Policy paper

Flood risk management plans 2021 to 2027: you said, we did

Published 12 December 2022

Applies to England

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview of the plans

Flood risk management plans (FRMPs) are required by the Flood Risk Regulations 2009 and must be reviewed by the Environment Agency and lead local flood authorities (LLFAs) every 6 years. We, the Environment Agency, worked together with LLFAs and other risk management authorities (RMAs) to produce the FRMPs for 2021 to 2027.

The FRMPs include the:

• part a national overview: high level overview of the FRMPs and flood risk management in England for 2021 to 2027
• part b: 10 draft FRMPs, one for each river basin district (RBD), including an overview of the approach taken, a summary of the flood risk, and the impact of climate change
• flood plan explorer (FPE): a new interactive mapping tool, where you can discover information about all the proposed FRMP measures - the FPE includes local and national measures
• strategic environmental assessment (SEA): a statement of environmental particulars (SOEP) supports each of the FRMPs - the SOEPs set out how the environment, SEA findings and SEA consultation responses have been taken into account in the development of the FRMP
• habitats regulations assessments (HRA): they consider the potential implications of the FRMPs on designated European conservation sites

The principal purpose of the FRMPs is to set out how to manage flood risk in nationally identified flood risk areas (FRAs). These are areas where there is the potential for significant risk or impacts should major flooding occur. However, the Environment Agency, LLFAs and other RMAs are also working to reduce flood risk outside FRAs. Local flood risk management strategies are developed by LLFAs and include action plans to address flood risk locally.

The FRMPs are strategic, place-based plans. They include objectives and measures closely aligned to the ambitions and goals of the FCERM strategy. FRMPs include both national measures which apply across the whole country and local measures. Each FRMP differs depending on the characteristics and location of the RBD and maturity of strategic planning. Where measures are included, the FRMP is not intended to cover all detail of the measure. The level of detail that is provided on measures may vary depending on the planning or implementation stage that the measures are at. Part a explains what measure information is included in the FRMPs and FPE.

During this second cycle (2021 to 2027) we will work with LLFAs and other RMAs to monitor and measure progress. For information on how this will be undertaken please refer to the ‘how we will monitor implementation of the FRMP’ in each plan. We will report on measure progress through the flood and coastal erosion risk management annual report, starting in 2023.

The long-term approach to strategic flood risk management planning is being considered by Defra. The government policy statement on flood and coastal erosion risk management has committed to reform local flood risk planning so that every area of England will have a more strategic and comprehensive plan that drives long-term local action and investment by 2026. In July 2021, Defra published its objectives for reform to local flood risk management planning to provide recommendations, advice and views to inform future policy. Defra has set out that future local flood risk management plans should support a catchment-based approach, considering all sources of flood risk and the potential for action across the whole of an area, upstream and downstream, by a variety of bodies. A series of advisory group meetings concluded in June 2022 and Defra is now considering next steps.

1.2 The purpose of this ‘you said, we did’ document

This you said we did document aims to set out the main topics included in the consultation responses and explains how we took forward the feedback. It complements the summary of responses document published in May 2022. It also describes the work that we and other RMAs are committing to undertake until 2027.

The structure of this document is the following:

1. Section 1 explains the role of the FRMPs, their development and consultation.
2. Section 2 gives an overview of the changes we made to the FRMPs (parts a and bs), their measures and FPE as a result of the consultation feedback.
3. Section 3 shows the comments we received and how we, in partnership with LLFAs and RMAs, addressed these themes in the final FRMP reports and measures. It also contains information, where relevant, of other work outside the FRMPs.

2. Taking forward the consultation feedback

2.1 Introduction

We received 255 responses in total, of which 42 were from members of the public and 190 from organisations. The main themes raised in the responses, were:

• engagement and partnerships
• nature based solutions
• catchment based approach
• alignment with other plans and strategies
• land management
• climate change and adaptation
• funding
• readability – the ability to find information in the plans within the FPE

Note: these themes are not exclusive or listed in any particular order.

2.2 Changes to FRMPs and FPE

The changes we made to the FRMPs include text modifications within the national overview part a, part bs and changes to measures.

