The Danube is the most international river in the world.
Thirteen countries together comprise 99% of the territory
of the basin and a further five countries have small amounts of land area in the basin. These thirteen major countries and the European Union signed the Danube River Protection Convention in 1994, that committed them to coordinated management of water resources. The Danube River Protection Convention is the legal frame for co-operation to assure protection of water and ecological resources and their sustainable use in the Danube River Basin. The goals of the Danube River Protection Convention include: � To strengthen international cooperation in the Danube River Basin � Ensure sustainable water management � Ensure conservation, improvement and rationale use of surface and groundwaters � Control inputs of nutrients and hazardous substances from point and non-point sources and accidents � Control floods and ice hazards � Reduce pollution loads of the Black Sea from sources in the Danube As can be seen from this list, flood control belongs to the main scopes of the Danube Protection Convention. That is why the Joint Action Programme of the ICPDR, agreed to at the end of 1999, addressed the issue of minimising the impact of floods and necessitated the development of an Action Programme for Sustainable Flood Protection by 2005. The disastrous floods in August 2002 demonstrated the urgency of the needs for the coordinated flood protection policy in the Danube River Basin. In Bavaria, floods affected the Danube from Regensburg to Passau, and many tributaries including the Inn, Traun, Salzach and Regen. The extent of damage to infrastructure and private properties amounted to 230 million Euro. In Austria, August floods caused eight fatalities and entailed enormous financial damage. They damaged important infrastructural facilities, caused crop failures, destroyed production sites and interrupted production. The calculations assumed the direct damage amounting EUR 3.1 billion. Moreover, additional indirect damage stemmed from loss of output and consequential losses, such as the potential loss of jobs. In the Morava River Basin in Czech Republic 20 communities were affected by floods. Major damage was caused to urban settlements, infrastructure and agriculture. Damages amounted to EUR 11.7 million. Floods affected also parts of central Slovakia, which were inundated by flash floods and an area around Bratislava was impacted by the Danube flood. 144 settlements and 8,678 hectares of land were flooded. Damages amounted to EUR 36.2 million and emergency measures cost some EUR 2.2 million. In Hungary, several municipalities were affected by the flooding of the Danube near Visegrad. About 2,000 people had to be evacuated, and 4,370 homes were damaged. More serious damage was successfully avoided by flood prevention structures and emergency interventions, however. The overall cost of the emergency operation in Hungary was EUR 33 million. Flash floods in the Suceava region of northern Romania caused 11 casualties, while 1,624 houses were flooded, and more than 1,000 km of roads and 567 bridges were destroyed. Gas, electricity and communication networks were also badly damaged. These devastating floods further accelerated the efforts of the ICPDR to elaborate the Action Programme. At the 5th ICPDR Ordinary Meeting in 2002 the Contracting Parties decided to establish an Expert Group on Flood Protection (FP EG). This new expert body was charged with a clear priority task � to elaborate an Action Programme for Sustainable Flood Protection in the Danube River Basin until the end of 2004. This Action Programme, has been developed and was officially adopted at the ICPDR Ministerial Meeting held on 13 December 2004 in Vienna. The Programme is based on the sustainable flood protection programmes developed in the various Danube countries as well as on networking existing structures and Sustainable flood protection in the Danube River Basin* Philip Weller and Igor Liska International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) * Some of the text for this presentation has been taken directly from the Action Programme for Sustainable Flood Protection in the Danube River Basin, December 2004. Copyright � 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK using the future-oriented knowledge base accumulated through a wide range of activities over the past decade. The overall goal of the Action Programme is to achieve a long term and sustainable approach for managing the risks of floods to protect human life and property, while encouraging conservation and improvement of water related ecosystems. Given the area, the complexity and the internal differences in the Danube River Basin, the Action Programme represents an overall framework, which needs to be specified in further detail for sub-basins. At the beginning of the Action Programme, there is a description of the general hydrological and climate characteristics of the Danube River Basin as well as an overview of floods and flood protection in that area. The section on �General considerations, basic principles and approaches� of the Action Programme refers primarily to UN-ECE Guidelines on Sustainable Flood Prevention, EU Best Practices on Flood Prevention, Protection and Mitigation and to EU Communication on flood risk management, COM(2004)472. The major principles advocated are: (i) the shift from defensive action against hazards to management of the risk and living with floods (ii) the river basin approach taking into account the Water Framework Directive, (iii) joint action of government, municipalities and stakeholders towards flood risk management and awareness raising, (iv) reduction of flood risks via natural retention, structural flood protection and hazard reduction, and (v) solidarity. Targets of the Action Programme are set on a basin-wide and a sub-basin level taking into account the above-mentioned principles. There are four major basin-wide targets: � Improvement of flood