Review of the flood risk management system in Germany after the major flood in 2013

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Widespread flooding in June 2013 caused damage costs of €6 to 8 billion in Germany, and awoke many memories of the floods in August 2002, which resulted in total damage of €11.6 billion and hence was the most expensive natural hazard event in Germany up to now. The event of 2002 does, however, also mark a reorientation toward an integrated flood risk management system in Germany. Therefore, the flood of 2013 offered the opportunity to review how the measures that politics, administration, and civil society have implemented since 2002 helped to cope with the flood and what still needs to be done to achieve effective and more integrated flood risk management. The review highlights considerable improvements on many levels, in particular (1) an increased consideration of flood hazards in spatial planning and urban development, (2) comprehensive property-level mitigation and preparedness measures, (3) more effective flood warnings and improved coordination of disaster response, and (4) a more targeted maintenance of flood defense systems. In 2013, this led to more effective flood management and to a reduction of damage. Nevertheless, important aspects remain unclear and need to be clarified. This particularly holds for balanced and coordinated strategies for reducing and overcoming the impacts of flooding in large catchments, cross-border and interdisciplinary cooperation, the role of the general public in the different phases of flood risk management, as well as a transparent risk transfer system. Recurring flood events reveal that flood risk management is a continuous task. Hence, risk drivers, such as climate change, land-use changes, economic developments, or demographic change and the resultant risks must be investigated at regular intervals, and risk reduction strategies and processes must be reassessed as well as adapted and implemented in a dialogue with all stakeholders.

New insights into flood warning reception and emergency response by affected parties

“…Nevertheless, recent events such as the flood of 2002 revealed deficiencies in early warning as well as a huge lack of general risk awareness, communication and preparedness of at-risk households and companies (DKKV, 2003). Therefore, amendments of the warning and response system as well as campaigns to improve risk communication and preparedness were requested and have been implemented since then (Thieken et al, 2016b).…”

When is it beneficial for insurers to engage in climate change adaptation – a cross country comparison

“…When losses are compensated by the tax-payer or by adhoc post disaster government assistance (as in Germany after severe flood events in 2002 and 2013) (Thieken et al, 2016) this can lead to a problem called moral hazard: people at risk do not see the necessity to purchase insurance or undertake 20 prevention measures as they presume their losses are already covered. Unfortunately, moral hazard can also occur when large structural prevention measures are implemented.…”

“…Large-scale structural adaptation infrastructure such as dams, dikes, embankments, reservoirs and polders (controlled 25 retention basins), or slope stabilization measures decrease the risk of flood occurrence or the magnitude of the event and have proven their effectiveness in flooding events (Thieken et al, 2016). Common to all measures is that safety is only provided when well maintained (i.e.…”

“…Common to all measures is that safety is only provided when well maintained (i.e. do not fail) and when design levels are not exceeded (Thieken et al, 2016). Two main functionalities of such infrastructure should be distinguished: infrastructure that protects an area from being inundated i.e.…”

“…extension of floodplains or wetlands) and are more costly. For flooding, a typical hazard modification measure is the use of controlled retention areas also called polders, which allow capping flood peaks and thus reduce damages further downstream (Förster et 10 al., 2005;Thieken et al, 2016). Possible future applications of single-event modifications in the context of floods might include cloud seeding to trigger precipitation when meteorological conditions, which have lead previously to large flooding, coincide with unfavorable hydrological conditions (e.g.…”