1. Good Practices on Disaster Prevention in Europe Project overview and status report

2. Contents Introduction & objectives of the study Project overview Status to date per theme Next steps for finalisation of the study Key questions for the day

3. Introduction Study is being carried out by a consortium led by Ecorys in partnership with CIMA, CGIAM, University of East Anglia. European Council agreed (Nov. 2009) on a Community Framework on disaster prevention within the EU, setting an EU prevention policy framework aiming to: Increase resilience to disasters Foster a culture of prevention and risk management across EU Share knowledge on good practices for prevention of disasters Develop guidelines on minimum standards for hazard-specific disaster prevention.

4. Objectives of the study Overall aim is to provide the Commission with a non-exhaustive list and assessment of good practices in disaster prevention, and draft guidelines for minimum standards. Working definition of good practice: A measure for which there is demonstrable evidence of effectiveness in increasing prevention, and for which there is demonstrable evidence that it is appropriate and feasible to apply.

5. Project Overview Study is divided into three tasks: 1.Collect a non-exhaustive sample of practices in prevention for all themes and all over Europe 2.Establish what constitutes a good practice in disaster prevention + create a short-list of good practices 3.Translate these good practices into minimum standards for disaster prevention Five hazard-specific themes: i.Horizontal measures (multi-sectoral, multi-hazard) ii.Earthquakes and tsunamis iii.Floods and storms iv.Heat waves, droughts and forest fires v.Industrial hazards and other measures

6. Project progress Tasks carried out… Initial sample of over 450 practices in 26 European countries Exploratory interviews held with key experts Clustering of practices into categories: 1.Organisational (legislation, strategies and financing, etc.) 2.Informational (awareness raising, training, etc.) 3.Structural (infrastructure, building codes, etc.) Remaining tasks… Next step = thematic expert workshops Create short-list of practices defined as ‘good’ Further explain dynamics and details of selected good practices (verification of good practices) Use good practices as a basis for translating them into minimum standards

7. Workshop summary: Horizontal measures What should the guidelines for min. stds. look like? Guidance will be most useful at local level. How can EU provide this type of guidance? Guidelines should help work towards solving a problem in prevention that has been identified by several Member States. And should be written in a way towards solving the problem e.g. land-use planning. Guidelines could draw on HFA priorities But take into account that the current HFA ends in 2015 Guideline should be realistic to apply in all MS and should not require unreasonable costs. Focus on filling in gaps that are not yet covered by other processes and guidelines.

8. Workshop summary: Horizontal measures (cont’d) Ideas for minimum standards on horizontal measures... An integrated, multi-level governance approach should be at the centre of the min. stds. guidelines. Strengthen the development of national platforms for multi- stakeholder dialogue Cross-scale aspects (e.g. good communication and assistance in two directions between local and national governments). Generate risk data on small hazard events & feed this into policy and insurance sectors Risk assessments at the local level Guidance on disaster loss data collection. Incorporation of climate adaptation into risk assessment.

9. Workshop summary: Horizontal measures (cont’d) Ideas for minimum standards on horizontal measures... Guidance on harmonising early warning systems to improve cross-border prevention efforts. Advocate for the 4 essential elements of EWS Education designed to provide advice on response to risk and not merely alert people to problems Update and reassess education methods as new technological tools become available. Link insurance risk premium to prevention measures. Financial incentives from EU not only to governments but also to private sector. Guidelines on disaster-proofing investments (both EU and national levels).

10. Workshop summary: Earthquakes & tsunamis  --> Distilled ideas of areas where minimum standards can be developed based on good practice experience Specific areas for earthquake & tsunami theme: Focus on mitigating vulnerability. Hazard can not be prevented. Minimum criteria for building codes & retrofitting Areas applicable on a multi-hazard (horizontal) level: Inspection, verification of implementation of existing legislation Education, awareness of general public (e.g. school programmes) Information availability to the public (e.g. results of hazard mapping) Early warning systems Harmonisation of terminology (e.g. risk, hazard, vulnerability, etc.) Means through which a good practice can be transferred to other countries

11. Workshop summary: Floods & storms Workshop was useful to see how to best interact the min stds guidelines with existing legislation and initiatives.  we can learn from guidance and information exchange that is already going on at Floods working group. Guidelines should start with a set of overarching principles that can help define good practice Works well in a given context Public access to information Involvement of different stakeholders within decision-making Principle of subsidiarity Having a learning culture taking lessons learned into account Taking interaction with climate adaptation into account Cannot be contradictory to other environmental goals, etc. Interaction with existing legislation

12. Workshop summary (cont‘d): Floods & storms Horizontal minimum standards could give guidance on… how to extract value out of research and implement into practice land use planning disaster loss data collection monitoring and audit against performance criteria. capacity building for professionals. lessons learned on how to raise public awareness using new technologies one portal for all risk information (all hazards included) and integrated approach to awareness raising. Integration of early warning systems into risk mngt plans cross-border cooperation

13. Workshop summary: Heat waves, fires and droughts Good practice inventory could be supplemented with examples for: Practices on information and prognosis systems; Successful stakeholder involvement measures; Practices highlighting cross-border cooperation (e.g. tools for information sharing, harmonisation of terminology, etc.); Bottom-up approaches to training and awareness-raising; and Innovative education measures, such as e-learning modules.

14. Workshop summary (cont’d): Heat waves, fires and droughts Min. Stds. for droughts should focus on implementation of drought management plans and existing guidance. Horizontal minimum standards could give guidance on… Better implementation of existing legislation and guidance documents; Public participation; Monitoring and evaluation; Harmonisation of data collection and data sharing; Disaster risk insurance premiums linked to mitigation measures; and Cross-border cooperation (joint management plans, sharing of information, etc.).

15. Workshop summary: Industrial risks For industrial risks, the minimum standard is the implementation of the SEVESO Directive. For guideline development, explore topics that go beyond / fill gaps. Criteria for selecting good practice include… Simple and clear Extent of uptake by all stakeholder groups ease of comprehension and communication Robustness Demonstrable implementation success Degree of effectiveness Sustainability and continuity

16. Workshop summary (cont’d): Industrial risks Horizontal minimum standards could give guidance on… Risk assessment Mapping of risk in view of land use planning Risk communication / public access to information How to stimulate a safety culture Risk insurance Promoting feedback loops Education and capacity building

17. Key questions for today Which practices can be highlighted as particularly good and why? Is there any important good practice missing from draft? What distinguishes a good practice from a general practice? Which criteria could be used to identify a good practice? What ideas can we distil from reviewing the good practices for translating these into minimum standards for disaster prevention? What should or shouldn’t be included when drafting guidelines?

18. Thank you for your attention. For further information, please contact koen.rademaekers@ecorys.com