forecasting and early flood warning systems; interlinking national or regional systems � Support for the preparation of and coordination between sub-basin-wide flood action plans � Creating forums for exchange of expert knowledge � Recommendation for a common approach in assessment of flood-prone areas and evaluation of flood risk. At the sub-basin level six targets have been identified in the Action Programme: � To reduce the adverse impact and the likelihood of floods in each sub-basin through the development and implementation of a long-term flood protection and retention strategy based on the enhancement of natural retention as far as possible � To improve flood forecasting and warning suited to local and regional needs as necessary � To increase the capacity building and raise the level of preparedness of the organizations responsible for flood mitigation � To develop flood risk maps � To harmonize design criteria and safety regulations along and across border sections � To prevent and mitigate pollution of water caused by floods. The measures of the Action Programme are directly linked with the targets mentioned above. As regards the sub-basin measures, the Action Programme provides a recommended structure of the flood action plans to be prepared at the sub-basin level and gives an overview of activities to be considered during their preparation. Decisions on the framework of implementation of the sub-basin Action Plans is the task and responsibility of the countries affected, according to their national legislation as well as their bilateral and multilateral agreements. In sub-basins of multinational interest, development of Action Plans should be coordinated using existing frameworks such as the working groups under the Tisza Forum or Sava Commission. Where the mechanisms of sub-basin-wide cooperation do not exist, consideration of the establishment of the appropriate working forums is recommended. Financial resources necessary for the implementation of the Action Programme should be based on the national budgets and other national sources, on EU funds, including new cohesion policy funds, and on the loans from International Financing Institutions. Of importance is the link between the flood prevention efforts and the work to complete management plans under the EU Water Framework Directive. The ICPDR is the platform for the development of the Danube Basin Analysis Report (WFD Report) and the conclusions of the analysis are clearly important for flood control. The report concluded that hydromorphological alterations in the Danube Basin are significant. In total about eighty percent of the natural Danube floodplains have been lost. Of significance flood protection works are a major factor in causing alterations and threatening the good ecological status required under the Water Framework Directive. Efforts have begun to examine how the River Basin Management Plans required under the Water Framework Directive (2009) will be integrated with the work the countries are doing on flood protection. The challenge for the ICPDR is to ensure that these efforts are compatible and complimentary. Further floods in 2005 have reminded us again of the urgency of those efforts. 1 INTRODUCTION After Kassel (Germany, 1999) and Beijing (China, 2002) the 3rd International Symposium on Flood Defence was held in Nijmegen (the Netherlands). One of the objectives of this Symposium is to present new developments in flood defence sciences and therefore stimulate new directions and/or integration among them. The themes that have been identified in that respect are (1) Frameworks, (2) Measures and Solutions, (3) Policy Making and (4) Scientific Developments. This theme report gives an overview of the papers that have been submitted for Scientific Developments. 2 SELECTION OF PAPERS Floods are the most common and widespread natural disasters. The ISFD symposia have promoted and facilitated the dissemination of flood-defence science to benefit audiences with backgrounds ranging from practicing professionals to the general public. We hope the papers submitted and selected for this symposium can continue to achieve this tradition. Science has to be the foundation of flood management measures. Better information leads to better decision making and thus better flood management. This assignment was well understood by most authors. By far most contributions for this symposium have been submitted for Scientific Developments. The abstracts and papers are generally of high quality, however, some of the abstracts and papers had to be rejected. A total of 96 abstracts has been submitted which ultimately resulted in 63 papers. Of those 63 papers 24 have been selected for oral presentation and the rest for poster presentation or transferred to another, more suitable theme. To avoid competition between presentations the organization has decided against the parallel programming of sessions with the same theme. This means that during the symposium there will be four consecutive sessions for Scientific Developments. The large number of papers and the limited number of available time slots called for the difficult task to select the papers for oral presentation. Selected are those papers that give a good overview of the flood science, report on new developments, or present a view or vision that challenges audiences to critically think about a specific task in flood science. Furthermore, papers must be of interest to a wide audience. Among papers that deal with similar subjects, only the most relevant one is selected. 