WGF5-7-ENV-Draft Outline- Floods in Guidance on CC
Status boxTitle:Chapter 6 guidance document on climate change and water Flood risk management
Version no.:0.3Date: 3.5.2009
Author(s):Drafting group on CC guidance document
M. Brättemark, DG ENV.D.2
Editorial comments :
The following advanced outline for the first draft of the chapter contains the issues raised by the WG F drafting group on climate change, as well as a column with editorial comments and suggestions on who would draft the text (to be completed). As a principle, the texts to be provided by the drafting groups should be very brief and precise, to limit the length of the document.
It is important to note that the outline was developed, and the first draft of the text is to be developed, as one standalone text devoted to flood risk management and with the understanding that further editorial work will be undertaken by the Commission on all chapters of the guidance to ensure coherence and avoid overlapping. The texts provided may therefore be moved and edited.
It is also important to note that some issues may be better addressed in a separate document, or in an annex, depending on their relevance for the overall guidance, but this can be decided at a later stage.
Whenever a practical example can be included, please indicate that and sent a text on that separately, with a clear indication to which section the example belongs. This text can then either be included in the text as a box, or in an annex.
References : Please submit references of relevant literature, projects or examples which can be included in the reference list or in an annex.
The final procedure and timetable to agree this text will be communicated at a later stage, but will be linked to the September workshop (Karlstad, Sweden).
Next milestones:
- submission of draft outline to WG F7/5
- submission of first draft texts14/5
- discussion WG F 1st outline20/5
Action for WG F:
- WGF are asked to comment on the draft outline to give general directions
Contacts:
Maria Brättemark (DG ENV) (Maria ), Jorge Rodriguez Romero (DG ENV) (),
/
STRUCTURE:
1. Introduction
2. Links between WFD and FD (partly to serve as an overview on which other parts of the guidance is of particular relevance of the floods work and vice versa) *
3. Key guiding principles in flood risk management in the view of climate change
4. Key flood risk management issues in the view of climate change
5. Considering Climate change in the different steps of implementing the FD
6. Considering climate change impact on flood risk in the different relevant steps of the implementation of the WFD
* Suggestion to put the second paragraph between the 5th and the 6th
1. Introduction [1 page]
1.A. Setting the scene, working with uncertainty in flood risk management. [General?[1]]
- Evidence of climate change but not - no evidence yet of the relationship floods
Climate change vs . climate variability.
- Different challenges on a “north/south/east/west” scale
- Trends in the CC-models for EU MS
1.B. Current CC “signals” situation and current impacts on flooding – if any: [General?]
FI – snow patterns – less snow south, 90 very snowy in Lappland. Snow conditions polarised,. Now after 2000;
FR – no statistical signal observed yet – main conclusion land use evolution
SW - less snow – more rain in the SW part of the country
ES - scarcity – but no floods
Other examples ?
1.C. Introduction on how the Floods Directive and the Water Framework Directive complement each other in relation to climate change
Text explaining the links between the two Directives, and therefore providing the bridge between this chapter and the rest of the document
2. Links between tasks according to the Floods and the Water Framework Directives
(This table is foreseen to provide an overview between the relevant links between the two directives related to climate change and flood risk management, and can serve as a quick guide to readers on which other parts of the guidance is of relevance for FRM, and as a guidance to WFD readers on relevant parts of the FD in this respect. To be completed. )
Floods Directive / To be completed / Water Framework DirectivePreliminary Flood risk assessment (art 4-5)
- impacts on environment
- modification of watercourses / Monitoring (Art 8)
- ecological quality parameters,
- hydromorphological parameters, flow
Characterisation WB, pressure and impacts, economic analysis (Art 5)
Art 6 and 7 (protected areas)
Flood mapping (art 6)
-Identification of potential adverse consequences on humans, economic activity and the environment
-Include protected areas (WFD annex IV), main point sources, and if deemed useful by the MS other significant sources of pollution and areas where floods with transported sediment and debris flow can occur / Characterisation WB, pressure and impacts, economic analysis (Art 5)
Identification of HYMO pressures and impacts
Art 6 and 7 (protected areas)
Identification of areas
Flood Risk Management Plans (art 7)
Set objectives to reduce flood risk including negative adverse consequences for the environmental, human health and economic activity. Include measures to achieve these.
Shall take into account WFD Environmental objectives, art 4, soil and water management, nature conservation, etc
May include sustainable land use practices, and controlled flooding of certain areas.
