US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Flood Risk Management Approaches As Being Practiced in Japan, Netherlands, United Kingdom, and United States Ray Alexander Deputy Chief, Office of Homeland Security Washington, D.C. May 24, 2012

US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ®

4 Nations’ Agencies  Explore risk-informed flood risk management approaches  Continue ongoing collaboration  Learn from others’ experiences

BUILDING STRONG ® Flood Risk Management Approaches Flood Risk Probability of flood hazard Vulnerability of individuals, society, environment Consequences

BUILDING STRONG ® Country Context Japan  Many assets, population in floodplain  Short time to flooding Netherlands  Major part of country is flood prone  Densely populated  Reliance on structural measures United Kingdom  Transition from flood defense to risk management  More holistic approaches United States  Many federal, state, others sharing responsibilities  Transition to risk-informed approaches

BUILDING STRONG ® Commonalities - Challenges  Adapting to new understanding of flood risks ► Climate Change ► Land-use decisions and flood risk management  Communicating with the general public ► Residual risk ► Promoting individual and societal responsibility  Aligning planning with action ► Identifying and meeting most critical risks ► Ensuring social, environmental, economic, political acceptability

BUILDING STRONG ® Commonalities - Approaches  Examining implications of climate change on flood hazards, vulnerabilities, consequences  Emphasizing communications and outreach  Increasing attention to environmental impacts and opportunities in flood risk management  Focusing on various aspects of cycle of emergency management

BUILDING STRONG ® Differences – Protection  Netherlands: specifies (risk-based) legislated level of protection  Japan: sets long-term aspirational goals for levels of protection along major rivers  United Kingdom and United States: use risk analysis informs decision-makers about options available to them

BUILDING STRONG ® Differences – Insurance  United States and United Kingdom: support separate flood insurance programs (provisions of the programs differ)  Japan: includes floods in comprehensive household insurance (government does not offer flood insurance)  Netherlands: government does not offer flood insurance

BUILDING STRONG ® Netherlands’ VNK Project Failure Mechanisms Levee Failure Probabilities and Consequences Prioritizing Levee Reinforcement measures (Levee System 36) Number of Fatalities (expected value) Levee System 36 Probability (per year)

BUILDING STRONG ® National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Strategy (England) Goal: “To ensure that the risk of flooding and coastal erosion is properly managed by using the full range of options in a co-ordinated way.”  Community focus and partnership working  A catchment and coastal ‘cell’ based approach  Sustainability  Proportionate, risk-based approach  Multiple benefits  Beneficiaries should be encouraged to invest in risk management Guiding Principles:

BUILDING STRONG ® Japan’s Suibo Activities  Activities executed by suibo-dan (local flood-fighting team) ► Normal days: preparation of flood-fighting storage, communication tools, flood drill (265,000 mobilized in 2004) ► During flood: warning, patrol, levee protection activities (900,000 in 2011)  2005 Suibo Act to enhance ability of local communities

BUILDING STRONG ® Conclusion and Next Step  Collaboration resulted in ► Sept joint report ► Greater awareness and understanding ► Ability to leverage events and perspectives  Continuing to engage in mutually- beneficial international partnerships ► International Levee Handbook ► Interchange ► “Lessons learned”

BUILDING STRONG ® Questions?