3 COUNTRIES AND CATEGORIES An international symposium like this attracts people from all over the world. Yet there appears to be a Scientific Developments ISFD3 M.H.I. Schropp Institute for Inland Water Management and Waste Water Treatment (RWS RIZA), Arnhem, The Netherlands T.W. Soong US Geological Survey, Illinois Water Science Center, Urbana, IL, USA ABSTRACT: Highlights, trends, and consensus from the 63 papers submitted to the Scientific Developments theme of the Third International Symposium on Flood Defence (ISFD) are presented. Realizing that absolute protection against flooding can never be guaranteed, trends in flood management have shifted: (1) from flood protection to flood-risk management, (2) from reinforcing structural protection to lowering flood levels, and (3) to sustainable management through integrated problem solving. Improved understanding of watershed responses, climate changes, applications of GIS and remote-sensing technologies, and advanced analytical tools appeared to be the driving forces for renewing flood-risk management strategies. Technical competence in integrating analytical tools to form the basin wide management systems are demonstrated by several large, transnation models. However, analyses from social-economic-environmental points of view are found lag in general Copyright � 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK distinct geographical distribution. Table 1 shows that most contributions are from Europe, with Asia in second place. As with most symposia the host nation is very well represented with about 30% of the contributions. In contrast, there are only few contributions from North and South America, Africa and Australia. This not only holds for the Scientific Development theme but also for the other themes. We think here lies a task for the organization committee of the next symposium on flood defence to attract more contributions from these regions. Absolute protection against flooding can never be guaranteed. In fact, over the years there has been a shift in approach from strengthening protection to accepting an increased chance of flooding. The objective is to minimize the damage should a flood occur, and to develop strategies that are sustainable. To emphasize this shift the phrase �From defence to management�was chosen as the theme for this symposium. Flood management has many components including management of disasters, of environment, and of risks. Climate, hydrology, hydraulics, geomorphology, ecology, and social-economics are the underlying disciplines for analysing measures to accomplish the goals of management. Seven topics were decided upon in 2003 as a guideline for abstracts and subsequent paper preparations. The topics and numbers of abstracts and papers contributed to each subject are listed in Table 2. It is satisfying to see that many contributions to Scientific Developments reflect the theme of the symposium. 4 MODELLING AND MAPPING Most papers (44%) have been submitted for the topic �Flood forecasting, modelling and mapping�, a topic of traditional engineering now aided by advancements in computer technology and accessibilities to GIS data layers and procedures. Emphases of the papers in this subject range from the development and application of climate-surface-groundwater model systems to techniques for estimating model parameter values. The development of a (real-time) flood forecasting system for a watershed is one trend in this subject and is discussed in a number of papers for river systems ranging from the Goldersbach River (75km2) in Germany (G�tzinger et al.) to the Yangtze River (1.8 million km2) in China (Markar et al.). Performance of these models differs according to how precipitation, tributaries, channel network, friction coefficients, alluvial or rigid bed, topography and groundwater-surface interactions, and many other factors are modelled. Precipitation is a major source of uncertainties in rainfall-runoff modelling. Identifying the rainfall characteristics by their sources (typhoon and thunderstorms) improves discharge estimation for flood-control projects in urbanized areas (Fukuoka & Tanioka). More importantly, fluctuations in precipitation levels have grown wider over time, thus it is necessary to develop technologies to properly assess variations contained in the rainfall predictions and the associated water management models (Kawasaki et al.). More insight in the hydrological properties of a river system can be gained by reconstructing historical floods: Gautier et al. and Lu et al. both reconstruct flood events from the late 19th century, the former to improve flood forecasts, the latter to extend hydrological time series. Remotely-sensed data provide the information for model validation (Villanueva & Wright, Hunter et al.) or can be used for developing flood risk information (Li) and flood management (Ritzen et al.). Huizinga et al. found that better results are obtained when floodmap areas are translated to water levels by using pre-calculated tables. However, flood extent and water level do not correlate well in steep areas. Although many papers contribute to the advancement of modelling techniques in conjunction with the use of remotely sensed data or digital terrain data, none of the papers discusses potential errors in these digital data, how to 118 Table 1. Contributions by region. Oral Region Abstracts Papers presentations Europe 55 40 18 Asia 38 21 6 USA 1 1 0 South/Central America 2 1 0 Total 96 63 24 Table 2. Contributions by topic. Oral Topic Abstracts Papers presentations Environmental 6 3 2 impact of floods Erosion and (stage 7 4 1 increase due to) sedimentation Flood forecasting, 38 28 8 modelling and real time mapping History of and 14 4 2 experience with flood management Hydrology and 8 5 2 meteorology Information, 21 18 9 management/decision support systems Landslide, debris flows, 2 1 0 banjirs and flash floods Total 96 63 24 Copyright � 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK handle when the scale of the base maps changes, and the consequences in model results. Verification of system models also needs to be emphasized in the development. Predicting flood heights also requires information about changes in bed formations and elevations. One vivid example is the disastrous annual flooding in Bangladesh (Islam & Sultan-Ul-Islam) that results from sediment laden fluvial discharge, monsoon rainfalls, and human activities. Construction of embankments along alluvial rivers can cause aggradation of the river bed and hence increase of flood stages. Rogeliz et al. investigate such a case for the town of Villavicencio (Columbia) using an 1D morphological model. Noteworthy is the paper by Takebayashi and Okabe, who have developed a bed deformation model for braided streams. They conclude that the number of streams decreases under unsteady flow conditions, and the presence of vegetation on islands enhances this process. 