Treffer: Flood Risk‐Sensitive Land Use Governance: Explaining Enforcement Gaps in the Case of Accra, Ghana.

Title:
Flood Risk‐Sensitive Land Use Governance: Explaining Enforcement Gaps in the Case of Accra, Ghana.
Authors:
Kruse, Sylvia1 (AUTHOR) sylvia.kruse@ifp.uni‐freiburg.de, Espinosa, Julio César Millán1 (AUTHOR), Ziga‐Abortta, Fafali R.1 (AUTHOR), Oteng‐Ababio, Martin2 (AUTHOR)
Source:
Environmental Policy & Governance. Oct2025, Vol. 35 Issue 5, p852-867. 16p.
Geographic Terms:
Database:
Business Source Premier

Weitere Informationen

Research has shown that effective flood risk management is closely connected to land use governance, i.e., the land use system involving diverse, relevant stakeholders (e.g., landowners, public authorities, disaster management organisations) and their formal and informal land development practices. Our research scrutinises the often‐observed enforcement gaps emerging when unauthorised encroachment in flood‐prone areas occurs despite existing formal regulations on building activities. The study identifies factors that help explain these enforcement gaps in flood risk‐sensitive land use governance by applying an institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework and a property rights perspective. Our empirical research focuses on Accra, Ghana, which has a long history of both regular and extreme flood events and is experiencing significant growth and high in‐migration rates, leading to increased demand for land. This, paired with land litigation and limited security of tenure, has led to unplanned settlements and encroachments of flood‐prone areas, thus heightening the local population's vulnerability—conditions typical of many similar cases in Sub‐Saharan Africa. The research builds on analysing policy documents and interviews with diverse stakeholders related to flood risk management and land use governance in Accra. Applying qualitative content analysis, we identified explanatory factors in connection with the enforcement gaps, which include overlapping property rights, outpaced planning efforts, land conflicts, legal loopholes, authority mismatch, information gaps, political influence and selective enforcement, and socio‐economic pressures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Environmental Policy & Governance is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)