Towards sustainable flood risk management in the Rhine and Meuse river basins: synopsis of the findings of IRMA‐SPONGE

Abstract

Recent flood events in western Europe have shown the need for improved flood risk management along the Rhine and Meuse rivers. In response, the IRMA-SPONGE research programme was established, consisting of 13 research projects, in which over 30 organizations from six countries co-operated. The aim of IRMA-SPONGE was 'the development of methods and tools to assess the impact of flood risk reduction measures and of land-use and climate change scenarios, in order to support the spatial planning process for the Rhine and Meuse River Basins'. Several important conclusions were agreed upon by participants in the programme; they emphasize the role of spatial planning, especially in areas at risk of flooding, as an important component of flood risk management:1. Flood risk, defined as a function of both flood probability and potential damage, is increasing not only due to climate change (likely to cause an increase in the probability of extreme discharges) but also due to continued investment in areas at risk of flooding (resulting in an increase in potential damage). 2. Water retention areas and land-use adaptations far upstream may be useful in lowering the frequency of floods in small basins. However, extreme floods far downstream in the lower Rhine and Meuse basins, where the probability of design discharges is less than 1/200 per year, cannot be prevented by such upstream measures. 3. The most effective and sustainable reduction of flood risks could be achieved by reducing the potential damage (vulnerability) in flood-prone areas through adapted land use and spatial planning. 4. Flood risk management organizations should not only aim at a reduction of flood risk but should also seek to enhance the ecological quality of rivers and floodplains.

Recurrent Governance Challenges in the Implementation and Alignment of Flood Risk Management Strategies: a Review

“…Both the UN Hyogo Framework and the EU Floods Directive opt for a simultaneous and coordinated application of multiple strategies. Literature supports the policy assumption that a diversification of FRMSs may lead to more resilience to flood hazards (Hooijer et al 2004;Aerts et al 2008;Tucci 2008;Green 2010;Innocenti and Albrito 2011;Van den Brink et al 2011). Instead of limiting consideration to a fail-safe system that never fails, it is argued that societies should strive to build a safe-fail system that fails in a safe way (Kundzewicz and Takeuchi 1999) and recovers after failure.…”

“…housing, power plants) in flood-prone areas, the establishment of building requirements or the dis-incentivising of urban development in vulnerable areas. Flood risk prevention is claimed to be the potentially most effective FRMS (Hooijer et al 2004;Beucher 2009;Penning-Rowsell and Pardoe 2014). However, in practice, implementation of flood risk prevention seems to be complicated.…”

Specifying risk management standard for flood risk assessment: a framework for resources allocation

“…Another study will specifically deal with this resources allocation which applying the concept of "comparative risk assessment" mentioned in Section 3. Furthermore, it is also a challenge to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation of certain flood risk reduction strategy [3].…”

“…It is more promising to meet the "demands of sustainable development, a more strategic, holistic and long-term approach" of flood risk management [19]. Hooijer et al [3] concluded their study that "the most effective and sustainable reduction of flood risks could be achieved by reducing the potential damage (vulnerability) in flood-prone areas through adapted land use and spatial planning".…”

“…More specific definition of "risk" used in different areas including flood risk management is the product of occurrence probability and its consequence of hazardous event or phenomenon [3,4]. The second frequently used formulation of "risk" includes three components, i.e.…”