The types of measure changes can be split into three categories:

• wording/supporting information for existing measures
• geographical extents
• measure(s) added or removed

When considering proposed changes we assessed the associated environmental effects as part of the SEA. This enabled us to understand the environmental effects of changes. We agreed the changes with relevant partners before making them.

We made changes to the functionality and maps on the FPE to make finding information easier, particularly in places where there are many measures near to each other. We also created a guide to support FPE navigation.

2.3 LLFA and RMAs role in updating the FRMPs

The LLFAs and RMAs responded to the consultation and worked with us in updating the FRMPs by carrying out the following tasks:

• they proposed and reviewed changes to part bs and measures
• they agreed and approved any LLFA/RMA measure changes and confirmed their approval for the final measures, plans and information they shared with us

Not all LLFAs have a legal requirement to produce FRMPs as some do not have FRAs. LLFAs who had to produce FRMPs confirmed that they agreed with how the consultation, the SEA and HRAs were carried out for their plans.

2.4 Further actions to the consultation feedback

Some of the responses received could not be addressed through changes in the FRMPs. Some comments identified local issues which needed action at a local level. These were passed to the Environment Agency and LLFA’s local teams for consideration. We worked with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) to consider any cross border issues.

Some comments related to the Environment Agency and the government’s wider remits. The FCERM strategy provides a long-term vision: ‘a nation ready for, and resilient to, flooding and coastal change – today, tomorrow and to the year 2100’. This year we published the flood and coastal erosion risk management strategy roadmap to 2026. The roadmap sets out the actions we and partners will take to 2026 when the strategy will be next reviewed.

The roadmap will help by:

• better protecting and preparing communities from flooding and coastal change by supporting the delivery of the flood and coastal erosion risk management investment programme
• taking forward projects and programmes that will pioneer innovative ways of boosting flood and coastal resilience and make a difference to their local communities
• providing training, tools and support to help practitioners in public authorities to develop the skills and capabilities they need to support their local communities to prepare and adapt to a changing climate
• ensuring policy makers and practitioners have the information and evidence they need about current and future risks from flooding from rivers, the sea and surface water as well as coastal erosion to make well targeted investments
• identifying practical ways in which flood and coastal investments can contribute to wider priorities including local nature recovery, carbon reductions and more integrated water solutions that help with both flood and drought resilience

Effective management of flooding and coastal change cannot be achieved in isolation from other pressures the nation faces. The roadmap makes it clear how action taken to deliver the Strategy will contribute to:

• wider benefits for biodiversity
• improved water quality and water resources
• creating a net zero nation by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing carbon capture
• increased resilience to climate change
• sustainable growth that maximises opportunities for at risk communities and supports a greener economy

3. Themes raised in the consultation and how we addressed them

3.1 Introduction

The consultation generated diverse views about the FRMPs and flood risk management generally. The responses showed support and recognition of the FRMPs role and content. Comments ranged from the development and level of detail in objectives, national and local measures to technical issues regarding SEA and HRA. There were also comments about groundwater flood risk, historic environment, coastal and river erosion and suggestions for the future FRMPs improvements. The responses helped us to add more detail, clarify and strengthen the plans.

This section describes how we have addressed the main themes raised. We took a consistent approach to update the plans when the themes were relevant to all of them. However, not all of the comments set out here were relevant to all plans and were only made where needed.

3.2 Engagement and partnership working

You said

You raised the need for early and consistent engagement with all relevant organisations. This includes Environment Agency teams, government departments, Historic England, Natural England, RMAs, and other stakeholders such as Transport for London, catchment partnerships, farmers, the food production industry, communities, universities and schools.

You supported partnership working as essential to deliver the plans and wanted to emphasise the important role of local organisations, such as catchment partnerships, parish and town councils, community organisations including flood groups, landowners and riparian owners.

Effective engagement and partnership working can bring many benefits including:

• data sharing
• access to local knowledge
• problem solving
• adequate asset maintenance
• identifying, planning and maximising wider environmental outcomes
• providing opportunities to align initiatives and pool resources
• delivery of measures, understanding their impacts and opportunities
• identifying future resilience opportunities and wider catchment benefits
• enabling better climate change planning with vulnerable sectors.

