Given financial constraints, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Environment Agency have done a good job in improving the cost effectiveness of their approach to flood risk management. They have adopted rational methods to prioritise spending on both new capital flood defences and maintaining existing ones. However, risks remain to the sustainability of current levels of flood protection. The Agency will need to make difficult decisions about how it prioritises its maintenance budget, including some defences where it will need to reduce or stop maintenance. In these cases, there is a risk that lack of maintenance will mean that capital costs are incurred sooner, when defences require replacement earlier. Since our evidence session, the Agency has published a long term investment strategy, which presents a number of flooding scenarios and outlines how much funding would be needed to protect against these.

Tax and tax reliefs are plainly different and require different accountability arrangements. Put simply tax is where you get money in through taxation and a tax relief is where you make a conscious decision to forgo that income. Some reliefs are structural parts of the system to ensure a more progressive system or avoid double taxation. But other reliefs, costing some £100 billion a year, are designed to deliver a policy objective that could be met instead through spending programmes. HM Treasury and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) do not keep track of those tax reliefs intended to influence behaviour. They do not adequately report to Parliament or the public on whether reliefs are working as intended and what they cost and whether they represent good value for money. While HMRC is accountable for implementing and monitoring all tax reliefs, its statements about the extent of its responsibilities are inconsistent with its actual practices. HMRC accepts it has a role to assess, evaluate and monitor reliefs, but is unable or unwilling to define or to categorise reliefs by their purpose. While HMRC accepts the need for reporting the costs of tax reliefs, it does not see the merit in assessing the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of reliefs, or considering their cost effectiveness alongside that of alternative policy instruments such as spending programmes. HMRC does not generally assess the effectiveness of reliefs with specific objectives although in a few instances it does consider their impact on taxpayer behaviour. HMRC's failure to articulate a set of principles to guide its management and reporting of tax reliefs is a serious omission which it now needs to rectify.

This report summarises the key areas of the Committee's work over the past five years. It draws out the areas where progress has been made and where their successors might wish to press in future. The Committee has assiduously followed the taxpayer's pound wherever it was spent. Since 2010 they held 276 evidence sessions and published 244 unanimous reports to hold government to account for its performance. 88% of their recommendations were accepted by departments. In many cases they successfully secured substantial changes, for example with the once secret tax avoidance industry. They secured consensus from government and from industry that private providers of public services do have a duty of care to the taxpayer, and in pushing the protection of whistleblowers further up the agenda of all government departments. By drawing attention to mistakes in the Department for Transport's procurement of the West Coast Mainline, more recent procurements for Crossrail, Thameslink and Intercity Express have all benefited from more expert advice and a more appropriate level of challenge from senior staff. After discovery in 2012-13 that 63% of calls to government call centres were to higher rate telephone numbers, the Government accepted our recommendation that telephone lines serving vulnerable and low income groups never be charged above the geographic rate and that 03 numbers should be available for all government telephone lines. They also secured a commitment to close large mental health hospitals.

This book studies governance capacity and governance legitimacy for societal security and crisis management. It highlights the importance of building organizational capacity by focusing on the coordination of public resources and underscores the relevance of legitimacy by emphasizing the importance of public perceptions, attitudes, and trust vis-à-vis government arrangements for crisis management. The authors explore several cases and identify relevant dimensions concerning performance, capacity and legitimacy across different countries. It is an ideal volume for audiences interested in public administration, public policy, crisis management and security studies.

The Winterbourne View scandal in 2011 exposed the horrific abuse of people with learning difficulties and challenging behaviour in a private mental health hospital. Concerns were also raised about a number of other institutions. As a result, the Government committed to discharging those individuals for whom it was appropriate back into their homes and communities. However, since then, too many children and adults have continued to go into mental health hospitals, and to stay there unnecessarily, because of the lack of community alternatives. The number of people with learning disabilities remaining in hospital has not fallen, and has remained broadly the same at around 3,200. It was refreshing that NHS England took responsibility for this lack of progress and has now committed to develop a closure programme for large NHS mental health hospitals, along with a transition plan for the people with learning disabilities within these hospitals, from 2016-17. Discharges from hospital are being delayed because funding does not follow the individual when they are discharged into the community. This acts as a financial disincentive for local commissioners who have to bear the costs and responsibility for planning and commissioning community services. Delaying discharge has the effect of institutionalising people, making their reintegration into the community more difficult. Some local authorities' reluctance to accept and fund individuals in the community will be exacerbated by current financial constraints. The Department should set out its proposals for 'dowry-type' payments from NHS England to meet the costs of supporting people discharged from hospital.

