Implementing nature- based flood protection Principles and implementation guidance ©2017 The World Bank The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development The World Bank Group 1818 H Street, NW List of acronyms Washington, D.C. 20433, USA CEDA Central Dredging Association Internet: www.worldbank.org DHI Danish Hydraulic Institute This work, including this document and the nature-based solutions online platform, was co-financed by the Program on Forests (PROFOR), the Global FEEM Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), and Deltares. FRM Flood Risk Management The online platform that provides up-to-date implementation guidance GCCA+ Global Climate Change Alliance and a database of nature-based solutions projects can be accessed at: naturebasedsolutions.org GCF Green Climate Fund GEF Global Environment Facility Attribution Please cite the work as follows: World Bank. 2017. Implementing GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster nature-based flood protection: Principles and implementation guidance. Reduction and Recovery Washington, DC: World Bank. GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit Disclaimer This document is the product of work performed by the World Bank and IFI International Financial Institution GFDRR with external contributions. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the views IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on of any individual partner organizations of the World Bank, GFDRR, the Climate Change Executive Directors of the World Bank, or the governments they represent. IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denomination, and other information M&E Monitoring and Evaluation shown in any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the MRV Monitoring, Reporting and endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Verification NBS Nature-Based Solutions The contents of this report are the result of (scientific) research and should be interpreted related to this (scientific) research only. Use of the information NGO Non-Governmental Organization is at your own expense and risk. NOAA National Oceanic and Rights and Permissions Atmospheric Administration The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, PEDRR in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution Partnership for Environment and to this work is given. Disaster Risk Reduction SIDS Small Island Developing States Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to the Office of the Publisher, The World Bank, 1818 H SUDS Sustainable Urban Drainage Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2422; e-mail: Systems pubrights@worldbank.org. UNDP United Nations Development Photo credits Programme Building with Nature Indonesia is a program by Ecoshape partners and the Indonesian Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF), and the UNEP United Nations Environment Indonesian Ministry of Public Work and Human Settlement (PU) Programme University & Research Centre, UNESCO-IHE, Blue Forests, and Von UNISDR United Nations Office for Disaster Lieberman, with support from the Diponegoro University, and local Risk Reduction communities; p4, p5, p6, p17, p27 and p30 Adobestock; p18 and p31 UNU United Nations University Stefan Verschure; p6 and p7 USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Thinckstock; cover and p8, p20, p23, p28 Clipart Panda; p10 VIA Vulnerability Impact Assessment Guus Schooneville; p12 Van beek images.com; p14 and p25 WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development WRI World Resources Institute Implementing nature- based flood protection Principles and implementation guidance Acknowledgements This guideline is a product of collective effort by Deltares, the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), the Program for Forests (PROFOR) at the World Bank, Ecoshape, and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Furthermore, this document could not have been made without the input from all participants of the workshop on scaling up nature-based flood risk reduction, held on April 11th and 12th 2017 at Deltares (NL). Authors: Deltares: Bregje K. van Wesenbeeck, Stéphanie IJff GFDRR: Brenden Jongman, Simone Balog , Stefanie Kaupa, Lauren Bosche World Bank: Glenn-Marie Lange, Niels Holm-Nielsen Ecoshape: Henk Nieboer UNDP: Yusuke Taishi, Pradeep Kurukulasuriya Independent consultant: Imen Meliane Contributors and reviewers: The Water Institute of the Gulf: Denise Reed HR Wallingford: Jonathan Simm US Army Corps of Engineers: Todd S. Bridges Deltares: Stephanie Janssen, Karen Meijer IH Cantabria: Inigo Losada The Nature Conservancy & University of California, Santa Cruz: Borja G. Reguero Royal Haskoning-DHV: Petra Dankers The Nature Conservancy: Adam Whelchel Wetlands International: Marie-Jose Vervest, Susanna Tol Environmental Defense Fund: Natalie Peyronnin, Shannon Cunniff University of Western Australia: Ryan Lowe Delft University of Technology: Stefan Aarninkhof UN Environment/IUCN CEM: Karen Sudmeier UN Environment: Marisol Estrella UNU Institute for Environment and Human Security: Fabrice Renaud Design and Layout: Deltares: Welmoed Jilderda This document is drafted based upon comments and remarks from the following workshop participants: Name Organisation Abdi Yusuf United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Ap van Dongeren Deltares Armando Guzman The World Bank Bastiaan Lammers Boskalis Bontje Zaengerling The World Bank Boris van Zanten Wolfs Company Carrie de Wilde Ecoshape Cees van de Guchte Deltares Christophe Briere Deltares Claire Jeuken Deltares Ellis Penning Deltares Els van Lavieren Conservation International Femke Schasfoort Deltares Fokko van der Goot Ecoshape Hans Pietersen Rijkswaterstaat Hessel Winsemius Deltares Jaap Kwadijk Deltares Jaap van Thiel de Vries Boskalis Luca Sittoni Ecoshape Madhuvi Kisoen Ministry of Public Works Suriname Marcel Stive Delft University of Technology Mary Bryant US Army Corps of Engineers Mathias Bertram Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) Mathijs van Ledden GFDRR Melisa October Ministry of Agriculture, Guyana Mindert de Vries Deltares Minke van Rees Turing Foundation Monica Altamirano Deltares Natasja van den Berg Tertium Nicolas Desramaut The World Bank Nigel Pontee CH2M Dionisio Perez Blanco Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) Peter Goodwin University of Idaho Pieter van Eijk Wetlands International Quirijn Lodder Rijkswaterstaat Remment ter Hofstede Van Oord Robert McCall Deltares Salah Dahir United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Saskia Marijnissen United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Stefan Aarninkhof Delft University of Technology Susanna Tol Wetlands International Vincent Vuik Delft University of Technology Drone picture of Demak showing sediment accumulation behind Wouter Gotje Witteveen + Bos permeable grids 1 INTRODUCTION 1 Introduction Floods are the most frequent and damaging of all natural hazards globally. Between 1994 and 2013, floods accounted for 43% of all recorded natural events, affecting nearly 2.5 billion people1. During exceptional years such as 1998 and 2010, total losses due to flooding have exceeded $40 billion. In the coming decades with climate change, urbanization, and demographic growth, the impact of coastal, fluvial, and pluvial flooding is expected to increase significantly. Effective flood risk management is critical to protect people and their livelihoods from flooding and to limit future losses. Nature- based measures and their ability to address flood risk are receiving increasing attention. Failing sea wall 6 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Until recently, most flood risk management involved implemented on an ad-hoc basis. While there have conventional engineering measures. These measures are been significant advances in the design and testing sometimes referred to as “hard” engineering or “gray” protocols for ecosystems and their role in risk mitigation, infrastructure. Examples include building embankments, these solutions have yet to be fully evaluated and dams, levees, and channels to control flooding. Recently standardized. As a result, some nature-based projects the concept of “nature-based solutions”, “ecosystem- for climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction have based adaptation”, “eco-DRR” or “green infrastructure” not been designed properly, leading to ineffective and has emerged as a good alternative or complement to unsustainable results. As is the case for engineering traditional gray approaches. Nature-based solutions solutions, there is no ‘one size fits all’ approach given make use of natural processes and ecosystem services that climatic, ecological, and hazard characteristics are for functional purposes, such as decreasing flood risk variable and are often poorly understood. However, or improving water quality. These interventions can be the sector of traditional infrastructure has a long completely “green” (i.e. consisting of only ecosystem history in which they have fully developed protocols elements) or “hybrid” (i.e. a combination of ecosystem and standards, whereas nature-based solutions are elements and hard engineering approaches). emerging approaches that need the same level of investigation of lessons learned and development of Nature-based solutions can help mitigate flood (the standards. Therefore, guidance and standards need focus of this document), drought, erosion and landslide. to be developed for nature-based solutions which In addition, they may help decrease vulnerability to can aid project designers, implementers, funders, climate change while also creating multiple benefits evaluators and others and others involved in project to the environment and local communities. These development. Guidance also facilitates achieving a include sustaining livelihoods, improving food security, common understanding of likely effectiveness and risk and sequestering carbon. Such solutions can be reduction outcomes. This document attempts to be one applied to river basins (e.g. reforestation and green step towards standardized guidelines for all nature- embankments), coastal zones (e.g. mangroves and based solutions. wetlands), and cities (e.g. urban parks). The objective of this document is to present five There is increasing momentum for the use of nature- principles and implementation guidance for planning, based solutions as part of resilience-building strategies, such as evaluation, design, and implementation of sustainable adaptation, and disaster risk management nature-based solutions for flood risk management as portfolios. Awareness of nature-based solutions from an alternative to or complementary to conventional communities, donors, and policy- and decision-makers engineering measures. The potential users of these principles and implementation steps are professionals This document attempts to be one step in risk management and climate adaptation, NGOs, donors, and international organizations. This guidance towards standardized guidelines for all was developed in cooperation with a large and diverse nature-based solutions. group of international funding agencies, research institutes, NGOs, governmental organizations, and engineering firms. is growing. Further, investors and the insurance industry are increasingly interested in nature-based solutions. This document has two parts: From a climate change perspective, ecosystem-based adaptation has been highlighted as a priority investment 1. Principles, describing key considerations to consider area in global funds such as the Global Environment when planning nature-based solutions Facility or the Green Climate Fund. 2. Implementation guidance, describing the timeline and activities needed to implement nature-based As with conventional engineering solutions, the solutions effective application of nature-based solutions requires a comprehensive assessment and implementation 1. UNISDR, C. (2015). The human cost of natural disasters 2015: process. However, nature-based solutions are often A global perspective. 