We did

FRMPs are an important enabler for how RMAs and partners strategically work and plan together. They have and will continue to provide an opportunity for local engagement and consultation with partners and communities.

To produce the plans, we engaged with all relevant national and local organisations including RMAs and communities. We are committed to putting communities at the centre of what we do so we strengthened the wording about our commitment to working in partnership in both parts a and bs. In part bs, we acknowledge that working in partnership is the most effective way to address the issues of flooding and climate change whilst maximising the delivery of multiple benefits. We explained the value and our continued commitment to working in partnership with stakeholders including:

• catchment and coastal Partnerships
• water companies
• flood action groups
• internal drainage boards
• other community and environmental groups

We also acknowledged within part a and part b, the role that integrated working will have in implementing the FCERM strategy in responding to the challenges of climate change.

Communities are included in 10 of the 18 objectives and many of the over 2,000 measures will benefit them. They are very important stakeholders in flood risk management. We are committed to engaging with them as the measures are implemented.

To clarify how we will engage with partners, we reviewed which partners and stakeholders are helping deliver the measures, and how, and updated that information on the flood plan explorer.

We added additional measures on engagement and partnership working where it will be especially critical to managing flood risk. For example, engagement with Transport for London, Thames Water and the London Drainage Engineers Group during the consultation, led to a new EA measure to better consider flood resilience across London. Some plans include specific measures to engage with business and local communities, raise awareness and promote action that delivers multiple benefits. We agreed changes to the wording of two United Utilities measures to better capture the partnership working elements in the Ambleside and Kendal actions.

3.3 Nature based solutions

You said

There was wide support for the measures containing nature based solutions. Suggestions to improve their implementation included: more references in the FRMPs’ objective, clarifying alignment with the FCERM strategy, early engagement, and the need to address how they will be maintained over the long term.

You said that natural flood management (NFM) techniques and sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) can deliver flood and biodiversity benefits whilst increasing resilience to future climate impacts. They are usually low carbon and support the delivery of objectives also set out in river basin management plans (RBMP) and future local nature recovery strategies (LNRS).

You said that more emphasis was needed on implementing nature based solutions and taking a natural capital approach to options appraisal. It was also noted that there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of NFM techniques which help determine the costs and benefits of nature based solutions and biodiversity net gain in relation to flood risk management. Knowing this would further support making the case for using these techniques.

You acknowledged that nature based solutions increase resilience to climate change by reducing the risk and impact of flooding and drought. They can also be used alongside other solutions such as traditional engineering solutions to reduce flooding.

Responses showed specific support for the implementation of NFM techniques to support habitat restoration across a catchment, including managing existing and new woodland. You suggested that NFM projects are a good way to meet the objectives of the FRMPs and should even be considered as part of all flood schemes. In contrast, other responses highlighted the need for discussion and agreement on how to find a balance between the use of NFM and other land uses such as food production.

You highlighted the important link between the historic environment and NFM, and the opportunities for the historic environment to support this. It is important to consider how FRMP measures impact on the historic landscape character and sense of place, as well as specific designated assets.

We did

Both Part a and bs included references to nature based solutions and NFM. To strengthen them, we provided more details about NFM in part a including types, benefits, outcomes of the NFM programme and the importance of partnership working to implement it. We also worked with the relevant RMAs to add further NFM related wording to part bs.

All draft FRMPs included measures containing different elements of nature based solutions. We have added new measures in some FRMPs to identify further opportunities to deliver nature based solutions. In addition, the national measure relating to historic environment has been strengthened to include resilience and adaptation as well as improvement to the natural, built, and historic environment.

When the FRMPs and measures are implemented, project level environmental assessments will be undertaken and we will consult with relevant stakeholders. The appraisal of project proposals means that environmental implications are thoroughly considered.

The strategy roadmap includes a set of actions to mainstream NFM which will help support the delivery of the FRMP measures. These include: developing an asset database of nature based solutions, creating a digital hub of information, and streamlining the development of low value NFM investments.

