Reporting of flood mapping under the Floods Directive :

1. Reporting of flood mapping under the Floods Directive : - EC development on Reporting of Flood mapping Maria Brättemark, European Commission, DG.ENV.D.2

2. Content • What and when • Why • Where • How

3. What and when !

4. Information flows of the Directive • Member States to the Commission : • Article 3.b : Competent authorities and units of management • Article 15 : Reporting of main tools (articles 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14) : 3 months after deadlines in respective article • Annex : content of the FRMP • Article 17 : Notification of transposition • Member States to the public • Article 10 : Making tools available to the public and public consultation – including any background document if requested… • Commission to other institutions • Article 16 : Commission report • Reporting format and Committee • Article 11 (and 12) • Information exchange between Member States in shared units of management • Articles 4.3; 5.2; 6.1 and 2, 7, 8… • Information flows with different actors: • Article 9 : Water Framework Directive coordination • Annex : Information on other Directives (EIA, SEA, EPER, SEVESO…

5. Key issues for flood map reporting • Appropriate scales • All types of floods • Textual information and maps • National vs European • Integrative water management and assessment - flood risk management – links to WFD • Role of other EU user needs : civil protection, regional funds, climate change adaptation, research….

6. Key issues for floods reporting • Flood implementation “tools” to be reported/made available to the Commission as well as the public • Commission needs to fulfil its role to check compliance with legal requirements – these for information needs to be collected that enable a comparable and fair assessment of all Member States • Need to coordinate mapping at the level of the River Basin District (see into art 6) • Towards streamlining – against duplication of information and work – making use of existing information • Water Directors have agreed to report water legislation via WISE - a tool in development • “Voluntary approach” rather than “regulatory”

7. Links WFD - article 9 • Coordination of maps (Art 9 FD) with the risk assessment in art 5 (WFD): « focussing on opportunities for improving efficiency, information exchange and achieving common synergies and benefits having regard to the environmental objectives of the WFD » • Environmental objectives (WFD Art 4) includes designation of heavily modified waterbodies, exemptions for temporary deterioration due to a.o; extreme floods, procdeures for allowing new modification for public safety. • Analysis of characteristics (WFD Art 5 ), review human acticity…, including identification of pressures and impacts thereof such as : • Impact of significant water flow regulations on overall flow characteristics, • Identification of significant morphological alterations, • Estimation of land use patterns

8. Where and why ? And what is it ?

9. WISE concept & aims Concept The EU bodies (DG ENV, JRC, ESTAT and EEA) and EU25 Member States, Norway, Bulgaria and Romania agreed on the Water Directors’ meeting in November 2003 the: “Development of a new, comprehensive, shared European data and information management system for water, including river basins (WISE). The system should be based on the concept paper and should be fully implemented by 2010”

10. WISE history • 2003: development / vision of WISE agreed by Water Directorss • 2005: WISE Implementation plan agreed by Go4 • 22 March 2007: WISE viewer launched as a gateway of information access on water internet access & ‘single data entry’ portal • 2007-2010: WISE construction phase • 2007/8: Integration of ‘old’ / remaining directives (Urban Water Water Treatment, Bathing, Nitrates, Drinking water) • 2008: Interlinks with ESTAT/OECD Joint questionnaire on inland waters (water statistics) • From 2008: • GIS Guidance document – to Water Directors November 2008 • Concept for WISE as distributed data management system • 2008-2010: new legislation : Marine protection strategy directive, links to EPER/ e-PRTR reporting, Floods directive… • by 2015: WISE as distributed system

11. Advantages and capacities From piecemeal approach … … to data integration in WISE • New ways of communication ... from tabular data to interactive maps ... • Electronic reporting for uploading data & information in a structured way • Quicker feedback on validation of quality of reported data (QA/QC) • Technical possibility for data exchange & interoperability • Interactive maps with zooming & searching possibilities • Possibility of integrated analysis at various scales • Enabling an integrated view on pressures & impacts • Efficient management of all water-related information at EU level • Coherence between various reporting mechanisms and needs • Access to information / data for various purposes and needs • Based on INSPIRE principles

14. Scale : 1 :250 000

20. Flood maps – appropriate scales!

21. PFRA – theoretical example Tornnionjoki RBD (FI) Bothnian Bay RBD (SW)

22. PFRA – theoretical example

23. National flood maps

25. Population density downscaling • Starting data: Population per commune and CORINE Land Cover. • Result: Approximate population density with 1 ha resolution (GIS grid) + = Data held at JRC - from presentation by A.dR, WJRC, WG F3

26. Towards reporting under the Floods Directive

27. Future WISE • Complete integration of all water-related directives • Develop further the input and output functionalities • Develop WISE as a distributed system (INSPIRE) • Establish links to the national information systems • Concept paper is plannedto be submitted to Water Directors in November • Now is the time for the WG F to get involved in the development of this future tool ! • Pilots – Floods reporting one candidate ?