7 PRINCIPLES 1 Introduction A number of pilot projects and technical reports have recently been released on the implementation of nature- based solutions for flood risk management. Five basic principles to guide future nature-based project development have come out of these pilot projects—both during design, implementation, and maintenance—and reports on the topic. The main purpose of these principles is to promote best practices and prevent common pitfalls in the use of nature-based solutions. As such, these principles are meant as guidance for project development and initiation and not as a specific design manual. For more detailed information on design, existing technical guidelines (including the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)2, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)3, and Ecoshape4) and guidelines under development (USACE) can be consulted. 8 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Principle 1: System-scale perspective of nature-based solutions for flood risk reduction, these Addressing nature-based solutions for climate change solutions should be considered from the outset in terms adaptation and disaster risk reduction should start with of their potential over large spatial scales. a system-wide analysis of the local socio-economic, environmental, and institutional conditions. Time scale In addition to considering appropriate spatial scales, a Spatial scale long time frame should be adopted to exploit the full The physical landscape of coastal systems, rivers, and potential of nature-based solutions. Ideally, time frames deltas has been shaped by the interaction between of 20 to 50 years or longer should be applied. For sediments, hydrodynamics, and ecology. Often these shoreline communities affected by flooding, the threat systems are strongly influenced by both riverine and is increasing due to changes in watershed land use, coastal processes, but also human use and existing more intense precipitation, sea-level rise, siltation of infrastructure play a role. System integrity is influenced river mouths, increased storminess, and possible failure by fluxes of sediment, nutrients, and fresh and salt of conventional risk reduction structures (when present). water occurring at different scales. Any change in these Risk reduction strategies also need to reflect the range of fluxes will trigger other processes that induce changes conditions that can occur and how systems change over in landscape morphology and ecology. A change in time. Consideration of the scale of the problem and fluxes could result in the reduction of sediment input how it will change over time is essential5. Ecosystems or the alteration of currents. For example, alteration of evolve over decades or even centuries, which means upstream sediment loads may influence downstream that the benefits they provide also change over time. coastline stability and in this way determine the success One of these benefits is that they can adapt to changing and feasibility of downstream or coastal interventions. environmental and risk conditions6, thereby potentially The planning of nature-based measures should take exceeding the design lifetime of engineered structures. into account these processes at various spatial scales, Awareness-raising amongst coastal residents and other starting with the largest scale at which they play a role or stakeholders that their system is changing, sea level is can be influenced. Ideally, planning of a conventional rising, and that each storm is different in terms of track, engineering structure would take the same approach. size, and intensity is crucial7. However, whereas these large-scale considerations optimize functionality and avoid unforeseen effects for Local socio-economic and institutional context engineering structures, they are indispensable for the In addition to an evaluation of effects and feasibility on success of nature-based solutions. the environmental system, each infrastructure solution should be rooted in the local socio-economic and Ecosystems are highly dependent on the larger enabling institutional context. Because nature-based solutions environmental processes. Often, ecosystems cannot be for flood risk are less common than traditional sustained by managing individual sites in isolation. The measures, their implementation in the local socio- integrity and health of ecosystems at landscape scales economic and institutional context can be a challenge. determine the potential of nature-based solutions to For example, there is relatively little documentation limit flood risk. If evaluated on small spatial scales, of their effectiveness, costs, and benefits. Therefore, the impact of nature-based solutions on risk reduction nature-based solutions may require a more integral may seem trivial, whereas on larger scales the presence perspective to ensure a common understanding and integrity of ecosystems may make an enormous of their role, including the integration of opinions difference on the overall impact of flood events. Therefore, to appreciate and fully develop the potential 5. Groves, D. G., Panis, T., & Sanchez, R. (2017). 2017 Coastal Master Plan: Appendix D: Planning Tool. Version Final. Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority. 2. NOAA (2015). A Guide to Assessing Green Infrastructure Costs 6. van Wesenbeeck, B. K., de Boer, W., Narayan, S., van der Star, W. and Benefits for Flood Reduction. https://coast.noaa.gov/data/ R., & de Vries, M. B. (2016). Coastal and riverine ecosystems as docs/digitalcoast/gi-cost-benefit.pdf adaptive flood defenses under a changing climate. Mitigation and .W., Burks-Copes, K.A. et al. (2015). 3. Bridges, T.S., Wagner, P Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 1-8 Use of Natural and Nature-Based Features (NNBF) for Coastal 7. Clipp, A., Gentile, B., Green, M., Galinski, A., Harlan, R., Rosen, Resilience. ERDC SR-15-1. Vicksburg, MS. U.S. Army Engineer Z., Saucier, M. (2017). 2017 Coastal Master Plan: Appendix B: Research and Development Center. People and the Landscape. Version Final. Baton Rouge, Louisiana: 4. https://www.ecoshape.org/en/design-guidelines/ Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority. 9 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance When planning nature-based solutions, it is important to take a system scale perspective. and objectives of stakeholders. A larger array of target which results in an acceptable level of residual stakeholders needs to be involved consistently in order risk. Secondly, the assessment is an important basis to increase the legitimacy of the measures. Achieving for analyzing the effectiveness of the various measures broad acceptance for a nature-based solution may be available for risk reduction. complex and time consuming. This will pay off in later project stages. Ideally, such broad acceptance should Risk assessments are not always conducted in nature- also be obtained for conventional engineering projects. based projects despite their importance for successfully implementing a flood risk reduction measure. Lack of Principle 2: Risk and benefit assessment an appropriate risk assessment may result in a lack of of full range of solutions understanding of the project’s risk reduction capabilities. A thorough assessment of risks and benefits of the Additionally, the broad portfolio of measures that full range of possible measures should be conducted, could be used for flood risk reduction is not always covering risk reduction benefits as well as social and taken into account. This may lead to implementation environmental effects. of suboptimal solutions in critical locations or to ill- fitted risk management strategies with potential long- Flood risk management projects generally start with term negative impacts for risk, ecosystems or other the identification of the three elements of risk: hazard, community interests. exposure, and vulnerability8,9. Conducting a risk assess­­ ment has two purposes. Firstly, the assessment Although traditional risk assessment methods can provides a baseline understanding of what is at stake. be applied to nature-based solutions, they do not It enables the decision-maker to define a risk reduction incorporate the full range of benefits generated by nature-based projects. To fully appreciate the potential of nature-based measures, risk assessments should 8. IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. be extended with a benefit assessment to quantify Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment their ecosystem and socio-economic benefits. These Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, additional benefits also need to be a standard element Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp. of cost-benefit analyses. This will enable a more holistic 9. UNISDR (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction comparison to traditional engineering approaches 2015-2030. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction: Geneva, Switzerland. that incorporates a project’s long term sustainability. 