization of social life. In: Shove E, Trentmann F, Wilk R (eds) Time, consumption and everyday life. practice, materiality and culture. Berg, Oxford. pp 35–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki T (2010) The timespace of human activity: on performance, society, and history as indeterminate teleological events. Lexington Books, Lanham

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz U, Meyerhöfer D (eds) (1995) Risiko Stadt? Perspektiven der Urbanität. Junius, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Söder J (1996) Risikomanagement in der Gefahrgutlogistik. Gabler, Wiesbaden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Staatsblad van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden (2015) Besluit van 20 februari 2015, houdende vaststelling van het tijdstip van inwerkingtreding van de wet van 10 juli 2013 tot wijziging van de Wet vervoer gevaarlijke stoffen en enige andere wetten in verband met de totstandkoming van een basisnet (Wet basisnet) (Stb. 2013, 307). Retrieved from:https://www.eerstekamer.nl/9370000/1/j9vvhwtbnzpbzzc/vjrxlu7k66dj/f=y.pdf

  • UNISDR (2007) Terminology. Retrived from https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology#letter-t

  • van der Vlies AV, Suddle SI (2008) Structural measures for a safer transport of hazardous materials by rail: the case of the basic network in The Netherlands. Saf Sci 46(1):119–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Versteeg MF (1988) External safety policy in the Netherlands: an approach to risk management. J Hazard Mater 17:215–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiesmann J (1995) Die Benzinkatastrophe vom 8. März 1994 im Bahnhof Zuerich-Affoltern und die Konsequenzen auf die Abwasseranlagen. Korrespondenz Abwasser 3/1995, pp 388–402

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Many thanks go out to Susanne Krings for her helpful comments on the outline of the text. The manuscript benefitted a lot from her thoughtful remarks. Furthermore, we would like to thank the reviewers Damien Serre and H.C. Schmitt for their feedback to improve the chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, Bonn University, Bonn, Germany

    Florian Neisser & Detlef Müller-Mahn

Authors
  1. Florian Neisser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Detlef Müller-Mahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Florian Neisser .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Rescue Engineering and Civil Protection, TH Köln—University of Applied Sciences, Cologne, Germany

    Alexander Fekete

  2. Institute for Public Safety and Emergency Management, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany

    Frank Fiedrich

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Neisser, F., Müller-Mahn, D. (2018). Urban Riskscapes—Social and Spatial Dimensions of Risk in Urban Infrastructure Settings. In: Fekete, A., Fiedrich, F. (eds) Urban Disaster Resilience and Security. The Urban Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68606-6_20

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation