Roadmap for future regional action in disaster risk management with focus on flood risk management and aspects with a multi-beneficiary dimension

Transcription

1 Grant Contract N. ECHO/SUB/2014/ Programme for Prevention, Preparedness and Response to Floods in the Western Balkans and Turkey IPA FLOODS IPA FLOODS implementing Consortium Italian Civil Protection Department (DPC); German Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW); National Protection and Rescue Directorate of the Republic of Croatia (NPRD); Administration of the Republic of Slovenia for Civil Protection and Disaster Relief (URSZR); Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB); CIMA Research Foundation, Italy; Studiare Sviluppo Srl, Italy. Roadmap for future regional action in disaster risk management with focus on flood risk management and aspects with a multi-beneficiary dimension Prepared by Prepared by: Marco Massabò, Stefania Traverso, Tatiana Bedrina, Miranda Deda

2 Glossary EUFD EUWFD PFRA APSFR FHRM WFD NSDI ISRBC ICPDR FBiH RS BD European Union Floods Directive [Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of flood risks] European Union Water Framework Directive[Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy] Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment Areas with Potential Significant Flood Risk Flood Hazard and Flood Risk Map Water Framework Directive National Spatial Data Infrastructure International Sava River Basin Commission Contracting Parties: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia and Montenegro as Associated Party International Commission for Protection of the Danube River Contracting Parties: Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Serbia, Ukraine and the European Union Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina Republic of Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina) Brcko District (Bosnia and Herzegovina) 2

3 Table of Contents Glossary Purpose of the Road Map Legal Framework for Flood Risk Management Institutional framework and capacity for Flood Risk Management Flood Risk Management in International River Basins Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment and Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping Flood Risk Management Plans Data Sharing and Data Information Systems

4 1. Purpose of the Road Map IPA Floods Consortium experts conducted an assessment of the overall status of approximation to the EUFD in the Beneficiaries by focusing on aspects such as: legal and institutional framework, Unit of Management, flood management in International river basin, preliminary flood risk assessment, flood hazard and risk mapping, flood risk management planning, data sharing and data information system. The assessment has been completed for each Beneficiaries and on the base of the outcomes, Consortium experts elaborated a set of Beneficiaries-specific recommendations for the approximation/implementation of EUFD. The assessment and recommendations have been developped in consultation with representatives of National agencies, institutions and line-ministries and are described in the Beneficiaries-specific reports Findings and Recommendation for the approximation and Implementation of EU Floods Directive. The Road Map presented here, proposes future regional actions in the area of disaster risk management with focus on flood risk management and aspects with a multi-beneficiary dimension. As the EU Floods Directive is a comprehensive framework for flood risk management and encompass all phases of the risk management cycle, including prevention, preparedness, response and recovery, the Road Map focus on the regional actions for supporting the approximation and implementation of all phases of the EU Floods Directive in the Beneficiaries. The Road Map considers six different aspects required for the implementation of EU Floods Directive and improving flood risk management: 1. Legal Framework for Flood Risk Management 2. Institutional framework and capacity for Flood Risk Management 3. Flood Risk Management in International River Basins 4. Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment and Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping 5. Flood Risk Management Planning 6. Data Sharing and Data Information Systems The Road Map provides, for each of the six aspects, a regional background on the status of practices in Beneficiaries and a set of possible regional actions for supporting the improvement of the specific aspect. 4

5 In the development of the Road Map, the following sources of information has been used: 1. IPA Floods Findings and Recommendation for the approximation and Implementation of EU Floods Directive (February 2016) 2. Flood Prevention and Management, Gap analysis and needs assessment in the context of implementing the EU Floods Directive, September