10 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Finally, risk assessments should incorporate projections Systematic knowledge development to fill these gaps is of future changes in risk as a consequence of climatic, necessary to advance uptake of nature-based solutions. socio-economic, and institutional changes. Assessments Developing and applying quantifiable engineering should account for the dynamic nature of the risk protocols for ecosystems will require close collaboration reduction functions of natural ecosystems including the evolution of ecosystem services over time. To fully appreciate the potential of Principle 3: Standardized performance nature-based measures, risk assessments evaluation Nature-based solutions for flood risk management need should be extended with a benefit to be tested, designed, and evaluated using quantitative assessment to quantify their ecosystem criteria. and socio-economic benefits. There are international standards and guidelines for engineered flood management structures, such as the International Levee Handbook10 and the Coastal between ecologists, or specialists with a strong Engineering Manual11. These standards and guidelines understanding of the natural systems, and engineers. are adopted for design, testing, and construction. They This will increase our understanding of the role that not only provide guidance for implementation but ecosystems can play in risk reduction. Ultimately, it also for evaluating the effectiveness of such measures. allows for impartial comparison of effectiveness, costs, Similar standards for nature-based structures are not and benefits of different types of solutions. yet available. Consequently, the uptake of nature-based solutions would be facilitated by an open and transparent Principle 4: Integration with ecosystem process to determine performance standards. This will conservation and restoration allow for standardized quantification of their effectiveness Nature-based solutions for flood risk management in reducing hazard or exposure. A transparent process should make use of existing ecosystems, native ensures that uncertainties are considered as part of the species, and comply with basic principles of ecological design. Further, such standards will enable comparison restoration and conservation. with conventional engineering interventions. Restoration, conservation, and management of eco­ Numerous documents are currently available that can systems are crucial elements of the implementation inform designers. For example, for wave attenuation of nature-based solutions for flood risk management. by vegetation there are numerous peer-reviewed Ecological conservation and restoration, and morphology papers documenting the latest advances in numerical (the study of natural processes including hydrodynamics models12,13. These numerical models can be used and sediment transport) are scientific disciplines with to make integrated designs as long as conservative large bodies of theory and practice that will advance estimates for vegetation parameters are adopted in proper implementation of nature-based solutions. For order to avoid overestimating the performance of example, it is known that ecosystems that are more such measures. At the same time, there are several diverse are also more productive and more resilient knowledge gaps regarding the performance of nature- based interventions for flood risk management. These gaps are mostly related to their performance under CIRIA (2013) The International Levee Handbook. CIRIA, London, 10. United Kingdom, 1332 pp. extreme storm conditions or tsunamis. Although U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2002). Coastal Engineering 11. numerical models are used to investigate performance Manual (CEM), Engineer Manual 1110-2-1100. U.S. Army Corps of vegetated ecosystems under storm conditions, of Engineers, Washington, D.C. (6 volumes). van Wesenbeeck, B. K., de Boer, W., Narayan, S., van der Star, W. 12. validation data from experiments or from the field is R., & de Vries, M. B. (2016). Coastal and riverine ecosystems as often lacking. adaptive flood defenses under a changing climate. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 1-8. Vuik, V., Jonkman, S. N., Borsje, B. W., & Suzuki, T. (2016). 13. Knowledge gaps also exist related to their persistence Nature-based flood protection: the efficiency of vegetated over longer time scales and subject to multiple events. foreshores for reducing wave loads on coastal dikes. Coastal engineering, 116, 42-56. 11 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Experimental facilities such as this Delta Flume can be used to test vegetation performance under extreme conditions to disturbances14. Further, there is ample evidence restoring it. Sometimes conditions are altered to such an that restoration by planting of a single crop or exotic extent that returning to original states is not realistic. This species leads to adverse effects and therefore restoration may warrant restoration to another type of ecosystem efforts better focus on reconstructing proper abiotic and adjustment of restoration targets. In addition, climate conditions15. However, this knowledge is not always change impacts on ecosystems may result in transitions reflected in on-the-ground flood risk reduction projects. between ecosystems. It is important to understand the Large-scale mangrove planting efforts, for example, are risk reduction value of the current ecosystem and how that risk profile will change as the ecosystem changes. System evaluations help identify Leveraging available knowledge on ecosystem opportunities and constraints for restoration and management will not only reduce the risk of failure in project implementation, but also avoid effective conservation and restoration undesirable side effects such as the replacement or of ecosystems. destruction of other valuable ecosystems. For example, mangroves are often considered crucial for reduction of waves generated by coastal storms. However, often conducted with unsuitable species in unsuitable previous mangrove habitats (the high intertidal zone) areas and therefore fail unnecessarily. Moreover, poorly are often already used for aquaculture, agriculture, or planned restoration and planting efforts may result in habitation. As a consequence, mangrove restoration is unanticipated effects on other valuable ecosystems often conducted in the lower intertidal zone. Restoration such as intertidal flats and sea grass beds. As for risk in this zone can negatively impact shellfish, birds, sea assessments, restoration practices should start with a grasses, and dugongs. Such tradeoffs need to be system evaluation to determine the pre-existing types of anticipated so that communities are aware of risk ecosystems and abiotic processes. System evaluations reduction outcomes, including the implications for food help identify opportunities and constraints for effective security and ecosystems. Guidelines for restoration of conservation and restoration of ecosystems. Present ecosystems can be found on the Ecoshape wiki pages16. and future conditions should be taken into account to A good manual for informed mangrove restoration is determine the target ecosystem and the feasibility of also available17. 12 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Principle 5: Adaptive management Nature-based solutions for flood risk management need adaptive management based on long-term monitoring. This ensures their sustainable performance. As nature-based solutions evolve over time, they require continuous management and monitoring of their effectiveness. The management of nature- based solutions should strongly draw on knowledge of ecosystem management, which requires a proper understanding of ecosystem dynamics. One example of an adaptive management strategy is the nourishment of extra sediment, as sometimes practiced in beach and dune systems. Another example is the exclusion of grazers or predators if these limit ecosystem recovery. The dynamic nature of ecosystems combined with long- 1. Plan: Defining the desired goals and objectives term trends necessitates adaptive management of any evaluating alternative actions and selecting a ecosystem-based strategy. Implementation of nature- preferred strategy with recognition of sources of based solutions should therefore be accompanied by an uncertainty; adaptive management plan. 2. Design: Identifying or designing a flexible management action to address the challenge; Adaptive management is a systematic approach that 3. Implement: Implementing the selected action facilitates flexible decision-making18. It is an iterative according to its design; process in which management actions are followed by 4. Monitor: Monitoring the results or outcomes of targeted monitoring and assessment. As outcomes from the management action; current and future management actions become better 5. Evaluate: Evaluating the system response in understood, the decision-making and management Adaptive Management relation Process to specified (CEDA, goals and2015) objectives; and can be refined. The adaptive management cycle is 6. Adapt: Adapting (adjusting upward or built on a predictive outcome or target. It consists of downward) the action if necessary to achieve the implementation, monitoring, data evaluation, decision- stated goals and objectives. making, and adjustment of possible management measures. This cycle should be repeated at a regular Adaptive Management Process (CEDA, 2015) interval over the lifetime of the measure. Adaptive management activities should be defined in a specific plan, with funding made available over time. Such activities include multiple management scenarios should the measure not perform as expected. Assessment of the flood risk reduction potential may include modeling and 14. van Wesenbeeck, B.K., Griffin, J.N., van Koningsveld, M., Gedan, K.B., McCoy, M.W., Silliman, B.R. (2017) Nature-Based Coastal monitoring, while the system should meet the criteria for Defenses: Can Biodiversity Help? Reference Module of Life risk reduction whenever a hazard occurs. The adaptive Sciences 2017. management cycle ensures consistent management 15. Lewis Iii, R. R. (2005). Ecological engineering for successful management and restoration of mangrove forests. Ecological after the project implementation, but also provides Engineering 24:403-418. a basis to develop lessons learned for future project 16. https://publicwiki.deltares.nl/display/BWN1/EDD+-+Building+wi th+Nature+Building+Blocks implementation. Similarly, the cycle should include 17. Lewis, R.R. and Brown, B. (2014). Ecological Mangrove documentation of effective measures and management Rehabilitation. A field manual for practitioners. http://www. methods. Flexibility in the donor requirements helps to mangroverestoration.com/pdfs/Final%20PDF%20-%20Whole%20 EMR%20Manual.pdf enable adaptive management of nature-based solutions 18. CEDA (2015). Integrating Adaptive Environmental Management for flood risk management. into Dredging Projects. http://www.dredging.org/media/ ceda/org/documents/resources/cedaonline/2015-01-ceda_ positionpaper-integrating_adaptive_environmental_management_ into_dredging_projects.pdf 13 2 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE 1 The five principles outlined some general ‘rules’ for sustainable and effective nature-based solutions for Introduction flood risk management. This section of the guidance summarizes the steps needed for the planning, assessment, design, implementation, monitoring, management, and evaluation of nature-based solutions for flood risk management. It follows the general cycle of a flood risk management project and therefore are also applicable for gray measures. However, it provides more information and detail on specific aspects that need further attention when implementing nature-based solutions. STEP 1 STEP 2 Define Problem, Develop These guidelines build and expand upon existing Project Scope, Financing guidance developed by other organizations, and Objectives Strategy including NOAA, USACE, and Ecoshape. This document attempts to cover the entire project cycle Scale of natural Local from preparation to monitoring and