Coordination in RBD/UoM at similar scale to WFD / Env objectives and exemptions (art 4)
- 4.3 (HMWB/AWB – justification flood protection, good ecological potential)
-4.6 (exemptions for temporary deteriorations, definition of exceptional flood events)
-4.7 (exemption for new modifications to water bodies, justification includes maintenance of human safety)
Art 6 and 7 (protected areas and drinking water)
Article 9 (water service pricing – cost recovery for impoundments)
Programmes of measure
(art 11) & RBMP (art 13)
Public information and consultation (art 9 and 10)
To be coordinated with art 14 WFD / Public consultation and information (Art 14)
Reporting (art 15)
Via WISE, synchronised with WFD (focus land side) / Reporting (art 15)
Via WISE (focus water body)
3. Overall guiding principles[2]
3.APlanning with uncertainties :
-general principle on how to approach assessment of flood risk and planning to reduce flood risks in view of climate change impacts on flooding
-precautionary principle to be applied, and worst case scenarios to always take into consideration latest climate change information
-general statements on, how to deal with different types of floods of particular relevance in view of climate change, such as pluvial floods, flash floods, urban floods, coastal floods etc
3.BShort term vs long term considerations
- ensure the relevant timescales considered takes climate change into account when flood risk management options are considered, including when costs and benefits are assessed.
- provide practical guidance on how to select "no-regret options", taking into account different water management objectives
3.C.Managing floods in regulated water systems versus natural water systems
- recognition that the management of floods is different in regulated water systems versus natural water systems and provide guiding principles on these differences
Examples : (EN / ES – difficult – natural floods/real river systems how works.)
3.D.Land use / spatial planning :
Recognition that land use and spatial planning is crucial in flood risk management, and that climate change will exacerbate this. More effort are needed to ensure flood risk is considered in spatial planning and in other local land use management.
Pattern of land use are changing, more use of land in or closer to flood plains– how to deal with protection in these areas.
Increase the awareness of different actors that the flood plains part of the river systems, for reducing flood hazard for instance by wetland creation, or to reduce flood damage by better protection of, removal or stopping to flood risk receptors.
Considerations of migration people away from high risk areas – relocation
Reinforce and clarify legal requirements in the MS discourage building in land use in flood risk zones management
Protection measures as adaptation to CC of buildings and water services for instance already existing in built up areas.
Ensure long-term land use plans take climate change into account.
NOTE: use key conclusions from the two workshops on Land use
3.E. Structural vs non structural measures : non structural measures preferred
A statement expressing a general preference for non-structural measures for flood risk management where possible, as being a better environmental option in the view of increased uncertainty as well as increased extent and intensity of floods in cview of climate change.
Examples
- use protection – natural retention areas
- use measures which allows for sediments to be transported rather than increase the problem
- wetland
- afforestation
- more sustainable land use
- river side restoration
- Keeping water courses free of obstacles
3.FDeal with the effectiveness and efficiency of existing structures : both coastal flood defence structures and river flood defences
- General principle on how to consider effectiveness of existing flood defence structures in flood risk assessment, then mapping and finally in management plans. MS are responsible for the definition of these principles and the FD implementation will be the occasion to do so.
- How to apply precautionary principle, worst case scenarios etc
- efficiency is cost benefit approach
3.G.Impact of climate change for the management of different types of floods need to be considered as well as changes in flood patterns due to climate change
General principle on the need to recognise this in planning, and to take it into account in management, examples increased flash floods and changed coastal flood risks(including SLR related hazards and storm surge).
Climate change may change water body typologies, with an impact on flood risk, for instance river flow levels changes with more dry areas.
Also modifications to water bodies (hydropower dams for instance) may change flood risks, there is a need to coordinate and exchange information between WFD and FD management.
Ground water floods, coastal, flash floods, ephemeral floods, pluvial floods, river floods, ice-melt floods, urban floods…
Examples:
3.H.Different approaches to the obligations on flood risk management
Recognition that the general approach to flood risk management can be affected. Examples : Requirement to authorities to protect people – (BE) – in UK right to protect yourself –( UK)
Management structure/practices need change with CC:
-change warning systems
-change measures in place today
-rebuild cities – “ugly defences” - flat
-learn to live with floods – rather than prevent floods
-adaptation measures need to be robust to changes
-use of materials to choose
-Improve adaptive capacity - knowledge !
3.I.Raising flood awareness as a risk reduction measure - education
With climate change flood awareness is likely to increase, and this needs to be managed in a constructive way, to make sure the right level of concern leads to the right management decisions. Awareness raising campaigns can be considered directed to the public, to local authorities and politicians and other sectors influences flood risk management.
Education / public awareness crucial for preparedness, prevention and protection.
- Expect less resources
–Expect less ordinary events – more extreme flood events
- Education regarding : source - path – receptor chainand all aspects of safety chain form prevention till recovery
3.J.Reinforcement needed of science – policy – risk management links
- Return periods – difficult to get estimates. Atmosphere up until 3000 years not clear what to expect.
- how to deal with residual risks
4. Key flood risk management issues
4.A.Working with flooding scenarios and modelling in view of climate change
Difficult to choose scenarios –not necessarily necessary to choose one CC scenario for the EU – but exchange information on how to work with scenarios
- down scale problem – downscaling using same scenarios – depending on method results different,
- advantages use common set of scenarios :
- disadvantages of using common set of scenarios :
- average not relevant
- no relevant choose – same
- local situations (humidity)
- still guidance possible for some cases:
- worst case –as a guidance or as examples
- test different scenarios
- calculations different – mention different
- uncertainty different parts of Europe
- Warm + -
- However, the choice of model means more than scenario...