6 2. Legal Framework for Flood Risk Management 2.1 Background The level of approximation of the legal framework of Beneficiaries to the EU Floods Directive is heterogenous; however, in all Beneficiaries there is the political and institutional commitment to adjust the current national legal framework by including the main provision of the EU Floods Directive into their regulatory framework and, as reported in the beneficiary specific reports, Beneficiaries are implementing several actions towards this direction. Table 1 summaries the status of approximation of EUFD into the legal framework of each beneficiaries. Croatia has fully approximated EUFD, the legislation in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Srpska is coherent with EU Floods Directive; the role-book of Montenegro and the amendments of the Water Law align the national regulation with EUFD main provisions. The Water Law of Serbia contains the base for the full approximation of EUFD. Albania, Kosovo*, Macedonia, as well as Brcko District, have plans for the full transposition of EUFD. This overall situation confirms the general common commitment of Beneficiaries in the approximation to EUFD and also the very different stages of implementation. 6

7 Table 1. Summary table on status of approximation to EUFD in Beneficiaries Beneficiary Legislation Status of Approximation to EUFD Albania Law no. 111/ 2012 on The Integrated Management of Water Resources In line with EUWFD; EUFD provisions are included into Decision no. 4, of National Water Council, Full transposition by 2020 Croatia Water Act in line with EUWFD and EUFD Bosnia and Herzegovina Water Law FBiH and RS; Action Plan for Flood Protection and River Management for BiH Kosovo* The Law on Waters 04/L-147, Law 02 / L- 068 for protection against natural and other disasters FBiH and RS in line with EUFD Water law of BD in design phase; Partially transposes EUFD Macedonia Law on Water EUFD is in phase of Transposition of EU FD requirements Montenegro Rulebook on contents of PRA, methodology for developing of FHRM and content of FRMP. Amendments to the Law on Waters in line with FD from 2015 Serbia Law on Water in line with EUWFD and contains base for EUFD transposition Turkey By-law on Preparation, Implementation and Monitoring of Flood Management Plans in line with EUFD (published May 2016) Draft Water Code - By-Law is in line with EUFD (except transboundary issues) - Draft Water Code includes articles strengthening the implementation of FD 2.1 Road Map for future regional actions Future regional actions should support: 1. further main-stream the principles and provisions of EUFD to line-ministries, national institutions and agencies in order to raise the awareness of national legislators on the benefits of the implementation of an integrated flood risk management approach based on EUFD. 2. further exchange of experience and practices with EU Member States and within the western Balkans and Turkey on the different approaches used for the transposition of EUFD into National Legal Frameworks 7

8 3. completion of the legal approximation to EUFD in all beneficiaries and harmonization of national legislations. The harmonization of the legislation should mostly focus on flood risk management in trans-boundary river basins and facilitate: data and information exchange; adoption of common methodologies and approaches to flood hazard and risk mapping; adoption of common Flood Risk Management Plan based on solidarity principle; mutual support among countries that share the same river basin. 3. Institutional framework and capacity for Flood Risk Management 3.1 Background One of the key requirement for the implementation of a n effective Flood Risk Management system is a clear institutional framework with defined and agreed distribution of role and reasonability among different organizations and high level of coordination among the multiple-institutions, authorities and agencies at National, Regional and local level. The institutional set-up of Beneficiaries is generally fragmented; responsibilities are not clearly distributed across different organizations and the level of coordination among multiple institutions should be more effective and efficient. The lack of resources, both in terms of number of human resources, technical equipment and tools and in term of technical competences, results in a weak capacity of Beneficiaries to enforce the legislation and to implement the key provisions of the EUFD. The definition of Unit of Management and River Basin District based on the river basins border is a crucial step for the enforcement of the River Basin Management Principle in the Flood Risk Management systems of Beneficiaries. Table 2 summarizes the status of definition of Unit of Management and River Basin District in Beneficiaries. Most of the Beneficiaries have enforced the river basin management principle, however, in some Beneficiaries the Unit of Management are still based on administrative borders rather then river basin. The River Basin Councils/Authorities, as multi-stakeholder platforms for Flood Risk Management into the river basin, are not established in all Beneficiaries; moreover, in Beneficiaries where River Basin Councils/Authorities exists, their effectiveness should be improved. 8