evaluation. system suitable investment in for problem interventions, solving green financing • Stakeholder • Budget needs estimate • Maps of area • Overview of of interest resources • Project objectives 14 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Projects that aim to implement nature-based solutions must consider biophysical and socio-economic processes on different scales in space and time. This calls for the engagement of experts from different disciplines such as hydrology, engineering, ecology, economics, and social sciences. As with other risk management projects, the design and implementation of nature-based solutions should be done in a participatory manner with full engagement of all relevant stakeholders. This is particularly important as nature-based solutions present an opportunity to address flood risks by aligning conservation, development, and poverty alleviation objectives. This can create new synergies and collaborations between governments, local communities, and NGOs, but also relevant private sector stakeholders. Ecosystem Outputs aspects STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 7 STEP 8 Conduct Develop Estimate Select and Implement and Monitor and Ecosystem, Nature­ the Costs, Design the Construct Inform Future Hazard, based Risk Benefits, and Intervention Practices and Risk Management Effectiveness Assessments Strategy Ecosystem Ecosystem Effectiveness Green and Conservation, Monitoring presence, potential, of ecosystem hybrid option restoration, ecosystem health, and option measure design and/or performance, functioning identification establishment resilience, of ecosystem and stability elements •H  azard and  ist of •L • Cost-benefit •D esign of • Intervention • Monitoring risk maps measures analysis measures lifetime reports • Ecosystem  trategy map •S • Impact •Monitoring plan • Regulatory • Actions if and land- assessment • Maintenance frameworks needed use maps • Risk assess­ plan • Implemented • Share lessons •F  lood zone ment with measures learned maps inverventions Project implementation timeline Feedback activities 15 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Step 1: Define problem, project scope, 3. Set project objectives considering the full targeted and objectives range of benefits Broadly identify the flood hazard, relevant stakeholders, Define quantitative project objectives and the main and beneficiaries. The scope of the problem needs to be reason of your initiatives. Any general constraints on identified within the larger context, forming the basis project options need to be identified. Potential barriers of further analyses in the subsequent steps. Project may include legal constraints, fundraising problems, objectives encompassing the necessitated flood risk or an uneven distribution of the benefits19. Stakeholder mitigation and additional benefits need to be defined. interviews can be used to identify the full range of desired benefits that should be taken into account. 1. Identify the study area, problem, key Potential benefits are flood risk reduction and erosion stakeholders, and beneficiaries control, but may also include other services such as Identify the direct area of interest and the main flood enhanced ecosystem quality, positive impact on the hazard(s) and risk(s) that the project intends to address. livelihood of local communities, and opportunities for Possible stakeholders and beneficiaries inside and recreation. outside of the intervention area should be identified. Meetings should be held with these stakeholders in order to understand their needs. Tradeoffs between Outputs stakeholders need to be acknowledged. 1. Documentation of stakeholder needs 2. Maps of area of interest depicting main risks 2. Define the project scope and set boundaries and root causes to these risks Define the scope of the problem within the greater 3. Measurable project objectives physical, social, and environmental context. Determine the limits of boundaries of the project’s physical intervention area that is suitable for addressing the problem (as stated in principle 1, e.g. watershed, ridge Deltares (2015). A framework for sandy strategy development. 19. to reef, estuary, etc.). Institutional and legal constraints, 55 pp. http://www.dezandmotor.nl/uploads/2016/09/sand- and opportunities should also be identified. motor-businesscase-def.pdf Step 1: Best practice example and additional resources Example project The Ecoshape consortium consists of engineering companies, contractors, research institutes, and NGOs. It implements a large-scale project on restoration of eroding mangrove coasts in Central Java, Indonesia. The project is conducted in joint operation with the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and the Ministry of Public Works and Housing. It entails a unique combination of engineering and water management knowledge with an intensive community-based approach. The objective of the project is to halt coastal erosion through the construction of permeable bamboo dams that mitigate wave energy and increase elevation by trapping sediment. These measures create suitable conditions for mangrove recovery. The project continues to work on rehabilitation of aquaculture ponds, including the creation of alternative income sources. Clear targets are defined for different coastal stretches in the design and engineering plan. Each year, a new design and implementation process begins. This is based on community consultation and on monitoring results from previous years. Before project initiation, commitment from local communities and governmental organizations on national and local level was sought. Read more: Tonneijck et al. “Building with Nature Indonesia: Securing Eroding Delta Coastlines. Design and Engineering Plan.” (2015): https://www.ecoshape.org/uploads/sites/2/2016/07/Ecoshape-2015- Result-1-5-Design-Engineering-Plan-v7-0-LAYOUT-Nature-style_2.pdf. Additional information on the Building with Nature project in Indonesia: www.indonesia.buildingwithnature.nl 16 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Building permable dams More information Specific guidance on how to conduct a stakeholder analysis can be found on the Ecoshape website: https://publicwiki.deltares.nl/display/BWN1/Tool+-+Stakeholder+analysis More information on involvement of local communities using a field school approach can be found with Blue Forests (http://blue-forests.org/). Blue Forests is a local NGO based in Indonesia focused on empowering local communities to rehabilitate and maintain sustainable use of coastal ecosystem resources. Blue Forests provide environmental education, ecological mangrove rehabilitation, coastal field schools, and coastal business schools. Step 2: Develop Financing strategy the measures. Consider non grant-based funding such Evaluate financing options for the proposed measures as environmental taxation or payments for ecosystem and secure green finance opportunities, if possible. services. These types of funding can influence behavior, spur autonomous adaptation, and subsequently affect 1. Identify funding sources cost-effectiveness and cost-efficiency of the project. Identify the financing sources available to implement nature-based solutions. Investigate the availability of 2. Assess project timeline, risk, and feasibility in light national and local government financing and related of financing implementation capacities. Check how international Assess requirements of financing sources regarding financing sources, including International Financial implementation of the project, including environmental Institutions (IFIs), link to national frameworks related to and social safeguards. Recognize that nature-based environmental solutions. Consider leveraging green or solutions may be different than conventional solutions climate-related financing, such as the Green Climate in terms of disbursement, performance, and risk Fund and the Global Environment Facility. Recognize timelines. This applies to the implementation as well that financing follows value creation and that the as the monitoring and evaluation phases. Consider benefit streams (types and recipients of benefits) will institutional feasibility and adaptability, given the (large) typically drive the financing sources available. However, investments in capital necessary to make nature-based creation of added value or additional revenue streams solutions successful. can potentially be used to attract the private sector to invest in nature-based solutions. Consider the 3. Check for (adverse) incentives availability of co-financing by local stakeholders, which Realize that traditional financing sources may can help support local commitment to the success of incentivize conventional solutions rather than hybrid 17 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance or green measures. This relates to the better known based solutions may be commissioned by the ministry project structures, possible shorter timelines, or larger of environment or fisheries. Meet with all potential disbursement amounts. Also be aware that financing stakeholders. Then, consider how the social and sources for traditional infrastructure and nature- environmental aspects can benefit each other. Results based solutions may go through different programs of the vulnerability and opportunity mapping may bring or institutions. For example gray solutions tend to go forward different benefits for multiple stakeholders through the ministry of infrastructure whereas nature- and hence, multiple ongoing incentives. A cost- Step 2: Best practice example and additional resources Example project In 2000, The Nature Conservancy in collaboration with the U.S. Agency for International Development established a water fund. This fund directs money from water users to improve protection of the Condor Biosphere Reserve in Ecuador. In 2004 the fund managed $2.1 million, financed by the Quito Municipal Water and Sewage Agency, the Quito Electricity Company, and the Andina Beer Company. The project reports successes on both social and ecological fronts. The nearly $5 million raised for conservation action have been used to plant 3.5 million trees, hire nine new park guards that provide new jobs and increase enforcement, build local capacity for monitoring and conflict resolution, fund hydrologic modeling and monitoring, and provide environmental education to children. Financial support for conservation came from an appreciation of the role that healthy forests play in supplying and regulating the availability of clean water. A key to the success of this project may have been a long record of flow and sedimentation monitoring data collected during hydropower operations. This data provided a clear signal of a degrading ecosystem service before any catastrophic event. Condor Biosphere Reserve Read more: Tallis, Heather, et al. "An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105.28 (2008): 9457- 9464. URL: http://waterfunds.org/esp/the-quito-water-conservation-fund-fonag/ More information The Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA+) offers a searchable repository of 47 sources