The Contribution of the Review towards Reshaping the UK Flood Management System - Case Study Example

FLOOD ISSUES Student’s Name: Code + Course name Professor’s name University City, State Date Introduction Following the 2007 floods in the UK and the devastating impact of the natural disaster on the lives and property of the victims, the Pitt review identify key recommendations on the part of all stakeholders that are necessary in improving the resilience of the country in responding and recovering from flood disasters in the future. Reducing the risk and impact of flooding sufficed to be one of the recommendations. The other recommendations include knowing when and where the flood will take place, speeding up the recovery process and staying healthy, and advising people on the effective ways of protecting their families. Moreover, the review included the need to maintain water supplies and power as well as protect essential services as well as rescuing and caring for victims during the emergency. The report identifies the recommendations in the Pitt review as well as the contribution of the review towards reshaping the UK flood management system. The report also identifies the reasons behind the devastating nature of the 2013-14 floods in the country as well as the lessons learnt from the floods. The Pitt-Review Recommendations The first recommendation of the review targeted the UK Government. In the recommendation, the review reiterates the fact that there is an increase in the potential of extreme weather events in the UK. As a result, the UK Government should prioritise adaptation and mitigation measures to enable the society to put up with the negative effects of climate change (Pitt 2008). The review required the Environment Agency to be responsible for the overview of all risks associated with flooding in the entire nation. This includes both groundwater and surface water risks associated with floods. In one of the review’s recommendations that targeted the Met Office, the recommendation required the Office to step up its efforts in its prediction and forecasting methods to a level that would avail adequate information to the emergency responders. The review also identified the need for the Environment Agency to develop its techniques and tools necessary for modelling and predicting river flooding while considering other aspects such as the velocity of water, water depths, multiple, and extreme events. In the other recommendation that targeted local authorities, the review required the local authorities to promote the continuity of businesses, and the adoption of property flood resilience and resistance by businesses. The review also targeted the construction of buildings in areas vulnerable to the flood risk. In the recommendation, the review warned against the construction of buildings in such areas in line with PPS25, and advocated for the need to take into account all flood risk sources (Pitt 2008). The recommendation also required developers to contribute to the costs associated with the construction and maintenance of flood defences. The Pitt review also discouraged against the tendency of laying impermeable surfaces by households on front and back gardens as well as business premises. The review also recommended the removal of the automatic right to link surface-water drainage of new structures to the sewerage system. The review also recommended the revision of building regulations that would ensure that both refurbished and new buildings constructed in flood prone areas are resilient to the flood risk. The recommendations also included an extension of the eligibility for loans and funds devoted towards home improvement to include flood resilience and resistance products especially for buildings and homes located in flood prone areas. The Pitt review also recommended the need for local authorities to be on the forefront in the management of the flooding risk with support from the other agencies and stakeholders (Pitt 2008). In essence, local authorities should establish legal responsibility and ownership of the management of the food risk. In attaining the requirement, it would be necessary for local authorities to map and collate the drainage and flood risk management assets for both surface and underground waters. Along the same line, the review also identified the need for all stakeholders and organisations to share information with the Environment Agency and the local authorities in the management of the flooding risk. The review also identified the local surface water management plans as the basis for managing all risks associated with flooding at the local level. The review also required the local authorities to assess and improve their capabilities in responding to the flood risk. The Pitt review also identified the need for the Government to change the maintenance and ownership of drainage systems. In accordance with the recommended changes, the water industry, Ofwat, and Defra should coordinate their efforts towards achieving effective risk-based standards for sewerage systems. The review also tasked the Government with the responsibility of planning for the strategic flood risk planning for potential disasters to occur in the next 25 years (Pitt 2008). Still on the Government, the review recommended the need for the UK Government to implement a scheme that permits and encourages local groups and communities to invest in measures associated with the management of the flood risk. The review also identified the need for the Environment Agency to maintain its current risk-based approach to maintenance levels and support the approach by published work schedules of the