This book focuses on policies and governance on how to build the resilience of cities to droughts and floods in the short-, medium-, and long-term. There are discussions on how cities prepare for, cope with, learn from, manage, and recover from these extreme events. The chapters also consider aspects such as changing paradigms, policy responses under uncertainty, scenario development, institutional responses, adaptive forecasting, governance perspectives, infrastructure development, overall investments, and technological innovation. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction are discussed at length. Most of the cities and regions studied are in Asia, however, cities from Oceania, Europe, Africa, and North America are also included. Analyses are not limited to cities but to the basins and regions from which urban populations obtain their resources, and on which their resilience depends. This book was originally published as a special issue of the International Journal of Water Resources Development.

This volume discusses a combination of topics dealing with the wide variety of urban planning, authored by well reputed scholars in India mastering disciplines such as architecture, urban design, transportation planning, public policy, urban planning, urban engineering and civil engineering. It focuses on contemporary problems in metro cities like New Delhi, Ahmedabad, Mumbai, etc. This book also highlights critical aspects of urban developments while considering the aspects of mega infrastructure projects especially related to water, waste water treatment and environmental issues.

This is the first English-language atlas to systematically introduce the environment, hazard, vulnerability and risk mapping for 11 natural disasters, i.e. earthquake, volcano, landslide, flood, storm surge, sand-dust storm, tropical cyclone, heat wave, cold wave, drought and wildfire, and risk mapping for multi-hazard disaster in the world. The above 11 hazards are assessed and mapped at grid unit, comparable-geographic unit and national unit, and the multi-hazard is assessed and mapped at grid unit and national unit. The expected annual mortality and/or affected population risks and expected annual economic loss and/or affected property risk of 11 hazards and multi-hazard of the world at national level are unprecedentedly derived and ranked. The atlas can be a good reference for researchers and students in the field of natural disaster risk management and risk governance, and enterpriser and risk manager as well to understand the global natural disaster risk. Prof. Peijun Shi works at Beijing Normal University, China; Prof. Roger Kasperson works at Clark University, USA.

Extreme weather and climate events, interacting with exposed and vulnerable human and natural systems, can lead to disasters. This Special Report explores the social as well as physical dimensions of weather- and climate-related disasters, considering opportunities for managing risks at local to international scales. SREX was approved and accepted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on 18 November 2011 in Kampala, Uganda.

Flooding is one of the most devastating natural hazards in the world. Available records suggest that both flood frequency and severity are on the rise and this is likely to worsen in the context of climate change. As population, infrastructure and poverty grow rapidly in developing countries, particularly in urban agglomerations of 10 million people or more, floods could cause widespread devastation, economic damage and loss of life. Assessment of vulnerability and risk from naturally occurring phenomena is therefore imperative in order to achieve urban sustainability. This book uses geospatial techniques to evaluate hazards, risk and vulnerability at a metropolitan scale in a data-scarce country. An empirical study was performed using remote sensing, GIS and census data. This research offers a new approach to mapping population, infrastructures and communities at risk which can greatly contribute to the deeper understanding of flood disasters in a rapidly expanding megacity. Examples shown in this book are from Dhaka Megacity, however, the techniques and methods can easily be implemented in medium to large cities of similar characteristics. The book is essential reading for hazard researchers, geospatial scientists, disaster management professionals, geographers, urban planners, and social scientists. Ashraf M. Dewan is currently a Lecturer in the Department of Spatial Sciences at Curtin University, Western Australia (on leave from his substantive position as Associate Professor in the Geography & Environment Department at the University of Dhaka, Bangladesh).