- importance of improving models -
- mean or extreme values
4.B.The specific challenges of coastal floods and sea level rise
- General statement and principles on how coastal flood risk will change (with both sea level rise increasing pressure on coastal defences and changing coast lines, linked with increased challenges of coastal storm surges).
Sea level rise :
- moving of risk receptors need to be considered
- increases coastal flood risk
- tsunami risk increasing due to increased landslide risks
- estuaries problems
- “hold the line” principle boundary condition in BE coastal protection for instance
- what can we do in this situation there
- not “black/white” solutions, but important trade-off and balances of objectives to be found
- win/win areas for instance for industrial activities to be sought
Specific challenges of estuaries where combined effects of SLR and discharge act having a combined probability influenced by both mechanisms and their correlation. Additional effects of changes in salt/fresh water boundaries
4.C. Dealing with flash floods and land slides/erosion due to floods, and links to WFD
-Protective measures areas from sediment deposits
-Effects in relation to change river course
-The need to raise awareness – politicians of land slide hazards
-identify “hot spots” be aware in planning- changing strategies on - identified
-no boundary torrential flood and land slides
-“dejection cones”
-rapidly changed river flows – debris flows
4.D.Urban floods
To manage urban floods in view of climate change, specific consideration are required in relation to the design and dimensions of :
- water run off system
- reservoirs / parking
4.EIdentification of win-win measures and no or low-regret measures :
To reduce flood risk, “win-win measures” or “low-regret measures” shall be favoured. Examples are :
- flood plain management with the objective of reducing hazards and damage
- wetlands
- improvement of flood forecasting for all different types of floods
- chain of measures – alert – more time to
- afforestation
- mitigation – measures reduce CO2 emissions, at the same time sustainable construction standards,
- new building standards including flood resilient buildings –
4.FPublic – private partner ships / insurance :
To improve the use of best available information, public-private partnerships with the isnuranceindustry should be reinforced, for the purpose of :
- using expertise available for risk assessment all through the flood risk manbgaement cycle
- increasing risk awareness
- hazard mapping – collection of data …
- economic instruments – reduction insurance premium –to send the right incentive price signals
- prognosis – cc – economic development – increase awareness
- benefit sharing data – no competitive advantage not to share data for all stakeholders involved
- sending signals – withdraw insurablility in flood zones
5. Possible guidance on the climate change related aspects of the different stages of the Floods directive
5.1Preliminary Flood risk assessment (art 4)
5.1.A.Working with “readily available information” on climate change impacts on flood risk
- Consider what is and what will be readily available information
- what is available today, what will be available in - 2011 – (IPCC 5 etc…), 2013 and 2015.
- What could be useful:
- more information “paleo” floods / past floods to support long-term trend assessments (
- further information to be made available via GMES, notably for reviews.
- elevation maps need for (both maps/PFRA)
- Examples on how data is used in FI
- Note : further discussions end May on PFRA, Brno
5.1.B.Using information availability under WFD
- environmental monitoring data, role of flow regime etc
- characterisation and impact of human activities on hydromorphology
- in particular to pick up signals on how certain elements change, due to climate change.
5.1.CObserved climate change : trends detection
Improve methodology for make relation to new monitoring data and link this to old data for the purpose of improving assessment of climate change trends in hydrology and scenario building in relation to climate change . Estimate, condensed data.
Example : FR study
5.1.DModelling of floods in view of climate change :
- use the models with the highest available resolution models
regional climate models – high resolutions
GCM+ downscaling on a specific region
- ensemble predictions
- ensure links with experts involved in IPCC – you have the knowledge in the country
–develop own scenarios – local models
5.1.E Reviewing the preliminary flood risk assessment in view of climate change
There is a need to go through all available data every cycle according to the Directive, and most information should be made use of, and a forum for exchanging g information on climate signals and other aspects on how to take climate change into account should be provided.
5.1.F. Use best information available in relation to long term changes including on land use, demographic change, environmental aspects
5.2Potential significant flood risk (art 5) :
5.2.A Include worst case scenarios
On grounds of using the precautionary principle, it is recommended to included the worst case scenarios in the assessment of PSFR, whereby CC is taken into account
5.2.B.Ensure all significant [mb1]drivers, all significant risk receptors and impacts related to water management are taken into account to encourage a holistic approach to risk assessment.
5.2.C.Issues to consider in relation to climate change in the review of the PSFR areas (at the latest after 6 years)
- regular review of projected 100 year floods
- identify “hot spots” – recalculated in some areas – beware of vulnerability of certain regions -
- ensure information exchange between MS on when scenarios change
- always use latest available information
5.3Flood hazard and risk maps (article 7)
5.3.A.Medium probability (at least 100 years return periods) :
The Directive requires that flood maps are not fixed – updates needed every 6 years (or might need update with more or less irregular interval) if conditions and scenarios change.
Every 6 year there may be changes in intensity and extent of floods and potential changes of 100 year floods which need to be reflected in flood hazard and risk maps.
5.3.B.Low probability or extreme events