Previous disasters, including the catastrophic Central European floods of 2002, have already led to improvements in flood protection; the latest events could risk reduction efforts.
Working under Professor Carina Keskitalo at Umeå University, Gregor Vulturius, now a research associate at SEI, did research on the development of innovative flood risk management policies by the German State of Saxony after the 2002 floods. The work will be published in a book edited by Keskitalo, Climate Change and Flood Risk Management: Adaptation and Extreme Events at the Local Level (forthcoming fall 2013, Edward Elgar Publishing).
Q: How big a policy impact did the 2002 floods have?
A: The scope and gravity of destruction triggered a number of policy responses. In 2007, the European Flood Directive was put in place. It is intended to be a flexible legislative framework for dealing with flood risks. It prescribes certain elements, such as preliminary flood risk assessment, flood hazard maps and flood risk management plans, but leaves decisions about other key elements – protection objectives, strategies and choice of measures – to the Member States.
A comprehensive implementation process is currently under way. Transposition of the Directive’s provisions into national law and submission of preliminary flood risk assessment reports were required by the end of 2011, and the development of flood hazard and risk maps and flood risk management plans is expected to be finalized by the end of 2013 and 2015, respectively.
Q: With every disaster like this, there is always public debate about whether climate change “caused” it. Does it matter whether that connection is made?
A: That is a difficult judgment to make. The IPCC Special Report on extreme events and disasters (SREX) concluded that neither flood nor mean precipitation trends could be identified in this region, but that there is a trend toward increasing precipitation variability, which suggests enhanced probability of flood occurrence. In the future, regional climate models for Saxony suggest increasing frequency of heavy rainfall events and risk from flash floods, complemented by more frequent and more intense dry periods which brings adverse effects on the supply of potable water and groundwater quality.
Our research in Germany has shown that extreme natural events such as floods can be a window of opportunity for policy-makers to develop novel approaches to flood risk management and climate change adaptation. The flood in 2002 put the issue of climate impacts and adaptation on Germany’s political agenda, ultimately leading to the adoption of the National Adaptation Strategy in 2008.
Q: How did the political dialogue change?
A: Before, climate was primarily discussed in terms of mitigation and Germany’s obligation to cut emissions. Adaptation was seen as a concern primarily for developing countries, whilst impacts on Germany were deemed self-evident and easy to control. In this sense, framing of the 2002 flood as a harbinger of climate change spurred policy innovation and engaged different actors in adaptation.
At the same time, many decision-makers at regional and local levels perceive existing knowledge about future climate impacts as too coarse to serve as a solid base for proactive decision-making. One has to remember that flood risk management and protection often entail comprehensive interventions into existing land use structures that require practical justification, political legitimacy and public approval. This is a challenge that adaptation research has to face in order to become useful to local decision-makers.
Q: What are some of the most effective flood-risk management strategies that you encountered in your research?
A: What we have seen in our research is that legislators in Germany as well as the EU level have taken steps to shift from traditional flood control strategies towards flood risk management. While the former aim to reduce flood hazards and rely primarily on structural infrastructure (e.g. embankments or dikes), the latter seek to mitigate flood risks by placing more emphasis on non-structural measures (e.g. spatial planning or flood risk mapping).
Flood risk management is envisaged to encompass a continuous process to develop, implement and revise policies that aim to minimize the risk to a society from flooding by means of preparedness, prevention and protection. A very good example is the Flood Protection Strategy of the State of Saxony, developed in response to the 2002 floods. Key innovations include an emphasis on individual responsibility for flood preparedness and the strengthening of soft measures such as restricting land use in flood plains and implementing an improved warning system.
Q: How important is it to learn from experiences like the current floods?
A: In the Saxon example, it was also evident that learning from previous floods was a key success factor. Our findings have shown that learning starts with a thorough assessment and mapping of flood risks, which later becomes the base for a comprehensive strategy. This requires sufficient and dependable funding, public approval and close coordination between governmental actors at different levels of decision-making.
Design and development by Soapbox.