3.4 Catchment based approach

You said

Responses showed broad support for a catchment based approach to manage flood risk and deliver measures. This is vital to manage the movement and storage of water at the catchment scale, to look at flood risk management more holistically and to maximise the use of nature based solutions. Some thought that the focus on flood risk areas within the plans appeared inconsistent with a catchment based approach and that more catchment scale interventions such as NFM or land use solutions were needed.

You said that partnership working with organisations was essential for a catchment based approach. This could bring benefits such as woodland creation, inland and coastal habitat creation and restoration, and water quality. Prioritising catchments for these activities could make partnership working more effective, optimising benefits.

We did

Part a includes the objectives for a catchment based approach which are:

• to deliver positive and sustained outcomes for the water environment by promoting a better understanding of the environment at a local level
• to encourage local collaboration and more transparent decision-making when both planning and delivering activities to improve the water environment

We have clarified that we considered the following factors when we prepared the FRMPs:

• how the processes across the catchment work and interact
• how drainage systems respond to different flood events
• how natural processes operate

Part a now includes information on the catchment sensitive farming programme and what it is trying to achieve. We also added more details about the role of catchment partnerships in part bs.

Managing water in catchments is a key component of the strategy roadmap as it delivers multiple benefits. It is integral to achieving the Environment Agency’s biodiversity net gain targets and our ambition to meet net zero carbon.

3.5 Alignment of plans and strategies

You said

You considered that alignment of strategies and plans was essential to ensure a joined-up approach and effective delivery. These include shoreline management plans (SMPs), drainage and wastewater management plans (DWMPs) and LNRS.

You welcomed the alignment between FRMPs and RBMPs to optimise environmental opportunities and benefits when reducing flood risk. This would promote projects being progressed and delivered at the same time to increase the number of multiple benefits for communities and the environment.

Some of you asked for clarity about how the plans and measures would deliver the FCERM strategy. This would help stakeholders and partners understand better their roles and responsibilities when delivering FRMP actions.

You considered that there was good alignment between some of the FRMP measures outside of FRAs and priority projects that the catchment partnerships and other partners were working on. However better alignment was needed to manage coastal flooding and the work on SMPs.

We did

Strategic flood risk management planning plays an essential role in informing the choices made to manage flood risk. At a national level this is set out in the strategy and locally in flood risk plans and strategies, such as FRMPs, local flood risk management strategies (LFRMS), DWMPs and SMPs.

The links of FRMPs’ objectives and the strategy are clearly identified in part a. We have made several changes to explain better how plans and strategies align with one another. A graphic has been added to part a that explains the links between FRMPs and other strategic plans in managing the water environment. We also expanded the section which includes information on other relevant plans and strategies such as LFRMS, SMPs, DWMPs and RBMPs.

Measure information in the FPE also shows which objectives the measures will meet, showing the line of sight from intent to action.

We are working to align plans and strategies to ensure an effective delivery of the FRMPs and the strategy by taking a more holistic approach to water management. For example, we co-ordinated the production of the FRMPs and the RBMPs to encourage better join-up in the management of flood risk and water environment.

We held joint consultation sessions to gather responses to the draft FRMPs and draft RBMPs with catchment partnership representatives in each of the eight RBDs. We did joint presentations at meetings with external partners to demonstrate the alignment of the plans.

We have expanded and improved the text relating to the RBMPs in part a. We also added some measures encouraging early engagement with business and local communities to raise awareness and promote action that delivers multiple benefits. Ongoing coordination will continue during the implementation phase of these plans.

The strategy roadmap includes commitments to work with Water UK, Ofwat and RMAs to inform drainage and wastewater management plans and improve resilience to surface water and drainage flood risks. We and Ofwat have published a joint approach that explains how our respective strategies are aligned to achieve a water environment that is cleaner, healthier, and managed in a way that is more resilient to flooding so that it better supports people and wildlife.

We are working with water and sewerage companies, Ofwat and Water UK to inform the drainage and wastewater management plans. The guiding principles set out expectations for how water companies’ business plans and investments should account for tackling surface water and sewer flooding. We have also worked with Ofwat to improve the water industry national environment programme methodology to enable water companies to collaborate and support co-design, co-delivery, and co-funding of nature based and integrated water management solutions. We will continue to work with other RMAs on their strategic plans so objectives and measures for communities and the environment can be aligned and delivered efficiently.