of technical and financial support in Africa, Asia, Caribbean and Pacific regions in GCCA+ priority areas: http://www.gcca.eu/technical-and-financial-support The Global Environment Facility (GEF) provides guidance on payment schemes for ecosystem services: https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/publications/28252nomarks_0.pdf 18 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance benefit analysis could be leveraged to overcome these strategies, laws, municipal development plans), relevant incentives. Consider how the complexity of the project institutes, and stakeholders. Stakeholders are defined matches the transaction costs and desired project size of as people, groups, and entities affected by current the funding sources. It should also be explored whether and future flooding events as well as those benefiting the implementation of this project can be bundled with or negatively affected by the proposed risk reduction other development interventions and programs in order measures. These types of data can be difficult to collect to reach a ‘sizable project’ that can be part of an IFI as they tend to be available in a wide range of places, pipeline. for example across governmental organizations. In data scarce regions, the risk assessment often needs to rely on remote sensing or other globally available Outputs data products. If these are not available or sufficient 1. First budget estimate for project to conduct a risk assessment, more effort needs to be 2. Overview of available and possible future invested in local data collection. resources 3. Assess current ecosystem extent, condition, and functioning Step 3: Conduct ecosystem, hazard, and Analyze if there are ecosystems that currently play a role risk assessments in flood protection. Understand how these ecosystems Conduct an assessment of the type and intensity of can further contribute to reducing flood risk. Ecosystem the flood hazard, including the effects on population, health should be measured by indicators such as assets, and infrastructure with specific attention to the species diversity, abundance, and biomass. Historical role of the ecosystem. changes and trends in the ecosystem should be researched with the objective to obtain a first impression 1. Conduct an integrated system assessment of the of the ecosystem’s stability and resilience, and to gain intervention area understanding of its original regulatory and provisioning Outline the direct area of interest (based on step 1) services. At the same time, future trends that may and assess the wider socio-economic environmental influence these conditions should be anticipated. The and institutional systems. This should include an role of ecosystems in reducing risk can be identified by assessment of the biophysical systems, the ecosystem, examining their role in: reducing or regulating hazards and provided ecosystem services. Further detail the (e.g. wave attenuation, current reduction), reducing main flood hazard type affecting the study area and the exposure of people and assets to hazards (e.g. by its source (started in step 1). River, coastal, and pluvial keeping people out of dangerous zones), and reducing flooding can be driven by a range of factors such as vulnerability (e.g. through supporting livelihoods and extreme local rainfall, high river discharge, or coastal economies, and providing key services). Qualitatively storm surge. Broadly define the various ecosystem types articulate what the potential is for expanding the risk in the area and their risk reduction potential. Note that reduction potential of ecosystems by conservation or the area relevant from an ecosystem management restoration efforts. perspective may be much larger than the area at direct risk of flooding (see Principle 1). 4. Model current and future flood hazard Conduct a probabilistic hydrological and hydraulic 2. Gather data modeling assessment and map flood zones with the Collect data that can be used for the risk assessment. potential intensity and location of all relevant types This includes data for hazard (e.g. rainfall, river of flooding. This should result in potential inundation discharge, sea level, and elevation data), exposure maps for a range of return periods and appropriate (e.g. population density and distribution, infrastructure planning horizons. location), and vulnerability (e.g. building typology, poverty). To assess the political dimensions of the system, 5. Quantify current and future flood exposure and risk collect information on the governance of relevant Combine the flood hazard maps with exposure and resources. This specifically applies to the strategic, vulnerability information to produce estimates of legal, and regulatory framework (national or regional human and economic impact. Future scenarios should 19 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance be developed using climate change scenarios affecting ones. Local or national policies may affect government flood hazard, deterioration scenarios for any flood prioritization of ecological or engineering interventions. management infrastructure, and socio-economic Assess the dependence of communities on the ecosystem scenarios informed by expected changes in population, and how this may be influenced by interventions. land-use, and urbanization. Outputs 6. Identify opportunities and barriers to 1. Maps indicating current and future hazard, implementation in the socio-political setting exposure, and vulnerability Assess the legal, regulatory, financing, socio-economic, 2. Maps and analysis showing land use, ecosystem and political context and their effects on the feasibility presence and health, and importance of of implementing various risk reduction interventions. ecosystem for disaster risk reduction Consider opportunities for enforcement of existing 3. Maps (with model results) indicating flood zones regulations or laws or possibility of development of new for different return periods Step 3: Best practice example and additional resources Example project The European Commission and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) led a Coastal Partners project in Port Salut, Haiti. National and community baseline assessments were undertaken in local hilly, coastal, and sea environments. The objective was to identify exposed or vulnerable areas and select appropriate reforestation interventions to reduce the risk of floods, storms, and soil erosion. Through marine and terrestrial field surveys, remote sensing, and GIS modeling, detailed baseline maps were developed. Exposure under current and future ecosystem management scenarios was modeled. Interviews, multi-stakeholder focus group discussions, and participatory mapping also contributed to the baseline assessments. Read more: UNEP (2016). Coastal Partners: Applying ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) through a ridge-to-reef approach in Port Salut, Haiti. URL http://wedocs.unep.org/ handle/20.500.11822/14211 More information 1. NOAA Guidance for Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Green Infrastructure: https://coast.noaa. gov/data/docs/digitalcoast/gi-cost-benefit.pdf 2. Methodologies for assessing dynamic risk: https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/ Riskier%20Future.pdf 3. Open-source hazard data and screening: www.thinkhazard.org 4. WRI Global Flood Analyzer: http://floods.wri.org 5. Information on finding data for risk assessments at Open Data for Resilience Initiative (OpenDRI): https://opendri.org 6. UNEP’s Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Methodology Project (RiVAMP): http://www.unep.org/ disastersandconflicts/news/rivamp-jamaica Urban river park 20 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Step 4: Develop nature-based risk management strategy Identify possible strategies to reduce flood risk and Then, more active intervention and creation of evaluate whether nature-based solutions are a good ecosystems is another option. Working with natural alternative or valuable addition to conventional processes and green solutions both represent nature- options. Wherever possible, prioritize nature-based based flood risk management solutions. Green- solutions by respecting the following sequence when gray solutions refer to hybrid solutions that combine evaluating intervention options. ‘No intervention’ is traditional infrastructure such as dikes with ecosystem taken as a starting point and followed by considering restoration or other natural solutions. Only if there is management options, which are non-structural measures no other option available, traditional (gray) solutions such as early warning systems or spatial planning. can be selected. Then consider if working with natural processes only will achieve desired safety levels. This option constitutes working with present natural processes and ecosystems, hence managing the present ecosystem.  onsider the socio-political context, existing 1. C to opt for no-regret strategies is always preferable. strategies and plans Specify indicators related to the risk reduction target Consult and build on national and regional based on the risk assessment such as prevented flood development plans and strategies. For the selection of damages or affected people. targets and measures, consider land tenure and the overall governance of resources in the intervention area. 3. Identify green or hybrid options with similar Identify opportunities and roadblocks to implementation performance as, or value addition to, over the expected project duration. Certain projects conventional options may benefit from state-led, top-down governance and Based on the ecosystem analysis and flood risk leadership to ensure sustainability of the intervention, assessment, identify possible green or hybrid solutions while others will thrive under the leadership of the civil to address the specific flood risk issue. Consider that society or a public-private coalition. Assess the local non-structural measures (such as early warning systems capacity to build and maintain desired interventions, and spatial planning) and various combinations of which is needed to select effective and realistic measures green, conventional, and non-structural measures later in the process. may be needed to address the specific flood risk issue. Consider how conservation, expansion of an existing 2. Select a flood reduction target ecosystem, or restoration of a destroyed ecosystem Identify the acceptable level of risk considering can contribute to reduce flood risk. Look at previous stakeholder interaction from Step 1 and the projects and possible green solutions for lessons realistic investments available for risk reduction and preliminary cost estimates. Assess which factors measures. Clearly identify the time horizon for the may influence the stability and performance of vital risk management approach. Engineering structures ecosystems. Also assess how they can be integrated into generally have a lifetime time frame of 50 years. the wider system management. Construct a portfolio of Therefore, a time horizon of at least 50 years is feasible strategies and accompanying