Experiences with the OECD Approach at Regional Level, Regis THEPOT
1 like482 views
1. The OECD High Level Risk Forum reviewed the risk of flooding from the Seine River in Paris. A flood in Paris could impact over 5 million people and cause economic damages between 3 to 30 billion Euros. 2. Better coordination of flood prevention policies across different government levels could reduce disaster impacts. There are opportunities to develop an ambitious resilience strategy, including improving flood risk governance and defining long-term financing for prevention. 3. Recommendations include ensuring linkages across flood prevention efforts, defining a clear vision and responsibilities, and improving risk knowledge, urban planning resilience, and infrastructure protection. Developing a strategic financial framework that maximizes coherence could help catalyze existing prevention resources.
Experiences with the OECD Approach at Regional Level, Regis THEPOT
- 1. OECD High Level Risk Forum Review on the risk of flood from the Seine river in Paris
- 2. • 34 governments of the OECD and beyond – Centres of governments – Sectoral Ministries (response, prevention) • Private sector • International organisations • High Level Expertise 2 The OECD High Level Risk Forum A wide network
- 3. OECD High Level Risk Forum OBJECTIVES FORUM’S OBJECTIVES • Comparative analysis to optimise risk management policies • Helping governments to prepare for Major Risks • Principles for Risk Management • Partnership with the private sector • Country reviews of risk management policies
- 4. 4 img3 Seine flood risk management in Ile-de- France Simulation 3D d’une inondation de la Seine à Issy-les-Moulineaux Source:IAU Youtube : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhT8tM3ABs8
- 5. International comparison Cities or country Year River Return period Damages and losses (Bio €) Prague 2002 Vlatva 500 y 3,1 New-Orleans 2005 Inondations liées à Katrina 90 UK 2007 Severn et Tamise 200 y 4,6 Brisbane 2011 Brisbane 120 y 11,7 Bangkok 2011 Chao Phraya > 100 y 36,1 New-York 2012 Inondations liées à Sandy 400-800 y 14,8 Central Europe 2013 Danube et Elbe 100 y 12,1 New-Orleans after Katrina 2005 Source: Romain Huret, 2010
- 6. 6 MAJOR IMPACTS AND CONSEQUENCES Prague Long-term interruption of critical networks – 6 months without subway New-Orléans Water stayed several months Long term interruption of vital infrastructures - 5 y without hospital 50% drop of the population UK Definition of a new strategy based on structural measures along with resilience of critical sectors Brisbane Impact on key sectors of the national economy (mining, tourism, agriculture) Mistakes in the governance of major protection infrastructures Bangkok Impacts on international supply chains (car, hard-drive) Major governance issues New-York Impact on supply chain and critical networks 70 000 SMEs went bankrupt due to electricity interruption Launch of a massive investment plan in resilience: 20 Bio $ by 2020 Central Europe Damage reduction in areas where structural measures had been implemented post 2002 (eg : Dresden) Lessons learned
- 7. 7 What about Paris area?
- 8. 8 Major assets at risks 463 km2 , 830 000 inhabitants 55 700 companies representing 620 000 emplois Key government institutions, 295 schools, 79 hospitals, 11 637 power sub-stations, 140 km & 41 subway stations, 3 railway stations, sub-urban train, 85 bridges, 5 highways and many secundary roads Cultural heritage : the Seine parisian banks part of UNESCO World Heritage, thousands of historical buildings, museums and art galleries Environment: wastewater stations, industrial sites SEVESO, waste disposals, oil deposits
- 9. A major and lengthy event with large and numerous consequences Direct and indirect impacts on nearly 5 millions citizens and many companies Continuity of government Long duration that could exceed a trimester A significant macroeconomic impact 3-30 Bio € of direct damages 0.1 to 3 % cumulated GDP losses over 5 years 10 000 - 400 000 job losses following the crisis 9 Key messages - impacts
- 10. 1. An effort to recalibrate, better coordination et adjustment of public policies could reduce the consequences of such disaster 2. Many opportunities are converging to engage an ambitious resilience strategy Few areas to further develop : Inventing a new governance approach for prevention Reinforcing prevention through whole-of-society resilience efforts Developing a long term strategy for financing prevention 10 Key message – Policy
- 11. Coherence of the legal and regulatory framework Roles and responsibilities of the different institutions and organisations Coordination mechanisms 11 1. Governance issues
- 12. 1. Governance issues A governance deficit Lack of a strategic and holistic vision Fragmented approaches at the different levels of government Sectoral approaches and lack of coordination accross publiuc policies Lack of leadership Consequences : Isolated approaches, dispersed efforts, investments benefits
- 13. 1. Governance issues Real opportunities to engage efforts Decentralisation process on going EU Flood Directive Evolving strategic frameworks Infrastructure project International examples
- 14. 1. Ensure the appropriate linkages between the various levels of flood prevention– from the exposed Ile-de- France metropolis to the river basin. 2. Define an ambitious and mobilising global vision over the long term together with actionable principles. 3. Break-down the global vision into precise objectives and make the stakeholders aware of their responsibilities. 4. Create effective gateways between the flood risk management strategy and related public policies. 14 1. Recommandations
- 15. • Knowledge • Risk culture • Urban planning • Critical infrastructures • Business continuity • Green infrastructures • Protection infrastructures • Infrastructures de stockage 15 2. Strengthening resilience NON-STRUCTURAL STRUCTURAL Principles of coherence, prioritisation, international comparison, innovation
