Project outcomes and beyond
Outcomes
- Specific outcome: a Vision and Action Plan with specific spatial adaptation measures for Moerbeke-Viane (Geraardsbergen) is being developed, and
- Process result: public actors and citizens were engaged into a participatory process.
Flood risk management strategies (FRMS)
The flood risk governance in Belgium is moderately diversified, but mainly focused on defence. The water and flood issues are responsibility of public actors (state dominant) with a tendency to centralisation (Buijs et al. 2018).
The most recent IPCC predictions have made it clear that a considerable increase in river discharge can be expected until 2100, due to more extreme rainfall events and more river runoff. The risk of flooding will also increase due to heat stress weakening dikes. This provides proof for a relevant risk of climate change in the area.
The Flemish Region has a complex multi-level governance setting (Mees et al., 2016). Nine organisations are responsible for the sewer system infrastructures of different areas. Moreover, four different governmental actors have responsibility over watercourses. The partition is organised in function of the scale of the watercourses: one category for the navigable watercourses and three categories for the non-navigable watercourses (AF, 2017).
Next to the water management, spatial planning is managed at the the regional, provincial and municipal level. Since the establishment of the Commissie Integraal Waterbeleid in 2003, whose purpose is to organise an integral strategy among different entities, the water assessment has been introduced. So, since then, every new building development needs to imply an assessment of its effect on the water system. The European Floods Directive from 2007 has confirmed water managers’ understanding that working solely on protection would not suffice, but that also other types of measures (prevention and preparedness) are necessary. This gave them a formal reason to shift to Multi-Layered Water Safety (MLWS) before the main focus was on protection, spatial planning played some role (e.g. through water assessment introduced in 2003), and disaster management organizations and structures – the emergency services, hospitals and fire department - have been in place. Since 2010 not many additional measures have been implemented to reduce flood risk, only some new jerseys have been placed along the river. Nevertheless, 2010 as a trigger point, more information was collected. In 2013, a cost-efficiency analysis was done by the Flemish Environmental Insitute and the work on the Dender valley formally started in 2016. From 2016, the FRM plan for the Dender is being developed under the collaboration of the Flemish Waterways - the water manager - , the Departement Omgeving - the spatial planning department from the Flemish government and the Province of East Flanders, which also has spatial planning responsibilities. The FRM plan of the Dender focuses explicitly on the 3 Ps of the MLWS approach. The FRM plan for Dender is the first plan to use the MLS and the 3Ps approach in Belgium. FRM in Belgium is traditionally regarded exclusively as a governmental responsibility, only in the last 5 years they started to engage citizens and other private actors to take flood risk measures.
The next table shows the FRM strategies that were considered before, during and after FRAMES project.
Table 1 Flood risks management strategies in Geraardsbergen considering the timeline of FRAMES
| Layers of MLS | Before FRAMES | During FRAMES | After FRAMES |
| 1.Protection/ defence | FRM plan for Dender in 2016 | No changes in hard infrastructure as result of FRAMES (interview pilot manager, 2019) | No changes in hard infrastructure as result of FRAMES (interview pilot manager, 2019) |
| 2. Pro-action/ prevention via spatial planning | Spatial planning- Water assessment in 2003 and Impact assessment of any new building to the the water system since the Directive Integraal Water Beleid
FRM plan for Dender started in 2016 |
1. Design proposals for making a specific neighbourhood in Ninove climate-proof / flood-proof
2. Floodlabel project for 20 houses |
1. Vision and action plan for Climate/flood proof neighbourhood in Ninove
2. Floodlabel project for 20 houses |
| 3. Preparation & response | Disaster management-learning from previous floods (2010)- FRM plan for Dender started in 2016 | 1.Risk communication and emergency planning. Preparedness manual for citizens, resilience community workshops in collaboration with local governments, workshops in schools, meeting neighbourhood networks | |
| 4. Recovery |
Lessons learnt so far
- The start of the Belgium pilots were highly dependent on the political context and its further development on the actors' agenda. The projects needed to be complementary with the plans of the actors, not only in order to proceed but also to be relevant.
- The projects use a methodology that is new and nontraditional. One issue in its application was the possible lack of an actor’s consideration for its methodology and misbelief of its usefulness. This possible lack of consideration is relevant seen the traditional organisation and distribution of governmental’s responsibilities among different institutes. The integral approach of MLS, which requires a high level of participation of each actors and information exchange, is confronted with the persistent perception that each entity has a precise responsibility without requiring the involvement of external actors.
Dissemination and up-scaling of pilot results
As the Province had a ‘parental role’ in the past, which is now changing into a more ‘facilitator role’, evolving the local government’s perception is a long and difficult matter. Furthermore, participation processes are not yet a common procedure. It leads to a situation where actors can be very reluctant in participating.
The difficult participation with the local governments have put in light the importance of a different approach in starting participation with this type of actors. Some important lessons in participation processes is to start with the local needs of the partner, be more open in the beginning, ask the partner what they would like to work on and where they can contribute. This could lead to a higher commitment and engagement.
Transnational exchange
- Protection: Not the main focus of FRAMES Belgium
- Pro-action/prevention: Deliver input for the decision making of urgency and costs of measures for prevention/pro-action of critical infrastructure in Electricity grid (Kloosterzand), Sloegebied and Wesermarch pilots (FRR, 2017)
- Preparedness & response: Share knowledge on emergency response (evacuation route and emergency planning) with Wesermarsch (Germany), Alblasserwaard and Zeeland (Netherlands)) pilots and on risk communication /capacity building (among authorities, businesses and citizens) with Wesermarsch, Alblasserwaard, Zeeland, KCC and Ninove (BE).
- Recovery: Get input on flood recovery from Roskilde (Denmark)