9 Table 2: Summary of UoM and River Basin District in Beneficiaries Countries Albania Croatia Bosnia & Herzegovina Kosovo* Macedonia Montenegro Serbia Turkey Unit of Management (UoM) or River Basin District (RBD) in line with 2000/60/EC 6 Units of Management: Drin-Buna River Basin, Mati River Basin, Ishëm-Erzen River Basin, Shkumbini River Basin, Seman River Basin, and Vjosa River Basin 2 RBDs: Danube and Adriatic FBiH 2 RBD: Sava River and Adriatic Sea RS 2 RBD: Sava River and Trebisnjica River 1 RBD (the entire territory) UoM based on administrative borders 2 RBDs: Danube basin and Adriatic Sea basins UoM based on administrative border 25 River Basins (UoM) 3.2 Road Map for future regional actions Future regional actions should support: 1. Strengthening institutional capacity for the implementation of EUFD provisions by clarifying role and responsibilities of institutions and by promoting the establishment and functioning of River Basin Councils and Authorities as multi-stakeholder organization and platform for Flood Risk Management within specific River Basin. 2. Improvement of coordination among different authorities and organizations at local, regional, national and international level by establishing an effective system of exchange of information among organization and use of flood risk information in multiple sectors such as land use, urban planning, early warning, emergency responses, etc.. 3. Establishment of specific protocol among line-ministries, national organizations and institutions for the exchange of geo-spatial data needed for flood risk assessment and management, including basic territorial data on land use and land cover. 4. Improvement of the institutional capacity, in terms of human capacity and expertise as well as modern equipment and software tools, for the implementation of EUFD provisions and for the collection and processing of data and map in GIS format for Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment, Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping 9

10 5. Support higher education institutions and University to develop student curricula on flood risk management (more generally Disaster Risk Management) for the preparation of a new generation of professionals with flood risk management skills. Facilitate the cooperation among Universities and Research Organizations with Institutions, Agencies and Public Authorities for improving the transfer of knowledge between the scientific community and operational structures. 4. Flood Risk Management in International River Basins 4.1 Background Large trans-boundary river basins are present in the region. The International Sava River Commission (ISRBC) and the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) are two relevant international organizations with important experience on Flood Risk Management in trans-boundary river basins. Both Commissions include representatives of the Beneficiaries such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro 1 and Serbia. Flood Risk Management into the Sava River Basin is regulated by the Protocol on Flood Protection, developed by ISRBC and based on EUFD provision such as Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment, Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping and Flood Risk Management Plan. ISRBC is coordinating the implementation of the Flood Protection Protocol. Besides the good practices of ISRBC and ICPDR, flood risk management in trans-boundary river basin is at early stage in other Beneficiaries. 4.2 Road Map for future regional actions Future regional actions should support: 1. creation of mechanism of cooperation among different Beneficiaries for flood risk management in international river basins in order to develop common Flood Risk Management Plan. The Flood Protocol of the Sava River Basin Commission should be considered as reference. 2. Facilitate the establishment of multi-national River Basin Councils or Authorities taking the experience of the ISRBC; the International River Basin Council or Authority should be the 1 Montenegro is Associated Partner of ISRBC and Member of ICPDR 10

11 international platform for the development of Common Flood Risk Management Plan and for monitoring and coordinating its implementation. 5. Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment and Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping 5.1 Background The availability of Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment, Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping in Beneficiaries is very diverse. Table 3 summarizes the status of PFRA in the beneficiaries. Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment has been completed in Bosnia & Herzegovina (except that for Brcko District where a first study has been developped by IPA Floods), Croatia and Serbia. PFRA has been completed for 5 river basins (over 25) in Turkey. It should be underlined that the methodologies adopted by Beneficiaries that have completed PFRA are not homogeneous; similarly, Beneficiaries used different solution for representing the Area with Potentially Significant Risk of Flood, i.e. segment of River, administrative border of village, floodable area, etc.; these differences challenge the comparison and integration of the results for trans-national river basins and for a pan-regional analysis of flood risk. The preparation of PFRA for the other beneficiaries started under IPA Floods Programme and it is based on a common methodology contained and described into the IPA Floods Guidelines for the Implementation of EU Floods Directive and MSs Good Practices. Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping has similar degree of development of PFRA in the Beneficiaries (see Table 3). Croatia completed FHRM as part of the obligation of MSs; the methodology adopted was uniform over the entire countries and is reported as good practice in the IPA Floods Guidelines for the implementation of EU Floods Directive and MSs Good practices. FHRM for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia is currently under development for their entire territories, while in Turkey FHRM has been completed for 2 river basins. Fragmented and non-homogenous studies on FHRM have been conducted in Albania, Kosovo*, Montenegro and Macedonia as part of different projects. Data availability is critical in almost all Beneficiaries; geographical data on hydrography, hydrology, meteorology and on exposed element such as population density, economic activities, land use, topography, high resolution digital elevation model, location of critical infrastructure, etc. etc., are not 11

