EU anti-flood bill faces member state opposition

With the European spring flood season around the corner, the European Parliament is haggling with member states over a piece of legislation aimed at pushing EU capitals into better coordinating the assessment and management of flood risks.

Between 1998 and 2002, Europe suffered over 100 catastrophic floods, causing some 700 fatalities, the displacement of about half a million people and at least €25 billion in insured economic losses.

In 2005, catastrophic floods left 40 people dead, something widely perceived as the last wake up call. Subsequently, in early 2006, the European Commission tabled the draft directive, which is now at its second reading in the European Parliament.

MEPs in the parliament's environment committee have criticized member states for not taking sufficient action as they try to water down the text of a planned directive on the assessment and management of flood risks.

The law sets up an EU-wide three-stage approach – an initial flood risk assessment to identify areas at risk, followed by flood mapping and by the drawing-up of flood risk management plans for river basins.

Taking account of climate change

One of the directive's points of conflict is closely intertwined with Europe's most debated issue of climate change, with MEPs and governments also arguing over the possible introduction of fines for increasing flood risk and the implementation deadline of the directive.

It is known that the scale and frequency of floods are likely to increase due to global warming, which will bring higher intensity of rainfall and rising sea levels. According to the European Environment Agency's estimates the water volume carried by the rivers of north and north-eastern Europe will grow by 50 percent or more by 2070.

According to Austrian conservative MEP Richard Seeber, responsible for the dossier, "we have to take into account climate change data in all three stages in order to get precise picture of an area."

This is however strongly opposed by EU capitals, with one diplomat telling EUobserver "there is no need to carry out a detailed climate change forecast for each precautionary measure, since this would engender considerable and largely unjustifiable costs and would delay the drawing-up of plans."

Prevention is best

However, climate change is not the only cause of the growing number of disasters. Human activities, such as inappropriate river management, construction and farming in flood plains which reduces their capacity to absorb flood waters, also play a part.

"We should give rivers the necessary space," Mr Seeber said, with some MEPs even demanding a review of any subsidies to activities which increase risks, such as agriculture and regional development.

The assets at risk of flooding are enormous. For example, more than 10 million people live in the areas at risk of extreme floods along the Rhine, and the potential damage from floods amounts to €165 billion.

Coastal areas are also at risk of flooding. The total value of economic assets located within 500 metres of the European coastline, including beaches, agricultural land and industrial facilities, is currently estimated at €500 million to €1 trillion.

In addition to economic and social damage, floods may have severe environmental consequences as for example when waste water treatment plants are inundated or when factories holding large quantities of toxic chemicals are affected. Floods may also destroy wetland areas and reduce biodiversity.

The parliament's environment committee has demanded that, for example, polluting factories should not be built in areas liable to flooding and tried to introduce the so-called "cost recovery principal."

According to such a principle "if a construction has the direct effect on flood risk, anyone responsible for authorizing this construction should pay costs for increasing the risk" Mr Seeber said, adding that member states and businesses – likely to be most effected by the new rules – are against his plan.

But the European insurance federation supports the strict legislation.

"Prevention measures are essential to limit the damage and costs," Jean-Luis Marsaud from the federation told EUobserver, stressing the need for the public-private partnership and free access of insurance business to maps of flood-prone areas.

"Customers also should know they are in endangered areas," Mr Marsaud added.

What's next?

According to Mr Seeber, Europe's entire philosophy on floods should change, as EU governments currently focus exclusively on their national territories.

"Rivers cross frontiers," Mr Seeber said, arguing "we need to adopt a European, so-called river basin approach, based on the knowledge of the entire river, including its upstream and downstream."

For example, the Danube basin stretches through 18 European countries, including 10 EU member states.

The EU floods directive - aimed at reducing the likelihood and the impact of floods - is scheduled for its second reading vote in April. However, Mr Seeber expects the package to undergo a so-called inter-institutional conciliation procedure.

The conciliation committee will bring together negotiators from the parliament, the council [composed of member states] and the commissioner in charge of environment, aimed at striking an overall balance between all three institutions.

The committee has six to eight weeks to reach the final wording for a "joint text" after negotiations are launched.