28. 2007 EOINET water / SoE Member states Report Net WISE Public Viewer Member states Member states WFD Member states Member states State of env’ment Member states Member states Bathing water D Member states Member states Urban WWD Member states 2010 WISE Public WFD, UWWD ReportNet: Push/ Pull Proto-cols WISE: Access Proto-cols Member states EIONET Water Member states WISE Expert ESTAT WISE Analysis Other policies/ users OUTPUT INPUT

29. Planned Milestones Floods Reporting • 2008 : • Agreement of concepts for reporting – concept paper 2008 – 1st discussion on outline April 2008 • Specific reporting sheets for CA/UoM and PFRA to be developed starting end 2008. • GIS Guidance document • Concept paper on distributed system of WISE • WISE Workshop 12.11.2008 - PARIS • 2009 : • Completion of reporting sheets for all reporting requirements • Completion of technical formats for the first reporting/notification steps (PFRA/ CA/UoM) • Development distributed system of WISE starts • 2010-2011 • Completion of technical formats for the following reporting/notification steps • Testing of reporting formats • Testing ofdistributed system of WISE on floods? • Inspire ! • 2013-2016 : Reporting of the Floods Directive

30. WISE data flow (all steps involve QA/QC) Delivery database Version of 04/09/08 Data definition/ requirements Step 1: WG D reporting sheets: Compliance or SoE, voluntary (or through comitology) Submission Step 2: End-user tool, schema/DEM, XML/shape/GML, other tools (DD, glossary), help desk Step 3: central holding area (CDR: MS individual submissions), management of access rights QA/QC feedback mechanism Step 4: Automatic QA/QC checks in CDR + standardised manual checks if needed, feedback to data submitters Acceptance Step 5: Final data storage: EU-wide, quality-checked databases (e.g. Art.3, 5, 8 – WFD, BWD, SoE, NiD, UWWTD, etc) after EEA acceptance Production databases Step 6: Purpose-oriented databases EU Databases (Spatial) reference datasets Compliance-check databases DG ENV Analytical databases JRC, EEA WISE viewer, GIS visualisation Legal, political, Assessment, compliance Analysis/Scenarios Step 7a: Public or restricted viewing, map service, aggregation, statistics Step 7c: Tools for SoE assessment, CCM2, management scenarios Step 7b: Tools for compliance assessment

31. What is a reporting sheet? • Introduction • How will the Commission use the information reported? • Which criteria/indicator for public information has been identified? • Detailed list of what information should be provided • Geographic information (list of maps) • Data • Summary text • Other information including reference or link to relevant documentation (such as links to more detailed information) THEN – technical formats are developed !

32. European vs national ? Maps Textual information Competent authorities (art 3) Units of management (art 3) PRFA: Information used & PRFA: Definition, principles and procedures potential significant flood risk (art 4- 5) EU level Result of PFRA – areas with PSFR (art 4-5) How mapping scenarios were defined (art 6) Content FRMP – map part (see annex I) Content FRMP (see annex I) How principles of article 7 were respected (compliance checking) Map explanations, legends (translated) (art 6) Links to more information to citizens regarding preparedness, prevention and protection – rescue services etc (art 7) Detailed organisation subsidiarity, but note that this shall be the focus of the FRMP. Flood hazard maps (art 6) Flood risk maps (art 6) National level

33. 3 questions • A centralised WISE system • A decentralised system • Existing or newly developed national systems, may be subject to standardisation OR - AND • Reporting flood maps, to Commission, the public, experts • Information exchange in the shared river basins – for FD + integrative river basin management • European wide harmonised flood maps ?

34. Environmental Reporting INSPIRE & SEIS Air Soil Water WISE Agri- culture Climatechange Others … EU water legislation and other EU reporting activities on water WFD UWWTD NiD BWD DWD MSD FlD SoE JQ-IW WISE in the wider context

35. http://water.europa.eu Thank you for your attention