5 INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT For the subject �Information, management/decision support systems� the trend from flood defence to risk management is obvious in the papers by Kron et al. and by J�pner & Tzschirner who present tools for analysing flood risks. A proper and transparent decision model for a variety of flood mitigation measures is approached by balancing costs and benefits (Waarts & Vrouwenvelder). Quite a few papers are case studies based on recent floods. This underlines the notion that the availability of funds for flood research often depends on the occurrence of (near-) calamities. Experience shows that interest in flooding issues fades a few years after the latest flood. Integrated Water Management (IWM) for river basins is an approach for analysing suitable strategies for long-term (drought) and short-term (floods) situations. This concept is reflected in a number of papers, particularly those dealing with decision support systems for spatial planning. Here numerous aspects of river management (e.g. flood control, inland shipping, nature restoration, agriculture) are brought together in one tool to facilitate the decision making process. Climate change is testing the conventional techniques of flood management in terms of building preventive structures. New ideas are forming, for example, seeking storage within the catchment rather than raising river dikes (Walesch). Spatially oriented decision support systems have given an important push to this trend from building higher and stronger dikes to lowering flood levels by giving more room to the river. Papers that deal with this subject are for instance the ones by Van Schijndel and De Kok & Huang. On the other hand, Berben & Tank numerically illustrate that an unwanted discharge distribution can result from widening a river reach in a network in an expectation to lower stages at that stretch. 6 RIVER EMBANKMENTS Structural protection such as strengthening or raising the dikes remains an important subject in flood management. The use of airborne laser altimetry to produce detailed maps of embankments for assessing their geometric structure and therefore for preventing floods is discussed by Franken & Flos. Developing a DSS to optimise dike maintenance are new approaches to old problems. A dike safety assessment system, including the safety (and how to assess it) and risk (what kind of safety level should a dike have) of a dike is presented by Xu. Dike failures are simulated using 2D modelling by Lin et al. or 1D modelling by Paquier et al. and Zagonjolli et al. Li presents a flood risk information management system for dike failure events for the Lower Yellow River in Shandong Province in China. Flooding dynamics after embankment breach have been analysed numerically by Lin et al., Zagonjolli et al. and Paquier et al. Aureli et al. found that the breaching position is the main parameter affecting flooding dynamics. Field inspection remains a necessary component in assuring the structural soundness of a dike, and experiences offered by Blommaart et al. provide valuable insights in that respect. 7 SOCIAL SCIENCES Most contributions to Scientific Developments are of a technical nature. In contrast there are only a few papers with a social angle. One important element in flood risk management is to educate civilians to live with risk and learn from the past. Dealing with multiple stakeholders in a multifunctional system also means dealing with unstructured problem situations, where values 119 Figure 1. Promoting risk awareness is a constant concern. Copyright � 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK are debated and knowledge is uncertain. The solution to such a problem can benefit from the mapping of mental models used by players involved in the decision making process (Kolkman et al.). Environmental depletion in Guatemala and the Czech Republic after recent flooding disasters was investigated by Aguilar Bobadilla. It is interesting to note that Guatemala has more information available about damages caused by Hurricane Mitch than the Czech Republic has after the 2002 flood. Possible future research questions with a social angle are: � What is the extent of public risk awareness in general and flood risk awareness in particular? � What do people expect from the authorities when it comes to flood protection? Can those responsible live up to these expectations? � What are regional differences with regard to these questions? 8 CONCLUSIONS Sixty-three high quality papers have contributed to the Scientific Developments theme of which 24 are recommended for oral presentation. Trends in flood management that can be distinguished are (1) shift from flood protection to flood risk management, (2) shift from reinforcing structural protection to lowering flood levels, and (3) sustainable management through integrated problem solving. Scientific information based on new knowledge and inter-disciplinary approaches has to be involved in flood management, notably the social sciences and spatial planning. The use of GIS systems, remotely-sensed data and developing decision support systems are commonly reported in papers submitted to Scientific Developments. Two objectives of this symposium are: (1) to increase the application of new research results and (2) adjust research programmes to questions from the field. The scientists have presented their results, now it is up to the river managers. A challenge for ISFD4 in 2008 is to attract more contributions from regions other than Europe and Asia.