Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' comments

Dear authors,

Thank you very much for your proposal to our contest. Our judges have thoroughly reviewed a large number of interesting proposals over the past weeks. While your proposals has some very interesting ideas, the judges have decided not to advance it to the next round. We hope that our feedback below helps you to further develop your idea and would like to encourage you to keep up the good work.

Judges feedback:

Raising awareness and building capacity on resilience at the university is a good start, but the proposal does not seem to go far enough. The links between risk analytics and risk reduction measures, and the proposed Regional Flood Insurance Program are not clear enough. Accordingly, the feasibility and sustainability of the proposal is questionable.

In addition, the proposal is assuming quite a lot on the part of the stakeholders involved without having any specific names; unclear if teaching about resilience at 'University-level' will help the actual target group of the proposal. The engagement with and buy-in from government would need further elaboration.

In addition, the proposal misses out on actually addressing the urban context – there are few links to specific urban settings and where the proposal can make a difference. Overall, the idea is good, but the project design, stakeholder constellation and concrete impact chain would need further research and elaboration.

Good luck and all the best,
The contest fellows

Share conversation: Share via:
No comments have been posted.