Obligation or Innovation: Can the EU Floods Directive Be Seen as a Tipping Point Towards More Resilient Flood Risk Management? A Case Study from Vorarlberg, Austria

Environmental change is subject to discussion among scientists, practitioners, and policymakers. As increasing threats to both environment and society are on the agenda, alternative management approaches are gaining importance. This paper focuses on the influence of policy changes on flood risk management. There is evidence that shifts in settlement patterns and population growth might influence the dynamics of flood damage and loss. There is increased pressure to intensify land use, but also to keep free spaces for hazard mitigation and adaptation. In this paper, we focus on new regulative and management approaches associated with the implementation of the European (EU) Floods Directive in Austria. The concept of tipping points, which are defined as turning points for system change, has been applied. Based on semi-structured interviews we evaluate whether or not the implementation of the EU Floods Directive has triggered a system change in flood risk management. Our results show that triggers for change are past flood events and a general need for action rather than the implementation of the directive itself. Changes related to the EU Floods Directive are likely to happen in the long-term; however, these cannot yet be determined. The main challenges are associated with transparency and communication between policymakers and the affected society. So far, the requirements of the first policy cycle of the directive have been fulfilled. The second policy cycle will show further outcomes and potential needs.

The EU Floods Directive trickling down: tracing the ideas of integrated and participatory flood risk management in Sweden

This study examines how the EU Floods Directive – an extensive and innovative legislative instrument for integrated and participatory flood risk planning in all EU member states – influences local flood risk management in one member state, Sweden. The study identifies that: many municipalities have received new knowledge; cross-sectoral organisational structures for water and flood risk issues at the local level are being formed or strengthened; and the flood risk issue has been elevated up the political agenda. There are also however clear signs that a number of other fundamental issues are not being adequately addressed in the complex institutional setting that results from the directive's implementation. These issues are undoubtedly obstructing the development of a more integrated and participatory flood risk management system. Of key importance here are questions relating to how roles and mandates are communicated and adopted, the lack of coordination between the Floods Directive and the Water Framework Directive, and the inadequate involvement of the municipal level and other stakeholders. Practical recommendations on how to redirect development towards more positive outcomes in these areas are thus formulated.