measures. desirable. However, time frame may depend on the amount of future uncertainty and available budget. There are various sources of information on the For example, with very uncertain futures short-term range of possible nature-based flood management benefits may outweigh long-term planning. However, solutions and their pros and cons, including the UNEP 21 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Green Infrastructure Guide20, the WWF Flood Green 6. Discuss risk reduction targets and possible Guide21, the Nature Conservancy22, and the Panorama strategies with stakeholders platform23. However, while general information may Hold interactive stakeholder consultations to present be available on effectiveness and unit costs of nature- and discuss potential intervention areas as well as based solutions, the feasibility of each option will potential intervention strategies. Discuss risk reduction strongly depend on the local circumstances. targets and the (potential) role of ecosystems in reducing risk, using information from the risk and ecosystem  ssess integration of measure(s) with 4. A assessments. Aim to understand stakeholder interests conservation/restoration of existing ecosystems and preferences without raising expectations. Readjust Analyze to what extent the selected measures can be risk reduction priorities if necessary. implemented by conserving and restoring existing ecosystems. In addition, analyze to what extent new 7. Shortlist technically feasible and socially ecosystem creation or engineering is required and accepted interventions for further analysis what methods can be used. The ecosystem assessment Hold stakeholder meetings to discuss possible strategies performed under Step 3 can form a basis to select and phasing. To proceed with further analysis, select proper methods for conservation, restoration, and options that are technically feasible, economically management of ecosystems. Analyses of factors viable, and desirable from a range of stakeholder impeding or jeopardizing ecosystem health and perspectives. Integrate the full range of benefits resilience can be expanded here to steer selection of produced by an intervention in the shortlisting process appropriate measures. Make use of existing knowledge as well as stakeholder priorities. in restoration ecology. Use the guiding principles outlined above to apply proper restoration methods and not negatively impact other ecosystems in the area. Perform a full assessment on how the new measures Outputs may impact existing ecosystems. Analyze regulations 1. Overview of feasible measures to reduce risk, and development plans contributing to the preservation their estimated effects and implementation steps or restoration of ecosystems; also include the degree in 2. Outline of different strategies and their possible which they are enforced. phasing in time with a focus on no-regret and less costly strategies first 5. Adjust financing strategy With an estimation of project costs for risk reduction strategies comprising different sets of options, begin finalizing the funding strategy. Criteria for consideration should include the available grant size, application procedures, and mission of the donor. Be aware of lengthy application procedures and other requirements. Secure (co-)financing from stakeholders, governments, and the private sector to foster buy-in to the intervention, if possible. 20. UNEP (2014). The Green Infrastructure Guide for Water Management: Ecosystem-based Management Approaches for Water-Related Infrastructure Projects. http://www.unep.org/ ecosystems/resources/publications/green-infrastructure-guide- water-management 21. WWF (2017). Natural & Nature-based Flood Management: A Green Guide. http://envirodm.org/flood-management 22. Nature Conservancy (2014). A Flood of Benefits. Using Green Infrastructure to Reduce Flood Risks. https://www. conservationgateway.org/ConservationPractices/Freshwater/ HabitatProtectionandRestoration/Documents/A%20Flood%20 of%20Benefits%20-%20J.Opperman%20-%20May%202014.pdf 23. http://panorama.solutions/en 22 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Step 4: Best practice example and additional resources Example project UNEP’s project “Building Capacity for Coastal Ecosystem-based Adaptation in Small Island Developing States” is being implemented in Grenada and the Seychelles. In Grenada, social and ecological vulnerability impact assessments (VIAs) were conducted in three local sites (Lauriston Beach, Windward, and Grand Anse Bay). The VIA process focused on modelling and analyzing the impacts of climate change in terms of extreme events such as hurricanes and tropical storms. The focus was also on the impact of sea level rise on coastal communities and coastal/marine habitats, highlighting the problem of beach erosion in all three areas. Human activities such as building construction on beaches were also examined. Various coastal adaptation options were proposed based on the identified vulnerabilities. This included coral reef and mangrove restoration, locally managed marine areas, beach nourishment, breakwaters and stone revetments, among others. Coral reefs play an important role in protecting Small Island Developing States (SIDS) against impacts of climate change. Read more: Day et al. (2016). Building Capacity for Coastal Ecosystem-based Adaptation in Small Island Developing States (SIDS). Assessing Climate Vulnerability in Grenada and Responding with Coastal Ecosystem-based Adaptation Action. URL: http://www.intasave.pecreative.co.uk/documents/Publications/ Climate-Change-Science,-Policy-and-Practice/CARIBSAVE/BCCEbA-SIDS.pdf More information 1. Decision tree on whether nature-based solutions can be effective for your project: http://www. naturalinfrastructureforbusiness.org/tools/#tree 2. An overview of possible green measures for flood risk management by The Nature Conservancy (2014): https://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationPractices/Freshwater/ HabitatProtectionandRestoration/Documents/A%20Flood%20of%20Benefits%20-%20J. Opperman%20-%20May%202014.pdf 3. UNEP , Danish Hydraulic Institute, IUCN and The Nature Conservancy’s Green Infrastructure Guide for Water Management: http://www.medspring.eu/sites/default/files/Green-infrastructure-Guide-UNEP .pdf 4. For planning and strategy building including long-term uncertainty: https://www.deltares.nl/en/ adaptive-pathways/ 5. Model tool of the Natural Capital Project for integrated valuation of ecosystem services and tradeoffs (InVEST): https://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/invest/ 23 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Step 5: Estimate the costs, benefits, and 3. Assess the social and environmental impacts effectiveness Assess social and environmental impacts of the selected Quantify the effect of the possible measures on measure(s) and check whether remedial action is project objectives, including a cost-benefit analysis to required under national or international law or agreed compare the costs of construction and maintenance of guidance. For example, an intervention may require the measure against the range of (co-)benefits it will the involuntary resettlement of people or may have provide. This analysis should also address performance an impact on the existing ecosystem. Ensure costs are of measures in relation to the risk reduction target as included for any impacts which must be mitigated defined in Step 4. The results can be used to identify the as part of the project. If applicable, ensure that the most cost-effective measure. Depending on the progress proposed project implementation will be in compliance of the development of the project and the evolving with laws and safeguard standards of the respective nature of the stakeholder interaction described in Step country and organization(s) involved. 6 below, these analyses may need to be repeated with progressively increasing levels of detail. 4. Identify additional benefits associated with risk reduction measures 1. Model current and future flood risk with Identify the full range of benefits of interventions and traditional, hybrid, and nature-based options their value added to society and environment for all Integrate the feasible green and hybrid solutions options under consideration. Socio-economic and identified in Step 4 into the risk model developed in Step environmental benefits, monetized or not, should 3. Assess the flood hazard, exposure, and risk in the be presented for consideration in decision-making. current situation as well as under the climate and socio- Determine how various benefit streams may increase or economic projections with the possible options in place. decrease over time. Quantify and monetize benefits as Methodologies and models for quantitatively assessing much as possible using tools for ecosystem valuation. the effectiveness of green measures for reducing hazard An example is ecosystem goods and services such as an intensity are constantly under development. Critically increase in fish stocks or recreational value. Quantify enquire about the methodologies and assumptions the uncertainty in benefit estimation. Benefits for which used for this assessment. Use models wisely, where monetization is not desirable or achievable must find appropriate, adopting conservative parameter settings adequate representation in qualitative narratives. for deterministic models and appropriately broad parameter distributions in probabilistic models. Apply Nature-based solutions can have a range of benefits a sensitivity analysis to gain insight into future tipping beyond flood risk reduction, such as biodiversity points that may occur under changing boundary conservation, job creation (e.g. in agriculture and conditions (e.g. sediment loads, subsidence levels, fresh fisheries), recreation, tourism, and public health. water input) and that are relevant for the sustainability Describe these various expected benefits as thoroughly of nature-based measures. Quantify the uncertainty in as possible, ideally in economic terms. Non-monetizable the model outputs. benefits should be adequately described and included in the decision-making process. Any potential negative 2. Quantify risk reduction costs and benefits effects should also be described and quantified. Compute the per-unit and total investment and maintenance costs for each of the possible solutions. 5. Perform full cost-benefit and effectiveness analysis Compare the model damages without interventions to Perform a complete quantitative cost-benefit analysis the damages with possible solutions in place to estimate of each possible solution, including the target risk the primary risk reduction benefits, i.e. the difference reduction benefits as well as all other benefits. In between the situation with and without the intervention order to make a fair comparison of costs and benefits, now and in the future. In the calculations, consider the monetary values should be discounted and converted time it takes for the solution to finalize construction to net present value. Costs are paid in the early years of or become effective, as nature-based solutions may a project while benefits are realized year by year over require years to realize their full risk reduction potential. a number of decades. Describe the distribution of the costs and each benefit stream. 