1. Integration FRMP into RBMP: experience in Flanders Sven Verbeke, Flemish Environment Agency 4 th European Water Conference, 23-24 March 2015

2. Content Legislation and organization Advantages and synergies Challenges Conclusion

3. Legislation and organization Decree Integrated Water Policy (DIW) 2003 Judicial and organizational framework integrated water policy Transposition WFD in Flemish legislation Elements flood management before FD existed 2007 FD Adapted DIW 2010 Transposition FD RBMP + FRMP = 1 plan 2014 Public consultation July14 - Jan15 Draft RBMP - integrated FRMP 2015 RBMP 2016 Reporting RBMP and FRMP March16 One Competent authority: Coordination Committee on Integrated Water Policy (CIW) www.volvanwater.be

4. Advantages and synergies Single competent authority Single water management plan Single public consultation

5. Advantages and synergies - structure Similar structure of WFD and FD plans Analysis Environmental and Flood Risk Objectives Assessment state Inventory necessary measures

6. Advantages and synergies - Assessment flood risk 3 situations A: situation acceptable, no action needed to improve the situation B: situation has to be improved based on cost- efficient actions C: situation is unacceptable Indicators - People at risk, economical damage, ecological flood tolerance,… - Helps to define where action is necessary to reach defined flood risk objectives and to evaluate how they evolve Seriousness consequences Frequency Framework of evaluation High Low

7. Advantages and synergies - prioritization All WFD and FD measures investigated and prioritized together  favours implementation synergetic measures FD measures

8. Advantages and synergies - prioritization FD  further prioritization by social risk Class 1: Actions 2016 -2021 Class 2: Actions 2021 - … Criteria WFD: Cost- effectiveness, other depending on group of measures Social risk HIGHMIDDLELOW high low FD: add criterium maximum social benefits

9. Content Legislation and organization Advantages and synergies Challenges Conclusion

10. Challenges Separate reporting to EU: items to be reported must be extractable Key differences WFD and FD

11. Challenges - key differences WFD and FD Area of application FD: subset of WFD water bodies with a significant flood risk

12. Challenges - key differences WFD and FD Scope of objectives Not always compatible Within FD Between WFD and FD Complicate assessment and prioritization WFD (quality)FD (quantity) EnvironmentWater management and safety (people at risk, damage) Environment Economic activity Cultural heritage

13. Challenges - key differences WFD and FD Timing of achieving objectives Estimation of benefits Quantification and monetization easier within FD  Higher sense of urgency  Higher social basis of public and politic support WFDFD Deadlines to reach objectives by 2021/2027 No deadline to reach objectives, prioritization to define which actions first Actions more linked to RBMP cycleLong term actions not bounded to RBMP cycle

14. Conclusion In Flanders challenging but successful integration of FRMP in RBMP with a lot of win- wins Critical success factors hinder some processes are geared to one another