Narrow thinking is the enemy of modern flood management solutions

As politicians from all parties continue to debate the effectiveness of past policy in managing the recent floods, it’s interesting to see just how much of the debate has centred on the amount of money that has – or hasn’t - been spent.  One could argue that their time might be better utilised conducting a cost benefit analysis. 

Since 2007, DEFRA has spent over £4bn on flood defences – and identifying where this investment has delivered tangible results would undoubtedly prove invaluable, to inform future policy and measures.

When we moved into the new millennium it would be true to say that Britain was lacking normative policy. Most work concentrated on the refinement of techniques to implement existing policy but looking back over more recent years, governmental bodies have moved forward - but slowly- and policy is still not as joined up as it could be. 

"Let’s not be drawn into narrow and independent focus on separate issues, rather let’s seek collaboration; where planners, designers, policy makers, budget holders, engineers and the general public input into an integrated approach, to ensure that we adopt best practice and spend effectively, within a timely framework of guidance and legislation."

Richard Hill, ACO Technologies

However, our engineering and planning communities have made progress despite of this – with those flood defences and surface water management solutions introduced unquestionably making a huge difference to towns all over the country.

Looking beyond the headlines, in many cases the reach of the flooding impact has been reduced. In fact, in the 2007 floods ten times the number of properties were flooded than in recent months and the Environment Agency has estimated that over 800,000 homes were protected by flood schemes this time round. 

In the current climate, it would therefore be extremely valuable to use this experience to identify best practice – not only in the design solutions but also in terms of collaborative working between the different bodies engaged in water management.

Instead, the industry has seemed to fragment, with particular aspects unduly focussed on and purported to be the solution to all the problems.  The recent weather conditions have created a platform that provides the ideal opportunity for lobbyists of specific elements of water management to get their message out. 

Whereas many of the arguments of course have foundation, there is still a big risk that overselling individual solutions as being the answer will be counterproductive. There is after all no ‘one size fits all’ solution here.

Over the last eight years or so there have been at least 10 top level documents written and re written by policy makers. The difference between Making Space for Water and the latest draft of the Flood and Water Management Guidelines is marked and once again the goal posts have been moved.  While it would seem that the very considerable level of work undertaken in recent years has improved understanding and practice, the question is - has a strong enough thread been kept through the process, particularly with respect to integrated approach?

"We should not forget that the need to properly address these many challenges still remains for urban drainage"

Back in 2008, Making Space for Water first championed an ambition that flood risks be managed more effectively by adopting a holistic, joined-up, and integrated approach. An area of particular concern was flooding in urban areas from surface water - due to inadequacies in drainage systems - and a need for integrated urban drainage management (IUDM) approaches was identified.

The Government also recognised that the physical and institutional complexities of urban drainage systems make it difficult to plan and deliver systems with reduced flood risk – particularly in England where complex institutional and funding arrangements divide responsibilities between water companies, the Environment Agency, planning departments in local government, housing developers, householders and internal drainage boards.

Six years on, we should not forget that the need to properly address these many challenges still remains for urban drainage; particularly with respect to run of quantity and quality, landscape aesthetics, ecology and amenity. As with all other aspects of water management further advances can be achieved by adopting an integrated approach.

So let’s not be drawn into narrow and independent focus on separate issues, rather let’s seek collaboration; where planners, designers, policy makers, budget holders, engineers and the general public input into an integrated approach, to ensure that we adopt best practice and spend effectively, within a timely framework of guidance and legislation.

Richard Hill, managing director of ACO Technologies