Ways Forward for Flood Risk Adaptation (Examples)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Ways forward for flood risk adaptation (examples) Lack of risk awareness : Government schemes, such as the Green Deal Plan, help people understand risk Lack of knowledge on adaptation : Flood risk adaptation exercises and studies, successful or not, are useful The Past, Present and learning experiences Rejected flood alleviation scheme : A revised, cheaper Flood Alleviation Scheme was approved and is being implemented by Leeds City Council and other partners Lack of communication : In the past the Aire Action Group, coordinated by the EA, served as a succesful Future of Flooding in Leeds partnership of many stakeholders What are the main barriers to flood risk adaptation? Leeds 100 years from now... Flooding is happening (as ranked by local stakeholders in 2015 workshop) more frequently 1775 River Aire Different Negative side- Lack of Opposition Lack of Unawareness Low stakeholder Lack of project Challenging to Limited funding priorities effects of GI consultation and conflict regulation for and lack of engagement governance demonstrate availability and accountability knowledge (beyond the benefits of an access 1866 Keighley, Stockbridge, and action regarding green public sector) adaptation Bingley, Shipley measures measure 1900 Shipley, Bingley, Morton, Leeds, Keighley, Bradford A closer look at the main barriers 1931 Leeds Focus mainly Hard to generate Poor intra – and Short-term evidence inter-institution vision Market-Driven Scenario 1932 Rothwell Beck on populated Population has doubled, mainly due to immigration, and GDP grows exponentially, reaching 5% per year. Limited communication 1934 Mill Shaw Beck, Beeston areas The mean annual temperature change is 4.5 ºC resulting in an increased number of summer days and heat waves, heavy rains, more frequent and extreme floods and droughts. There are some green city actions, but no 1944 Leeds and lowland areas government policies. Energy consumption of fossil fuels intensifies as people search for comfort and financial stability. The use of ecosystem services is maximized causing their overexploitation. 1945 Wortley Beck Hard to Demonstrating Catchment Funding benefits of an 1946 River Aire availability and perceive models Lack of project adaptation Low governance 1947 Gipton Beck, Harehills access by citizens lacking Reactive measure political 1950 Wortley and Kirkstall Few priority Localised 1953 Adel rewards for actions adaptation 1960 Methley Prescriptive 1982 River Wharfe, Otley Difficult to quantify Lack of leadership and buy-in and Wetherby into interdisciplinary projects 1991 River Wharfe, Wetherby Oct/Nov 2000 Skipton, Stockbridge, Bingley, Shipley Leeds Middle of the Road Scenario What are the main drivers of flood risk adaptation? Population has increased 30% due to immigration and urbanisation. This leads to city expansion and the Jul/Aug 2002 Leeds (as ranked by local stakeholders in 2015 workshop) creation of vulnerable suburbs. Mean annual temperature increases 1.5 ºC. Heavy rain increases in the winter, which leads to more frequent and more extreme floods. Economic growth enables just basic green actions and Dec 2002 Yorkshire, Otley, Garforth, the inequality between poor and rich increases. Ecosystems become degraded due to limited investment. The Beeston, Kirkstall slight change in climate and socio-economic conditions do not cause great changes to historical situation. Aug 2004 Leeds city centre Place-based Stronger Incentives for Independent Knowledge Increased actor Use of Integrated/ Policy approach Generation of May 2005 Wyke Beck, Farnley Wood approaches EU/ national private sector body sharing participation information holistic thinking – Cost-benefit new information Beck, other watercourses regulation Analysis in SW Leeds Aug 2006 West Yorkshire Jan 2007 West Yorkshire A closer look at the main drivers June 2007 Leeds city centre, Wortley, Cost-benefit analysis Beeston, Halton, Pudsey, Evidence-based approach, matches Stronger and more Methley, Guiseley research spending with cohesive EU and Jul 2007 Yorkshire Clear Spatial potential national regulation adaptation catchment damage Jan 2008 River Aire, message Leeds city centre studies ©James Mckay www.jamesmckay.info Jun 2012 Austhorpe, Garforth, Generation Fragmentation Scenario Woodlesford, Swillington, of new Regulatory Institutional There is a slight initial increase in population but then a moderate decrease below current values. Urban Allerton Bywater, Create population and GDP both grow slowly. The mean annual temperature increases by 4.5 ºC, bringing more frequent Seacroft, others. information Create framework standards and Context Quantify long-term, heat waves. Heavy rains also become more common in the winter and in the summer. Annual economic losses Dec 2015 Leeds accreditations due to flooding will double, and mortality due to riverine flooding increases. Adaptation measures are only taken Co-benefits benefits to independent for adaptation where financially relevant. Ecosystem services will become degraded due to overexploitation and climate change. of adaptation businesses body focused measures measures Authors: Dr Olivia Rendon on flood risk and Prof. Jouni Paavola National scale review Incentives for private Integrated and holistic flood management Contributions by Dr. Rosalind Bark industry to invest in thinking to better understand flood risk and Dr. James Stark flood management as part of a wider system The BASE project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework BOTTOM-UP Programme for research, technological CLIMATE ADAPTATION Key Actors Resources Institutional Context development and demonstration under STRATEGIES TOWARDS Grant Agreement No. 308337 Nature of Measure Knowledge Regulatory Framework A SUSTAINABLE EUROPE.