24 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Outputs 1. Cost-benefit analysis including the full range of values 2. Social and environmental impact assessments 3. Risk assessment with interventions Step 5: Best practice example and additional resources Example project 1. The rivers and coastlines of Lami Town in the Republic of the Fiji Islands are prone to flash and surge flooding. This town was the focus of an economic analysis of nature-based, hybrid, and conventional solutions. A comprehensive analysis of installation, maintenance, labor, and opportunity costs was conducted for each of four options. The costs of inaction were also calculated. The economic analysis was conducted using avoided damage estimates and incorporated ecosystem service benefits. Lastly, a sensitivity analysis was included based on time, discount rate, and estimated percent of damage avoidance. Read more: Rao, Nalini S. An Economic Analysis of Ecosystem-based Adaptation and Engineering Options for Climate Change Adaptation in Lami Town, Republic of the Fiji Islands: Technical Report. 2013. http://ian.umces.edu/pdfs/ian_report_392.pdf River in rural area of Fiji 2. Despite a dyke that provides the primary flood protection of the area, Koh Mueng, Thailand experiences flooding. To assess green and conventional infrastructure, an evaluation of the most effective flood mitigation measures was pursued through hydrodynamic simulations and evaluation of economic viability using cost-benefit analysis. The solution options were evaluated for flood risk reduction effectiveness using assessments of flood hazards, physical and economic vulnerability, and ecosystem service values. The cost-benefit analysis evaluated direct and indirect losses through physical and economic vulnerability of the building stock, infrastructure, cultural artifacts, and tourism industry. Read more: Vojinovic, Zoran, et al. "Combining Ecosystem Services with Cost-Benefit Analysis for Selection of Green and Grey Infrastructure for Flood Protection in a Cultural Setting." Environments 4.1 (2016). http://www.mdpi.com/2076-3298/4/1/3 25 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance More information 1. The NOAA Guidance for Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Green Infrastructure outlines methodologies for assessing the effectiveness of green solutions: https://coast.noaa.gov/data/docs/ digitalcoast/gi-cost-benefit.pdf 2. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) produced a report on the business case for natural infrastructure: http://www.naturalinfrastructureforbusiness.org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/02/WBCSD_BusinessCase_jan2016.pdf 3. ProjectSelect, also produced by WBCSD, is a free cost-benefit analysis that allows users to evaluate the long-term financial costs and benefits of natural and conventional solutions, as well as account for the non-financial co-benefits: http://www.naturalinfrastructureforbusiness.org/projectselect-tm/ 4. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), a global initiative to mainstream the values of biodiversity and ecosystem services into decision-making: http://www.teebweb.org/ Step 6: Select and design the intervention methods. Engineering designs should be based on Select the most effective and most appropriate option, detailed flood hazard and effectiveness modeling. based on the problem definition, the cost-benefit These designs should explicitly encompass both the analyses, and the local needs and capacity. Develop a ecosystem and engineering aspects in the case of detailed design and implementation plan. hybrid interventions. There are various technical design guidelines for nature-based interventions available, for 1. Select effective and feasible measure(s) in example through the Ecoshape consortium. collaboration with stakeholders Discuss cost-benefit and effectiveness analyses with 4. Draft maintenance plan stakeholders in (an) interactive session(s). Identify those To secure the flood risk reduction effectiveness of the stakeholders that should be involved to ensure the long- measure over time, a maintenance plan should be drafted term commitment to plans and strategies. as part of the selection and design phase. Maintenance costs can play a role in the selection process, and will 2. Design a robust monitoring system, starting with influence the optimal design. Furthermore, it is important baseline monitoring to decide who will be responsible for the maintenance To ensure the success of the project, conduct baseline and how the long-term financing will be arranged. Also monitoring and identify in an early stage how the think about embedding maintenance and protection in project will be monitored and evaluated. There are local laws and regulations. many kinds of evaluation systems, and it is not yet clear which system is appropriate for nature-based solutions. A different type of monitoring system may Outputs be required, e.g. monitoring and evaluation (M&E), 1. Design of measures or monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) with 2. Monitoring plan containing indicators, costs and responsibilities assigned. Logical framework target values, roles and responsibilities, and and results-based management approaches are the monitoring method and duration most common frameworks. Monitoring and evaluation 3. Maintenance plan should be tailored to each project. Decide upon the roles and responsibilities of the organizations who will do this follow-up work after the project is implemented. 3. Draft engineering design study Q R Produce a draft engineering design and feasibility study R of the selected measure(s), including detailed material 1:0 H and labor requirements. The engineering design should B be informed by the risk reduction target, the required integration of the measure in the existing ecosystem and By reducing wave height, mangrove trees can reduce the dike height that is needed to meet the safety standards and reduce by identified ecosystem management and restoration maintenance costs. 26 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Step 6: Best practice example and additional resources Example project As part of the Mozambique Cities and Climate Change Project, the World Bank is creating urban parks in the city of Beira. The objective is to increase the resilience of the city to floods by improving and safeguarding the natural drainage capacity of the Chiveve River. The first phase of the project included the rehabilitation of the riverbed, the construction of an outlet, the dredging of the fishing port, and the planting of 2,200 mangrove trees with active flood mitigation function. The second phase, which is being implemented at the time of writing, will focus on the further development of a multi-purpose green infrastructure solution along the stretch of the Chiveve River in Beira. This solution will include the creation of a large park along the river, public spaces, cycling paths, and overall green landscape planning. Read more: http://projects.worldbank.org/P153544?lang=en More information 1. Designing nature-based solutions: Building with Nature Guidelines: https://publicwiki.deltares.nl/ display/BWN1/Building+with+Nature 2. Information on design characteristics of green solutions for flood risk management, The Nature Conservancy (2014): https://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationPractices/Freshwater/ HabitatProtectionandRestoration/Documents/A%20Flood%20of%20Benefits%20-%20J. Opperman%20-%20May%202014.pdf 3. Incentives for Natural Infrastructure, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2017): http://www.wbcsd.org/Clusters/Water/Natural-Infrastructure-for-Business/Resources/ Incentives-for-Natural-Infrastructure Beira, Mozambique 27 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Step 7: Implement and construct aspects are implemented in harmony as per the design Implement the project in consultation with stakeholders; plan. ensure compliance with social and environmental standards. 3. Continuous stakeholder and community interaction during implementation 1. Revisit social and environmental impact Continuously inform and consult the key stakeholders assessment as identified in the previous steps. Ensure stakeholder Revisit the social and environmental impact assessment, ownership and involvement. In communications, including the standards and safeguards relevant to be sensitive to both the short-term impacts and the project. Start planning any required involuntary expected long-term impacts, but also on the gains for resettlement of inhabitants and preparing the communities and environment. Monitor impacts of implementation area to limit environmental impacts. the construction and rehabilitation work on the local stakeholders. Flexibly adjust the implementation of the 2. Consideration of ecosystem structure, species project where required based on changing stakeholder diversity, and ecosystem functioning needs and emerging information. Implement the engineering and ecosystem aspects of the project in accordance to the Principles. Also include the ecosystem integration as assessed in the Outputs previous steps. Closely monitor ecosystem functioning 1. Agreement on lifetime of intervention and impacts during the implementation phase. Any 2. Regulatory frameworks to sustain and unexpected impacts on ecosystem structure, species maintain intervention and functioning should be flagged. For hybrid solutions, 3. Implemented measures ensure that the engineering works and ecosystem Step 7: Best practice example and additional resources Example project A good example of a participatory design process is the storm water management system of the city of Malmö, Sweden. The city experienced socio-economic decline and floods from overflowing drainage. A collaborative solution aimed to retrofit the area with Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) as part of a broader regeneration project. The objective was to create a more sustainable neighborhood and to benefit biodiversity. An extensive and iterative process of stakeholder engagement was initiated during the design and execution of this project. The process involved a series of consultations with local residents, representatives from the local school, practitioners, city staff, and many others. The idea behind these consultations was to build awareness about the SUDS retrofit, its benefits and costs, and to obtain public perspectives on the desired design. This included regular meetings, community workshops, and informal gatherings. The approach became increasingly open and consultative, with approximately one-fifth of the tenants in the area having participated in dialogue meetings about the project. Amongst other topics, safety issues related to open water areas (e.g. retention pools) were discussed with residents as well as the potential loss of particular recreational opportunities