Informing operational flood management with ensemble predictions: lessons from Sweden

Abstract

This paper highlights some communicative and institutional challenges to using ensemble prediction systems (EPS) in operational flood forecasting, warning, and civil protection. Focusing in particular on the Swedish experience, as part of the PREVIEW FP6 project, of applying EPS to operational flood forecasting, the paper draws on a wider set of site visits, interviews, and participant observation with flood forecasting centres and civil protection authorities (CPAs) in Sweden and 15 other European states to reflect on the comparative success of Sweden in enabling CPAs to make operational use of EPS for flood risk management. From that experience, the paper identifies four broader lessons for other countries interested in developing the operational capacity to make, communicate, and use EPS for flood forecasting and civil protection. We conclude that effective training and clear communication of EPS, while clearly necessary, are by no means sufficient to ensure effective use of EPS. Attention must also be given to overcoming the institutional obstacles to their use and to identifying operational choices for which EPS is seen to add value rather than uncertainty to operational decision making by CPAs.

Paperwork and the decoupling of audit and animal welfare: The challenges of materiality for better regulation

“…A more promising approach would heed the Macdonald et al (2011, paragraph 5.17) review recommendation that government work collaboratively with farmers to redesign the format of the information required for assurance to make it easier to collect and use. This kind of participatory, co-production approach has proved useful in a number of other regulatory contexts (Hardy, 2011;Lemos et al, 2012;Nobert et al, 2010). But as long as animal welfare regulation relies on auditing physical records as a proxy for the rather less tangible goal of good animal welfare, it will always be prone to means-ends decoupling.…”

How much does participatory flood management contribute to stakeholders' social capacity building? Empirical findings based on a triangulation of three evaluation approaches

“…In terms of knowledge building, dialogic forms of communication have been found to facilitate knowledge exchange and attitude changes (Höppner et al, 2012;Buchecker, 2008;Nobert et al, 2010;Howgate and Kenyon, 2009). The extent to which stakeholder involvement contributes to knowledge exchange and to the building of shared knowledge is, however, less clear.…”

Climate Change Impact on Riverine Nutrient Load and Land-Based Remedial Measures of the Baltic Sea Action Plan

“…A similar ensemble approach is used for meteorological model input to hydrological forecasts (e.g. Norbert et al 2010;Arheimer et al 2011a, b). Ensemble means from several hydrological models have actually been found to give better performance than each single model used (Viney et al 2005), and recently this approach has also been applied to water quality models (Exbrayat et al 2010).…”