- 16. 16 2. Strengthening resilience Risk knowledge and risk culture ASSESSMENT Progress in knowledge harmonisation Weak risk culture (risk memory, moral hazard) Responding to the demand Companies are in demand of risk information once risk-aware A strong interest of citiozens Need to increase transparency
- 17. 17 2. Strengthening resilience Resilience through urban planning and business continuity Regulatory aspects (Risk Prevention Plans) Resilience of critical infrastructures Lack of instruments to incentivise resilience in existing buildings and in the private sector Opportunities with the Great Paris project
- 18. 18 2. Strengthening resilience Structural measures Lack of harmonisation and governance deficits Equity issue accross territories Prioritising investments Local protections Multiple uses reservoir dams
- 19. 5. Continue to improve and harmonise risk knowledge and ensure that risk information is made available. 6. Reinforce the risk culture of citizens, decision-makers and companies. 7. Improve territorial resilience, using the opportunities offered by the Grand Paris Project 8. Gradually improve the resilience level of critical networks and take steps towards preserving the continuity of business and public services 9. Place the flood protection infrastructures under the responsibility of a single contracting authority 10.Encourage experimentation with regard to the La Bassée storage project 19 2. Strengthening resilience Recommendations
- 20. Seine flood risk represents a significant part of average economic damages at the national level in France Mean yearly cost of flooding in France: € 1-1,4 Mds (EPRI), the Seine represents one tenth 20 3. Financing prevention An important risk: « tail » event & large share 0 1/100 1/50 3/100 1/25 1/20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Périodederetour Dommages (milliards €) Avec réservoirs Sans réservoirs
- 21. • Existing financing tools for flood prevention in France: CatNat, Barnier fund, Prevention Plans, Major River Plans : 300-450 Mio € investments per year Low contribution to Seine flood prevention 21 3. Financing prevention Existing financing tools • What is the acceptable level of risk, how to prioritise ?
- 22. Absence of floods in the last 60 years : « anesthesia » Heterogeneous risk levels: difficulties to finance costly infrastruictures for a common public good Prevention funding not allocated in priority to the large scale shocks but more to the low return period events Lack of incentives for stakeholders to invest in prevention before and afetr floodng events (moral hazard) Difficulties to catalyse existing resources in a coherent approach 3. Financing prevention An heterogeneous system
- 23. 23 3. Financing prevention Elements of a strategic framework Maximising coherency and synergies through a multi-criteria strategy Fiscally constrained environment Need to develop a global financing strategy : - Long term vision and sustainability - Contributing to France competitiveness - Accountability and proprotionnality between beneficiaries and financial contributors - Synergyes and coherence with other stategies - Cost effectiveness - Equity
- 24. 11.Support the local of Seine flood risks management strategy in the Ile-de-France by a clear financial strategy, 12.Mobilise all the beneficiaries of preventive measures in a multi-level approach 13.Strengthen efforts to clarify the priority criteria for prevention funding from State resources 14.To re-examine the impact of the CatNat insurance regime on flood risk prevention 24 3. Financing prevention Recommendations
- 25. A new organization for flood risk governance Engaging a positive dynamic on resilience Role of the OECD and the High Level Risk Forum to facilitate sharing of good practices Innovative approach for flood risk assessment 25 CONCLUSION
Editor's Notes
- #4: Increased major disruptive events signal an ongoing shift in the nature of major risks and in society’s capacity to manage them Increased vulnerabilities: concentration of population and assets, interconnectedness and interdependencies, climate change Reduced capacities of government and increased demand from citizens
- #14: L’acte III de la décentralisation et le Grand Paris La métropole du Grand Paris De nouvelles responsabilités au niveau local La Directive Européenne sur les Inondations Plan de gestion des risques d’inondation de la Seine et stratégie locale d’ici 2015 Les cadres stratégiques qui évoluent SDRIF / Plan Seine / Contrats de plan État-région Le projet de PAPI de l’EPTB Seine Grands Lacs Projet de réduction de l’aléa porté par l’EPTB Seine Grands Lacs Les exemples internationaux New-York 2012, Europe Centrale 2013: des évènements qui permettent de mobiliser les énergies en montrant les enjeux
- #18: Aspects réglementaires (Plans de Prévention des Risques) intégrés comme contrainte plutôt que source d’innovation Résilience des réseaux urbains et opérateurs critiques déterminante pour l’ensemble de l’agglomération Manque d’instruments pour encourager la résilience des entreprises et du bâti existant
- #23: Absence de crue au cours des 60 dernières années : « anesthésie »: manque de motivation des acteurs à structurer une approche financière Différences des niveaux de risques: difficulté de financer des infrastructures qui bénéficieraient plus à certains qu’à d’autres Dilemme du prisonnier Fonds destinés à la prévention ne participent pas à la réduction des risques majeurs mais à ceux aux périodes de retour plus faibles Fonds barnier bottom-up pas de priorités Aléa moral avec l’absence d’incitations pour les acteurs à investir dans la prévention avant ou après l’inondation
- #24: Contexte de finances publiques tendu : difficulté d’obtenir des ressources additionnelles et nécessité d’une répartition équilibrée des efforts Nécessité de penser une stratégie de financement globale axée sur un certain nombre de principes :