12 adequately developped and collected in standard format and are not easily available to national authorities. 12

13 Table 3. The status of development of Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA), Flood Hazard and Risk Mapping (FHRM) in beneficiary countries. Countries PFRA FHRM Albania Early stage Fragmentary and on project base Croatia completed completed Bosnia & Herzegovina completed APSFR for Sava, 14 for Adriatic sea basin Preliminary Studies for Brcko District In progress Kosovo* Early stage Fragmentary and on project base Macedonia Early stage Fragmentary and on project base Montenegro Early stage Fragmentary and on project base Serbia completed in progress Turkey Completed in 5 river basins Completed in 5 river basins 5.2 Road Map for future regional actions Future regional actions should support: 1. Further collection and preparation of geographical data and maps on hydrography, hydrology and exposed element needed for Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment and Flood Rik Mapping. Specifically, homogenous, comparable and accessible data on exposed element (population, economic activities, environment, cultural heritage) should be collected and organized as a priority. The web-portal MyDEWETRA IPAFloods could support this activity. 2. Finalization of Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment in Beneficiary by implementing the IPA Floods Guidelines for the Implementation of EU Floods Directive and MSs Good Practices and as continuation and capitalization of the activities of IPA Floods. 3. Establishment, as part of PFRA, of the national Flood Catalogue for recording and sharing data on historical floods, their consequences and impacts to human health, economic activity, environment and cultural heritage. The Flood Catalogues should support the implementation of 13

14 Sendai Framework and record data on the Sendai Indicators. FloodCat platform that is part of MyDEWETRA IPAFLOODS could support this action. 4. Strengthening of the capacities of relevant institutions of preparing flood hazard and risk mapping, conducting vulnerability analysis, assessing the effect of climate changes and possible changes in land use on flood risk. Specifically, the capacities of Beneficiaries should be improved both in term of skills for hydrological and hydraulic modelling, data preparation and management, as well as software and hardware systems and production of new geographic data such as high resolution digital terrain model for flood hazard mapping and vulnerability characteristic of exposed element. IPA Floods Guidelines for the Implementation of EU Floods Directive and MSs Good Practices can be used as reference. 6. Flood Risk Management Planning 6.1 Background Apart from Croatia, the development of Flood Risk Management Plans (FRMP) in the Beneficiaries is at very early stage. Turkey has completed FRMP for two river basins as part of an action plan that envisages the finalization of FRMP in all 25 river basins by Most of the adopted planning documents development by Beneficiaries focus on preparedness and response at National or Municipal levels (i.e. National and Municipal emergency plans), while few attempts of FRMP for pilot river basins are present in Albania and Macedonia. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia had developed plans for the preparation of FRMP. Though FRMP are not well developed at national scale in Beneficiaries, FRMP of the international basins of the Danube and the Sava rivers (as sub-basin of the Danube) are very good example to use as reference. The FRMP of Danube river basin has been prepared in 2015 by ICPDR while in 2016 ISRBC has elaborated the Program for development of FRMP in the Sava River Basin as a first concrete step of the preparation of FRMP. As part of Flood Risk Management Plans, the Early Warnings are important systems that can reduce the impacts of floods in modern societies. Several regional and European initiatives have supported and are currently supporting the improvement of meteo-hydrological forecasting and monitoring capacities of hydro-meteorological services of Beneficiaries (EFAS and WMO - Multi-Hazard Early Warning Advisory 14

