1. Our team of researchers explain how government funding of flood
risk management is changing, and how community vision can be
harnessed to pave the way for a new era of collaborative and holistic
flood risk management.
Sunny floods in York
by Ness

2. etter winters,
drier summers
and extreme
weather are
predicted to
affect most regions of the UK as
the climate changes.
Increased flooding is one likely
repercussion of such change, and
it’s a force that should not be
underestimated, as any
homeowner in Cockermouth will
tell you. The government is not
blind to the impending increase in
flood risks, and the subsequent
impacts on local economies,
communities and environments.
In response, Caroline Spelman,
Secretary of State for DEFRA, has
brought in a new policy on
partnership funding, to be applied
within local flood risk
management strategies.
In the current economic climate, it
comes as no surprise that, despite
the predicted increase in risk,
government funding is not due to
increase.
The new policy does, however,
provide the opportunity to scatter
existing funding across a wider area
by offering only part funding to flood
risk management projects, together
with increased support of community
involvement, holistic assessment of
new developments and efficient use
of resources. The new policy also has
provision to support those most in
need: a deprived area may receive
45% of perceived benefits from the
government, compared to 20% in a
more affluent region.
So, rewinding a little, many flood
risk management plans may receive a
significant reduction in government
funding, even in the poorest areas.
But before you all rush to lobby
parliament, consider the fact that
there are plenty of sources out there
who may be willing to meet any
shortfall. A local economy, after all,
could be shattered by a severe flood.
Such was the case in Hereford, where
supermarket giant ASDA coughed up
£2 million, in return for permission to
build one of their increasingly
ubiquitous ‘Supercentres’.
In Bawdsey, a similar sum was
amassed by local landowners, who
sacrificed plots of land to enable
flood alleviation on their remaining
turf.
Flood management doesn’t just
affect large groups and
multinationals. Since everyone with
a stake in a flood-risk area is likely
to be affected in the event of a
downpour, it shouldn’t be difficult,
in theory, to drum up
comprehensive support. There’s no
reason the whole community
shouldn't be involved in flood
prevention.
Obviously, not everyone will have
millions to spare for the cause, but
time can be just as valuable. Local
groups have often been highly
effective when it comes to
grassroots action; The East
Hackney collective who cleared
weeds from sections of river and
repaired flood defence banks are a
case in point. In the absence of a
significant benefactor, costs could
even be spread by asking
homeowners to pay a flood
protection levy to prevent further
damage, and loss of value, to their
properties.
W

3. Local Focus on Flood Risk Management
Community involvement in flood risk
management doesn’t have to stop there.
Why not allow communities to take
complete ownership of flood risk
management? Doesn’t everyone affected
by floods have the right to be involved
in the consultation process? The
opinions of an elderly couple living in a
houseboat on the river Adur or
homestead farmer in the valleys of
Exmoor are, arguably, no less valid than
those of the national grid, TESCO or a
growth point initiative. It takes time to
explain flood risks to the local
community, but the importance of the
local community must not be
overlooked.
The formation of a flood risk
management association has proven
effective in Earley, Reading, and there’s
no reason other local communities
wouldn’t jump at the chance to become
involved in similar projects. Retired
locals and community enthusiasts will be
chomping at the bit to chair important
meetings and they will gain a real sense
of ownership in the process if they are
the ones to invite and involve other
interested parties in the decision making
process, and not vice-versa.
… there’s no
reason the whole
community shouldn’t
be involved in flood
prevention.
“
Funding options
Funding streams to be collaboratively applied (EA National Strategy)

4. Local Focus on Flood Risk Management
It’s not just the local movers and
shakers with something to gain from
the ‘friendly neighbourhood
committee’; large organisations will
be keen to have their businesses
stamped with the gold star of
approval when it comes to
‘community engagement’.
But can a group of well-meaning
novices really be up to the abiding
challenge of managing flood risk?
Let’s look at how the ‘community
association’ might be applied to the
situation in Riverford, a coastal town
well accustomed to the effects of
flooding.
“
Central
East
North
West
North
West
Public open spaces
Agricultural land
Urban
area
Light commercial
Leisure properties
Port
Houseboats
Airport
EA maintained area
With poor current protection
SSSI &
RSPB reserve
Improved protection planned
Raise existing defences providing
existing level of protection
Low lying areas
flooded in past
New development
The Riverford residents already have
an active interest in flood risk
management, due to past floods and
concerns over the development of the
north-west region of the town. This
interest could be harnessed to ensure
marginalised or vulnerable
stakeholders are represented fairly.
Previous floods in Riverford have
caused a chain reaction of failures in
the north and central parts of the
town. The community suffered major
disruption when the breakdown of the
electricity substation sparked a failure
of the surface pumping station.
The town is also host to a site of
special scientific interest (SSSI), and
there is an RSPB nature reserve
nearby. With sea level rise, these
areas are at increased risk of tidal
intrusion, which would, at best, alter
the habitat of the area, and at worst,
devastate this unique environment.
The flood risk management
association would need to have their
wits about them when it came to
preventing local catastrophes in the
future. Effective strategies would
need to be carefully planned, costed
and implemented, weighing up
potential risk
Riverford at a glance

5. About the authors:
Roger Swan is a doctoral researcher investigating
optimisation of water treatment works.
Jai Mackenzie is an English teacher with research
experience in the field of independent learning.
Sally Barnett is a doctoral researcher investigating
the effect of climate change on highway drainage.
They all live and work in Birmingham.
to life and property against the
likely costs of preventative
measures, not to mention the
important considerations of
residual risk, emergency plans and
regular review.
The association would need to
understand the importance of
strategically placed defences in
Riverford, so as to maximise
benefit versus cost. Improving
defences on the North bank of the
river, for example, would
simultaneously protect the SSSI
and Nature Reserve, the town’s
largest urban area and significant
stretches of agricultural land,
therefore impacting on the local
environment, community, local
economy and food sources.
By choosing the solutions with
maximum perceived benefit, the
flood risk management association
would not only spread a wide net
in terms of potential funding
sources, such as the RSPB and
local farmers, but also increase
potential government funding,
which is wholly dependent on
projected benefits.
The community association, more
than any other, would bear a
weighty burden when it came to
perceived ‘fairness’ to everyone
affected by flood, particularly
groups who are typically under-
represented.
Communities will be more likely
to trust familiar individuals over
large authorities and faceless
organisations, and with that trust
comes great responsibility.
Members of small flood risk
management associations would
have a significant stake in their
own success; they would have to
live with the consequences of their
decisions every day. Planned
changes and costs are therefore far
more likely to receive a positive
reception when proposed by such
an organisation.
Local flood risk management
associations may just be our best
hope in times of increasingly rapid
change and development.
The flood risk
management
association would
need to have their wits
about them when it
came to preventing
local catastrophes in
the future.
“
Stirchley, Birmingham, 2008