individual local authority areas. The review also identified the need for the Government to develop a single guidance approach that the public and local authorities would use in the utilisation of sandbags and other protective measures rather than leaving the local authorities to handle the task. The review also identified the need for Defra, Natural England, and Environment Agency to coordinate their efforts in establishing a programme through Shoreline and Catchment Flood Management Plans. The Pitt Review also identified the need for an education programme established through the coordinated efforts of the Government and players in the insurance sector. The education should target informing the public about the merits of insurance on matters associated with flood risks. The review also recommended the issuance of warnings by the Met Office even in the event of a low probability threshold in order to enhance preparation lead times on the part of the emergency responders (Pitt 2008). The review also identified the need for local authorities and the Government to establish mutual aid agreements and a fully funded national flood rescue capability to deal with the financial constraints associated with dealing with flood disasters. The review also recommended the activation of machinery from the central government only if the flood disaster has affected or has the potential of affecting a significantly wide area thereby having a high impact. The review also recommended the need for the joint efforts of the UK Government and infrastructure operators in ensuring a high resilience level that would enable the effective management of a worst-case flooding emergency. The Government should also establish a national policy framework and statement that defines the expectations, timescales, and processes. The review also recommended the need for the Government to issue inundation maps to Local Resilience Forums to enable the effective assessment and planning for contingency, evacuation, and warning. The review identified the need for the Risk and Regulation Advisory Council to identify ways of enhancing the understanding of the public on community risks associated with flooding. Moreover, Local Resilience Forums should step up their door-to-door campaigns under the coordination of local authorities to warn the public about impending flooding disasters (Pitt 2008). This would ensure the preparedness of the public towards increasing their self-reliance in responding to the flood disaster following its occurrence. How the Pitt Review Recommendations Reshaped the UK Flood Management System Following the Pitt Review recommendations, the UK Government has stepped up its efforts towards prioritising mitigation and adaptation policies. On mitigation, the Government has published the Carbon Plan that sets the vision for achieving mitigation commitments in both the short term and long term until 2050. The Government also produced the first Climate Change Risk Assessment in the UK in 2012 in response to the adaptation recommendation. Currently, the Environment Agency has taken over the national overview of all flood risk sources including coastal erosion. The Met Office has also directed its focus on significant capabilities and resources aimed at improving its forecasts of severe weather. The move aims at meeting all the needs of the emergency responders as stated in the recommendations. The Met Office implemented a 1.5km grid length model for weather forecasting as part of an enhancement of its operational forecasting suite. Following the identification of the weakness of the high-resolution forecasting model employed by the Met Office, the office decided to introduce a lower resolution model to yield satisfactory results (Defra 2012). The Environment Agency has also stepped up its efforts towards developing techniques and tools for modelling and predicting river flooding (Defra 2012). In its first measure, the Agency carried out a review of its flood packages and availed a data set that acts as a reference point in modelling future reference points. The Agency has also developed a flood-mapping tool and demonstrated its ability towards dealing with simultaneous extreme flooding disasters and widespread flooding emergencies. The Agency has also devoted its efforts towards establishing flood velocity and depth information in accordance with the requirements of the Flood Risk Regulations. The Environment Agency also procured a license to share information about surface water flooding maps prepared by the Areas Susceptible to Surface Water Flooding (ASTSWF), a third party in accordance with the Pitt review recommendation that required the Agency to work with partners. The Agency also shares the information with Local Authorities (LAs), Local Resilience Forums (LRFs) as a national endeavour that aimed at information local authorities and Local Resilience Forums about areas within the country that were prone to surface water flooding. One of the recommendations of the Pitt Review also required the Environment Agency to work together with the Met Office through an established joint centre. In response to the recommendation, the Environment Agency and the Met Office created the Flood Forecasting Centre that provides forecasting information to stakeholders in the local and national governments as well as customers round the clock in accordance with the Civil Contingencies Act. The Government also reviewed the national planning policy according to the Pitt recommendation in order to streamline the current national planning policy into a consolidated national planning policy framework (Defra 2012). Currently, the prevention of