in the area. In many cases, comments and concerns from stakeholders were taken into account and addressed in redesigned SUDS plans. Urban flood prevention via green infra­ structure in Mälmo 28 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance Read more: http://www.panorama.solutions/en/building-block/engaging-stakeholders-raise- awareness-and-support More information 1 The Natural Hazards - Nature-based Solutions platform details projects from around the world: http://naturebasedsolutions.org 2 NOAA Guidance for Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Green Infrastructure: https://coast.noaa.gov/ data/docs/digitalcoast/gi-cost-benefit.pdf 3 The WWF Flood Green Guide: http://envirodm.org/flood-management 4 What Will Adaptation Cost? An Economic Framework for Coastal Community Infrastructure (NOAA 2013): https://coast.noaa.gov/data/digitalcoast/pdf/adaptation-report.pdf Step 8: Monitor and inform future actions 3. Continuous community involvement Monitoring activities during and after the implementation The sustainability of a nature-based solution depends of a nature-based solution are needed to maintain its on community willingness and commitment. If the effectiveness and to grow an evidence base. They are community is not involved and does not see the value of also needed to record lessons learned for future use. the restored or created ecosystem, they may knowingly or unknowingly contribute to its decline. It is crucial to Monitor physical system, ecosystem status, species involve all social groups in the community by conducting diversity, and ecosystem functioning meetings to explain the project and its benefits. Carefully monitor the development of the ecosystem in the Practical guidance should be provided on the use and area of implementation, as well as the larger landscape. protection of vital ecosystems. It is important to ensure The aim is to assess how the intervention has affected that project representatives listen to the community. the area, how the ecosystem flood protection functions Sufficient time should be spent on addressing their are developing and whether ecosystem restoration is concerns. Community commitment can be increased in progressing according to plan. Monitor species diversity case of new employment opportunities derived from the and density over time to determine whether the ecosystem ecosystem. There are several documented examples of develops through different successional stages. Also assess nature-based solutions that were implemented with if these stages are occurring on the expected timelines. strong community involvement that can be used as guidance24. 1. Monitor risk reduction effectiveness Refer to the monitoring system (see Step 6.3) to 4. Review, evaluate, and act assess how the components of the project have been Monitoring and evaluation should generate insights on implemented. The extent to which the restoration and what works, what doesn’t work, and why. Monitoring creation of ecosystem elements are providing a growing also strongly informs maintenance and other necessary contribution to the risk reduction effectiveness should actions. Review all project components with special also be assessed. If monitoring results show significant attention to risk reduction effectiveness, community (and unexpected) physical changes, re-run the hazard impact, and environmental impacts. This monitoring and risk model with the evolved interventions in place and review process should include developments to assess the effect on damages. outside the project area that may influence the effectiveness of measures. Decide if structural and 2. Policy and regulatory framework development functional performance meet previously set standards and adjustment and project objectives. If not, decide on follow up As the benefits of nature-based solutions can be realized over many decades, it is important to understand the regulatory environment. Does it change over time? This For example, see EPA (2017). Green Infrastructure in Parks: A 24. will allow the project to adapt to forthcoming policies Guide to Collaboration, Funding, and Community Engagement: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-05/documents/ before they negatively impact the solution. gi_parksplaybook_2017-05-01_508.pdf 29 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance actions, regarding maintenance or even implementation of additional interventions. To enable scaling-up and improvement of global best practices, publish evaluations and share insights with other implementing organizations. Investigate possibilities for scaling up successful approaches in other areas. While the documenting of lessons should be done throughout the project, it is important for the success of other nature-based projects to capture and report these lessons in a way that is accessible more broadly. We encourage you to report your projects and lessons learned on the online platform ‘Natural Hazards – Nature-based Solutions’25. Outputs 1. Monitoring reports that discuss how the monitoring meets the target 2. Actions to change or improve the project, if needed Monitoring activities by members of the Coastal Field School - 3. Sharing of lessons learned Blue Forest 25. http://naturebasedsolutions.org/ Step 8: Best practice example and additional resources Example project New Zealand’s coastal parks have recently focused on restorative techniques focused on the use of indigenous sand-binding species, for example in the management of dune ecosystems in Christchurch. A collaborative and community-based vision for the area was established and management objectives were identified. These included a specific restoration plan for the dune system at the site, together with a monitoring plan. Other initiatives included the promotion of education on the area and the dune restoration initiative. A monitoring program was developed to measure the success of the key actions and provide useful information for future management decisions. The monitoring program has clearly shown changes in the dune system in response to the new management activities. Read more: https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/2014-038.pdf More information There are numerous online communities that support the advancement of nature-based solutions through a variety of approaches. These resources offer an opportunity to review and evaluate projects and share your own experiences to inform the development of future projects. The European Commission’s Oppla is a new knowledge marketplace; a place where the latest thinking on ecosystem services, natural capital, and nature-based solutions is brought together. http://www.oppla.eu The Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction (PEDRR) is a global alliance of UN agencies, NGOs and specialist institutes. PEDRR seeks to promote and scale-up implementation of ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and ensure it is mainstreamed in development planning at global, national, and local levels. http://pedrr.org 30 Implementing nature-based flood protection I Principles and implementation guidance The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and IUCN host the PANORAMA platform. This is a partnership initiative to document and promote inspiring, replicable solutions across a range of conservation and development topics. This enables cross-sectoral learning and inspiration. http://panorama.solutions/en The Natural Infrastructure for Business platform developed by WBCSD, CH2M (with support from The Nature Conservancy) and other member companies is designed to introduce business leaders and practitioners to natural infrastructure. http://www.naturalinfrastructureforbusiness.org Stockholm Environment Institute’s weADAPT is a collaborative platform on climate adaptation issues. It allows practitioners, researchers, and policy-makers to access credible, high-quality information. The platform also facilitates new connections between these stakeholders. https://www.weadapt.org GIZ hosts an Adaptation Community which offers an inventory of methods for adaptation to climate change. It also serves as a platform for the exchange of experience among practitioners. http://www. adaptationcommunity.net Building Ecological Solutions to Coastal Community Hazards. A Guide for New Jersey Coastal Communities. National Wildlife Federation (2017). https://www.nwf.org/CoastalSolutionsGuideNJ The Natural Hazards – Nature-based Solutions platform, managed by the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), the World Bank, and Deltares, provides a global overview of the nature-based or hybrid solutions projects implemented by a variety of organizations. The platform also houses these Principles and Implementation Guidance that are updated with lessons learned. http://naturebasedsolutions.org/ Conclusions forms an addition to other more specific initiatives The five principles and implementation document such as detailed guidance on implementation (e.g. presented in this guidance make a case for a structured the WWF Flood Green Guide26; and USACE design approach to the planning, evaluation, design, and guidelines that are currently in preparation), training implementation of nature-based solutions for flood programs (e.g. the NOAA Green Infrastructure for risk management. They aim to support disaster risk Coastal Resilience course27), and international networks management and climate adaptation professionals (such as the Partnership for Environment and Disaster who plan flood risk management interventions, NGOs Risk Reduction, PEDRR28). As such, we have tried to that implement nature-based solutions, as well as reference such specific further resources throughout the staff of donor and international agencies who design, guidance. Also, we encourage others to build from this review, or fund such projects. Using the growing framework to provide further detailed information that momentum for the use of nature-based solutions is needed for successful implementation. as part of resilience-building strategies and disaster risk reduction, these guidelines offer a step-by-step We hope that ‘Implementing nature-based flood approach for implementing successful nature-based protection: Principles and implementation guidance’ solutions for flood risk management. streamlines and accelerates the process of knowledge development, evaluation, and standardization of This document is one building block towards a system in design and testing protocols. That way, we can continue which nature-based solutions for flood risk management to improve and promote nature-based adaptation as a are widely accepted and implemented as an alternative sustainable flood risk management solution. or complement to conventional engineering measures. However, the document is not meant to form an all- 26. WWF (2017). Natural & Nature-based Flood Management: encompassing guide. Rather, it aims to set out the A Green Guide. http://envirodm.org/flood-management framework for nature-based flood management, and 27. https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/training/green.html 28. http://pedrr.org/ 31