Natural Hazards

, Volume 66, Issue 3, pp 1383–1404 | Cite as

A threatened world city: the benefits of protecting London from the sea

  • Edmund C. Penning-Rowsell
  • Nick Haigh
  • Sarah Lavery
  • Loraine McFadden
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper describes the options appraisal undertaken in the UK within the major TE2100 project to investigate the future of protecting London from flooding from the sea. An economic analysis, within a Benefit-Cost framework complemented by Multi-Criteria Analysis, shows that improving the existing flood defences and, in 2070, constructing a new Thames Barrier downstream from the existing one are the “front runner” options for tackling the increase in flood risk that is anticipated in the future. Both sensitivity and scenario analysis have little effect on option choice. Uncertainties inevitably remain, however, when looking so far ahead, but it is clear that continuing to protect this area from the sea is highly cost-beneficial. Also the very high standard of protection now, and the robustness of the existing flood defence assets, mean that major new interventions will not be needed for some time (i.e. until c. 2070). We therefore have time to monitor the situation, carefully plan measures to maintain and enhance the existing defences, and to seek to restrain the growth of risk in the Estuary and in London through carefully designed and implemented resilience-building flood plain management measures. Rather than having to rush to new engineering works, because we have not anticipated what is needed but are forced to respond hastily to a “crisis” situation, the adaptive approach that is now possible is a key legacy of the TE2100 project.

Keywords

Storm surge Economics Multi-criteria analysis Flood risk management London 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper is based on the work of many members of the TE2100 team. As such we acknowledge the invaluable work of the Environment Agency TE2100 team’s Kevin House, Oliver Grant, Megan Linwood, and Phil Shaw. In addition the following were central to this work: David Ramsbottom (HR Wallingford); Teresa Fenn, Elizabeth Daly, and John Ash (RPA). The contributions of David Wardle, Jean Venables and many others to the completion of the TE2100 Plan are also acknowledged, as are resources for the preparation of this paper from the Flood Risk Management Research Consortium (FRMRC2). This paper contains Environment Agency information: Environment Agency and database right.

References

  1. Bondi H (1967) London flood barrier. Report to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government. MHLG, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Defra (2006) Flood and coastal defence appraisal guidance, FCDPAG3 economic appraisal, supplementary note to operating authorities—climate change impacts. Defra, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Defra (2008) Defra flood and coastal defence appraisal guidance. Social appraisal supplementary note to operating authorities assessing and valuing the risk to life from flooding for use in appraisal of risk management measures. Defra, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Defra (2009) Guidance on how to measure and report your greenhouse gas emissions. Defra, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Department for Transport (2007) Highways economics note no. 1 (2005 Valuation of the benefits of prevention of road accidents and casualties). DfT, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Environment Agency (2004) Catchment flood management plans, policy guidance, vol 1. Environment Agency, BristolGoogle Scholar
  7. Environment Agency (2008) TE2100 phase 3 studies, topic 2.11, modelling for appraisal of the phase 3 set 2 options. Environment Agency, BristolGoogle Scholar
  8. Environment Agency (2009) TE2100 technical report, chap. 8, appraisal of options. Environment Agency, BristolGoogle Scholar
  9. Environment Agency (2010a) TE2100 plan: managing flood risk through London and the thames estuary. Environment Agency, BristolGoogle Scholar
  10. Environment Agency (2010b) Flood and coastal risk management appraisal guidance (FCERM-AG). Environment Agency, BristolGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans E, Ashley R, Hall J, Penning-Rowsell E, Sayers P, Thorne C, Watkinson A (2004a) Foresight future flooding. Scientific summary: future risks and their drivers, vol 1. Office of Science and Technology, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans E, Ashley R, Hall J, Penning-Rowsell E, Sayers P, Thorne C, Watkinson A (2004b) Foresight future flooding. Scientific summary: managing future risks, vol 2. Office of Science and Technology, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. MAFF (1999) Flood and coastal defence project appraisal guidance, economic appraisal, vol 3. MAFF (now Defra), LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. HM Treasury (2003) Appraisal and evaluation in central Government. HM Treasury, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007, synthesis report. IPCC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  16. McFadden L, Penning-Rowsell EC, Tapsell S (2009) Strategic coastal flood-risk management in practice: actors’ perspectives on the integration of flood risk management in London and the Thames Estuary Ocean & Coastal Management 52:636–645Google Scholar
  17. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004) Sustainable communities: an Urban development corporation for the London Thames Gateway Decision Document. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. RPA (2005) Evaluating a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) methodology for application to flood management and coastal defence appraisals, guidance for the MCA-based element of the current approach to appraisal, R&D technical report FD2013/TR. Defra, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Penning-Rowsell EC, Johnson C, Tunstall S, Tapsell S, Morris J, Chatterton J, Green C (2005) The benefits of flood and coastal risk management: a manual of assessment techniques. Middlesex University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. NERA (2011) Updating the VPF and VPIs: phase 1: final report department for transport. NERA Economic Consulting, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Townend IH (2004) Identifying change in estuaries. J Coastal Conserv 10:5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Townend IH, Pethick J (2002) Estuarine flooding and managed retreat. Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond A 360:1477–1495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Waverley JA (1954) Report of the departmental committee on coastal flooding. HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edmund C. Penning-Rowsell
    • 1
  • Nick Haigh
    • 2
  • Sarah Lavery
    • 3
  • Loraine McFadden
    • 1
  1. 1.Flood Hazard Research CentreMiddlesex UniversityLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Environment, Food and Rural AffairsLondonUK
  3. 3.Environment AgencyLondonUK

Personalised recommendations