15 System); however the timely broadcast of flood warnings in standard and common format is still not sufficient in the Beneficiaries and there are few standard operating procedures in place that, on the base of warnings, activate specific measures and operations at national and local level for the mitigation of the impacts of floods 6.2 Road Map for future regional actions Future regional actions should support: 1. The strengthening of the capacities of relevant institutions to develop, adopt and implement FRMPs based on Good Practices of Member States and in line with the provision of EUFD. FRMP should be harmonized with River Basin Management Plans with attention to transboundary issues; a mechanism for the effective implementation of the FRMP and its monitoring should be established. FRMP should be consistent with relevant National and local emergency plans and contain the identification of structural and nonstructural measures for flood risk reduction and mitigation with particular attention to measures that have transnational dimension. Early Warning Systems should be included as non-structural measures of FRMP. 2. the strengthening of the existing Early Warning system by improving hydro-met services and including Early Warning into local and national emergency plan. Hydro-met services should upgrade theirs forecast and early warning capabilities on national level by integrating and sharing forecasting products of different beneficiaries and further integration into EFAS. Improve the observation and data transmission networks and better integration of meteorological and hydrological models and development of operational hydrological forecasting and warning system at basin level. Existing network needs to be optimized, upgraded and modernized, in particular by extending the number of automatic and real-time data transmission stations. 15

16 7. Data Sharing and Data Information Systems 7.1 Background Accessibility and comparability of flood risk information and data at national and regional level is generally weak. National Geoportals in line with the provision of INSPIRE directive are present in some Beneficiaries (i.e. Albania, Croatia and Serbia), however, apart from Croatia where data are accessible, in other beneficiaries the access to data needs specific agreement among institutions. Furthermore, some beneficiaries are currently establishing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure 2 (NSDI) that includes a set of technologies, measures, standards, implementation rules, services, human resources and other factors enabling efficient integration, management and maintenance of the sharing of spatial data. The level of implementation in the creation of NSDI varies significantly among Beneficiaries. At regional level, the Policy on the Exchange of Hydrological and Meteorological Data and Information in the Sava River Basin is a unique agreement that regulates data and information exchange among Countries of the Sava river Basins. Moreover, SavaGIS is a geoportal where flood risk data, real time hydrological and meteorological data can be visualized by the public. MyDEWETRA IPA Floods is the Flood Risk Information System for Western Balkans and Turkey developped under IPA Floods. It contains data and maps for Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment such hydrography, potentially floodable area, exposed element of the following categories: human health, economic activities, environment and cultural heritage. 7.2 Road Map for future regional actions Future regional actions should support: 1. Strengthening the institutional and technical capacity of relevant institutions for the implementation of INSPIRE directive and for establishing and maintaining the National Spatial Date Infrastructures. The conformity of NSDI of beneficiaries to INPIRE directive will permit to develop an integral part of the European Spatial Data Infrastructure defined by the INSPIRE Directive. For development of spatial data infrastructures at a local level it is necessary to:

17 a. provide access to interested users to existing spatial data; b. harmonize the policy, technical standards and operational capabilities of the NSDI with European principles; c. develop a well organized geo-informational community in the sense of open publicprivate-academic (or interinstitutional) partnership. 2. the further development of the Flood Risk Information System - MyDEWETRA IPA Floods - as regional data hub for improving the accessibility, comparability and consistence of flood risk information and data at regional, national and local level. The capacity of institutions for collecting, preparing, recording and sharing data in standard format (Compliant with INSPIRE Directive and interoperable with the Water Information System for Europe WISE) for the Flood Risk Information System -or equivalent platform-should be improved 3. the development and adoption of a data sharing policy framework among national and international institutions, organizations and general stakeholders to access flood risk data and maps. 17