Sally J. Priest

Flood Risk Management in England: A Changing Landscape of Risk Responsibility?

Flood risk management (FRM) in England is undergoing a major paradigm shift as it moves from an ideology dominated by flood defence to one in which the management of all floods, their probabilities and consequences is now of central concern. This change has led to searching questions both within government, and more widely, concerning the appropriate division of responsibility between the state and its citizens, the appropriate balance between structural and non-structural risk management options, and the ‘fitness for purpose’ of the current appraisal, prioritization and decision-making processes. In this paper, the authors examine how a desire to ‘make space for water’ in England has the potential to alter the division of responsibility between the public and private domain, presenting new opportunities, potential barriers and possible solutions.

Economic evaluation of structural and non-structural flood risk management measures: examples from the Mulde River

The concept of flood risk management, promoted by the EU Floods Directive, tries to mitigate flood risks not only by structural, hydraulic engineering measures, but also by non-structural measures, like, e.g., land-use planning, warning and evacuation systems. However, few methods currently exist for the economic evaluation of such non-structural measures and, hence, their comparison with structural measures. The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the potential benefits of employing a wider range of economic appraisal methods for flood projects, in particular, it provides examples and applications of methodologies which may be employed to evaluate non-structural measures and their transaction costs. In two case studies at the Mulde River, Germany, two non-structural measures, a resettlement option and a warning system, are evaluated and compared with structural alternatives with regard to their effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and efficiency. Furthermore, a simple approach is tested in order to show the transaction costs of these measures. Case study results show that the choice of evaluation criteria can have a major impact on the assessment results. In this regard, efficiency as an evaluation criterion can be considered as superior to cost-effectiveness and effectiveness as it is also able to consider sufficiently the impacts of non-structural measures. Furthermore, case study results indicate that transaction costs could play an important role, especially with non-structural measures associated with land-use changes. This could explain why currently these kinds of measures are rarely selected by decision makers.

Evolving inter-regional co-operation in flood risk management: distances and types of partnership approaches in Austria

Abstract Flood risk management and policy in Europe are changing, so the role of local and catchment-wide flood risk management plans is now key contemporary issues in flood policy. A new policy agenda is to enhance inter-local solutions instead of local flood alleviation schemes. This paper analyses the new role of those local authorities and stakeholders in flood risk management as well as how the nature of the partnerships is established and operated, focusing especially on the main barriers and challenges. This paper examines catchment-based flood risk management in Austria. Catchment-based flood risk management was analysed in three different Austrian regions (Aist in Upper Austria, Triesting-Tal in Lower Austria and Ill-Walgau in Vorarlberg). The current functions of a partnership approach in flood risk prevention lie within the selection of sites for conservation of regionally important retention areas, harmonising spatial planning instruments and awareness-raising for protective measures on an inter-local level. The empirical results are currently characterised by a lack of sufficient co-operation between the members as well as with the regional authorities. The three case studies show different backgrounds and developments. The results show that the inter-local co-operation process is in no cases fully achieved. Some of the case studies show a higher integration in one field than others.

The Fallibility of Flood Warning Chains: Can Europe’s Flood Warnings Be Effective?

Taking a broad overview, this paper explores recent evidence on flood forecasting, warning communication and public warning response in Europe between 1995 and 2010. Key flood warning chain deficiencies are identified together with the effect these deficiencies have on flood warning effectiveness and loss reduction. Europe-wide data on flood forecasting and warning communication are examined alongside recent in-depth research evidence from various parts of Europe on flood warning receipt, warning response and warning effectiveness. Using the latest flood warning benefit assessment methodologies, the results of case studies of flood loss avoidance through warnings reveal the damage saving potential of flood warning. Although these savings are significant, currently they are inhibited by a series of shortcomings which transfer through the warning chain limiting warning impact. Flood forecasting, warning and warning response systems are inherently fallible and so it is doubtful that they will ever be consistently effective. Sole reliance upon them to protect life and property carries inevitable risks and governments should not be surprised when flood warnings are only partially effective. Although Europe’s flood forecasting and warnings have been improving, the scope for further improvement is large. Extending flood forecasting and warning coverage, extending warning lead times by combining meteorological and hydrological forecasts, building greater redundancy into warning communication, and crucially also building it into cooperative strategies designed to engage at risk communities in flood warning response, are all likely to be important.

Assessing options for the development of surface water flood warning in England and Wales.

This paper explores the technical options for warning of surface water flooding in England and Wales and presents the results of an Environment Agency funded project. Following the extensive surface water flooding experienced in summer 2007 a rainfall threshold-based Extreme Rainfall Alert (ERA) was piloted by the Met Office and Environment Agency providing initial steps towards the establishment of a warning for some types of surface water flooding. The findings of this paper are based primarily on feedback on technical options from a range of professionals involved in flood forecasting and warning and flood risk management, about the current alerts and about the potential options for developing a more targeted surface water flood warning service. Providing surface water flooding warnings presents a set of technical, forecasting and warning challenges related to the rapid onset of flooding, the localised nature of the flooding, and the linking of rainfall and flood forecasts to flood likelihood and impact on the ground. Some examples of rainfall alerting and surface water flood warning services from other countries are evaluated, as well as a small number of recently implemented local services in England and Wales. Various potential options for implementation of a service are then explored and assessed. The paper concludes that development of a surface water flood warning service for England and Wales is feasible and is likely to be useful to emergency responders and operational agencies, although developing such a service for the pluvial components of this type of flooding is likely to be feasible sooner than for other components of surface water flooding such as that caused by sewers. A targeted surface water flood warning service could be developed for professional emergency responders in the first instance rather than for the public for whom such a service without further operational testing and piloting would be premature.