a householder from laying impermeable surfaces in gardens is part of the legislation in response to the recommendation in the Pitt review. The legislation has also included a provision in Schedule 3 of the Act that removes the automatic right to link the surface-water drainage systems of refurbished and new buildings to the sewerage system. The Building Regulations has also included the provision for all houses developed in high-risk areas to be flood resistant and resilient. The Government has also introduced a grant scheme to effect household resilience and resistance measures. The Act has also transferred the duty of promoting business continuity to local authorities. Finally, the Government introduced the “Access to Insurance Working Group” in accordance with the recommendation that required the Government to work together with players in the insurance sector in providing education regarding the need for insuring against the flood risk (Defra 2012). Why the 2013-14 Floods were devastating It is evident that practical experience underpins the response and recovery measures employed by the emergency responders in the event of a flooding disaster (RSBP 2015). The situation suffices to be true in reference to the events that unfolded during the 2013-14 floods in the UK. Even though the country had learnt from the 2007-8 floods and employed necessary measures to counter the effects of future flooding disasters, it was evident that the emergency response plan developed by the Environment Agency and other local responders and agencies had not prepared to deal with an emergency of such magnitude. This also provides an explanation behind the devastating effect of the 2013-14 floods. A combination of severe flood events within the six-month period was responsible for the devastating effect of the flood. At the onset, vigorous low-pressure systems traversed the UK successively. The result was the wettest winter that the UK ever recorded since 1910, the year in which the country started keeping records. The winter also turned out to be the stormiest for both the UK and Ireland. During the period, a significant portion of the country experienced persistent heavy rainfall accompanied by heavy storms, strong winds, and high tides. The distinctive nature of the winter was also evident following the occurrence of multiple types of flooding. Consequently, the emergency responders had to deal with pluvial, flooding, coastal, and groundwater flooding that affected many parts within the country. In some instances, some types of flooding occurred simultaneously. The exceptional long duration of the flooding disaster suffices to be the other reason behind the devastating effect of the 2013-14 flood (Muchan et al. 2015). Therefore, it is proper to state that the occurrence of multiple types of severe floods simultaneously and over an extended period overwhelmed the resources deployed by emergency responders towards dealing with the disaster thereby resulting in its devastating effect. Lessons Learnt from the 2013-14 Floods The main lesson learnt from the 2013-14 floods was the lack of resilience on the part of the UK flood management system in dealing with extreme flooding disasters (RSBP 2015). Apparently, the 2013-14 floods presented a typical example of an extreme flooding disaster that required a resilient flood management system. This also indicates the failure of the UK Government through its Environment Agency and other stakeholders to adapt to adapt to the flood risk under changing climate conditions. Forecasting and reporting on impending floods is an area that has recorded positive results. However, the resilience of the country towards managing flooding disasters appears to be declining at an alarming rate because of a number of reasons. The decline in the funding for flood resilience and protection as well as the high rate of constructing non-resilient structures in flood risk areas are some of the reasons why the latest floods had a devastating impact on the country. Conclusion The Pitt Review provided several recommendations to the UK Government, the Environment Agency, associated stakeholders, and the public that would improve the resilience of the country towards flooding disasters. The recommendations include reducing the impact and risk of floods, knowing where and when the flood risk would occur, hastening the recovery process and staying healthy, and educating the public on effective ways of protecting their families and homes. The other recommendations include maintaining water and power supplies as well as other essential services, and rescuing and caring for victims during emergencies. Since the occurrence of the 2007-8 floods and the identification of the appropriate recommendations, the UK Government and other stakeholders such as the Environment Agency, the Met Office, the Local Resilience Forums, and the Local Authorities have strived to implement the recommendations. However, the fact that the UK still suffered from the devastating impact of the 2013-14 floods indicates the inability of the flood management system to respond to extreme flooding events and the failure of the system to adapt to the flood risk in the changing climate. Reference List Defra 2012, ‘The Government’s Response to Sir Michael Pitt’s Review of the Summer 2007 Floods’, Final Progress Report. Muchan, K, Lewis, M, Hannaford, J & Parry, S 2015, ‘The winter storms of 2013/2014 in the UK: hydrological responses and impacts’, Weather, Vol. 70, no. 2, pp.55-61. Pitt, M 2008, ‘Learning lessons from the 2007 floods.’ RSBP 2015, ‘Flooding in focus: Recommendations for more effective flood management in England’. Read More