Modelling the potential damage-reducing benefits of flood warnings using European cases

Flood warning systems are now centre-stage in flood risk management strategies in Europe. This is due to advances in flood forecasting and the rapid communication of flood risk information, coupled with a growing understanding that communities need to find better ways of co-existing with rivers and the realization that structural flood defences are insufficient on their own to prevent flooding. However, not enough is known about the potential and actual benefits of flood warnings for avoiding property damages. This paper presents an extended approach to the estimation of potential flood damage reduction benefits of flood warnings for fluvial and tidal floods, drawing upon research completed for the European Commissions Floodsite project. Its aim is to demonstrate the potential economic benefits of coupling flood warnings to a combination of structural and non-structural flood risk management measures. Previous research in this area is critiqued, including that which suggests that flood warnings are futile, and the features, strengths and weaknesses of the extended approach are presented and discussed. Two case studies, a national-level (England and Wales) and a local-level (Grimma, southeastern Germany) assessment of flood damage-saving potential, are presented to illustrate the new approach. Although a number of data quality issues need addressing, the model outputs and estimations of potential damage savings may be used to make wise decisions about investment in flood warning systems, and to identify those areas, such as public flood risk awareness, that need attention to achieve the full scope of potential benefits in practice.

The European union approach to flood risk management and improving societal resilience : Lessons from the implementation of the Floods Directive in six European countries

Diversity in flood risk management approaches is often considered to be a strength. However, in some national settings, and especially for transboundary rivers, variability and incompatibility of a ...

Dealing with flood damages: will prevention, mitigation and ex-post compensation provide for a resilient triangle?

There is a wealth of literature on the design of ex post compensation mechanisms for natural disasters. However, more research needs to be done on the manner in which these mechanisms could steer citizens toward adopting individual-level preventive and protection measures in the face of flood risks. We have provided a comparative legal analysis of the financial compensation mechanisms following floods, be it through insurance, public funds, or a combination of both, with an empirical focus on Belgium, the Netherlands, England, and France. Similarities and differences between the methods in which these compensation mechanisms for flood damages enhance resilience were analyzed. The comparative analysis especially focused on the link between the recovery strategy on the one hand and prevention and mitigation strategies on the other. There is great potential within the recovery strategy for promoting preventive action, for example in terms of discouraging citizens from living in high-risk areas, or encouraging the uptake of mitigation measures, such as adaptive building. However, this large potential has yet to be realized, in part because of insufficient consideration and promotion of these connections within existing legal frameworks. We have made recommendations about how the linkages between strategies can be further improved. These recommendations relate to, among others, the promotion of resilient reinstatement through recovery mechanisms and the removal of legal barriers preventing the establishment of link-inducing measures.

Sharing the burden of increasing flood risk: who pays for flood insurance and flood risk management in the United Kingdom

Many countries are exploring alternative strategies to counter rising flood risk as there is concern at the extra burden that such increasing risk will bring. The aim of this paper is to explore the nature of these burdens and outline responses in the United Kingdom (UK) where both the government and the private flood insurers have new policies and proposals. Our method is to collate the extensive existing authoritative data and information—from government and the insurance industry—about the risks that are being experienced and the related policy responses. The results show that these seek to concentrate somewhat more the financial burden of, respectively, flood risk management costs and insurance provisions on to those who are at risk and away from the general taxpayer and those who pay insurance premiums. Other countries may well learn from these developments. The pre-existing cross-subsidies are being reduced, and in this way, it is hoped that extra resources for risk management investment will be forthcoming (from local contributions from at-risk communities) and flood insurance will remain affordable, available and commercially viable. A key conclusion here is that it appears that any increase in flood frequency and severity in the UK appears likely to affect the financially deprived communities to a greater extent than others, not least because they are less likely to insure. Government arrangements to prioritise their contribution to risk reduction towards these financially deprived communities are signs that this regressive effect of floods is real and serious and those arrangements are to be welcomed.

Dealing with change and uncertainty within the regulatory frameworks for flood defense infrastructure in selected European countries

Whereas existing literature on the interactions among law, adaptive governance, and resilience in the water sector often focuses on quality or supply issues, this paper addresses adaptation in national water laws in relation to increasing flood risks. In particular, this paper analyzes the extent to which legal rules governing flood defense infrastructure in a selection of European countries (England, France, Sweden, and The Netherlands) allow for response and adaptation to change and uncertainty. Although there is evidence that the legal rules on the development of new infrastructure require that changing conditions be considered, the adaptation of existing infrastructure is a more complicated matter. Liability rules fail to adequately address damages resulting from causes external to the action or inaction of owners and managers, in particular extreme events. A trend toward clearer, and in some cases, increased public powers to ensure the safety of flood defense infrastructure is observed. The paper concludes that legal rules should ensure not only that decisions to build flood defenses are based on holistic and future-oriented assessments, but also that this is reflected in the implementation and operation of these structures.