3.6 Land management

You said

FRMPs will help to create a better place for people and wildlife. You said that when assessing and managing flood risk, there is a need to consider all land uses and land management practices. Joining up FRMPs with spatial planning to achieve sustainable development was also needed.

You supported the recognition of the importance of agricultural land in the SEA. However, some of you felt that the benefits the farming community and agriculture bring should be better represented in the FRMPs. These benefits could be jeopardised if agricultural land is regularly flooded. FRMPs should consider land use change impact on food production. The right balance needs to be found between flood risk management, including NFM, land use change and agricultural land loss. You had concerns about the economic implications of using agricultural land for flood protection and wanted more consideration given to the value of agricultural land regarding future flood protection and food production.

We did

We acknowledge that land management is a very important factor in managing flood risk and its impacts. To address the comments received we strengthened references to land management in Part a to explain that farming and land management practices will better support rural resilience to both floods and droughts. We explained the benefits of agricultural land and food production and emphasised the significance of flood risk to both.

We also enhanced wording in parts a and bs around partnership working and amended the wording in part bs sections on RBD overview, agriculture & land use, surface water flood risk and canal flood risk to address land management comments.

One of the outcomes of the strategy roadmap is for farming and land management practices to better support rural resilience to both floods and droughts.

3.7 Climate change, mitigation and adaptation

You said

You supported the plans’ information regarding climate change and alignment of the objectives with the FCERM strategy. However, some of you thought that there were inconsistencies with the climate change scenarios used by other programmes and strategies.

There was agreement that FRMP measures will improve communities’ resilience to climate change. Responses supported continued partnership working, including data sharing, to enable better climate change planning with vulnerable sectors and more adaptive planning. Some highlighted the impact of climate change on food producers, the agricultural sector and the rural economy. They highlighted the need for sufficient resourcing and funding to implement the plans.

You wanted more research and better information on certain aspects such as the carbon footprint of measures and their effectiveness addressing climate change, drainage infrastructure capacity and how changing land use could be part of the solution. Responses asked for more clarity regarding how the climate estimates are applied to assets and properties at risk now and in the future. There is also a need to show how climate change modelling and forecasting will identify actions at a local community level.

You recognised that working with nature and making space for water could help to address the impacts of climate change. However, the plans would benefit from more consideration of climate change impacts and associated longer term challenges. These include the threat of coastal erosion, the climate mitigation role of coastal habitats and the need for community adaptation.

Inappropriate new development, its design and how we and other RMAs are involved during the production of local land use plans were amongst the concerns you raised. Further detail of how climate adaptation will take place was needed to support local communities to make decisions on climate change. You also felt more detail was needed on how climate change will impact surface water flooding and more measures to address this are needed.

We did

For part a, we clarified that the plan covers climate change at a high level and only over the next 6 years. Our understanding of the impact of climate change on flood risk will evolve as more climate modelling and research is undertaken. We reiterated that climate change should be assessed further at project level and that the most up to date information will always be used. We explained how measures contribute to the adaptation and mitigation of climate change over the longer term and how climate change estimates are being applied to manage flood risk. We also explain the guidance we produced to support decision making and adaptation pathways: planning guidance for local planning authorities to comply with the national planning policy framework, and guidance for flood and coastal risk projects, schemes and strategies.

We have improved part bs, by providing catchment level information of climate allowances for fluvial and surface water risk, rather than at the RBD scale. Our climate ambition is to create a nation that is resilient to climate change. Putting it at the heart of all we do will help us and the country become better prepared for the impacts of climate change while simultaneously taking action to prevent further climate change from happening.

The Environment Agency sustainability plan sets out commitment for cutting our carbon emissions by at least 45% and reaching net zero by 2030. It breaks down the sources of our emissions and the tangible actions we will take to reduce them, such as reducing carbon during project construction, piloting and adopting new low carbon technologies and sharing lessons learnt with RMAs.

We know the best opportunity to reduce carbon comes in the early stages of the project cycle. We now include a low carbon objective in all our business cases. In March 2021 we updated the FCERM appraisal guidance and incorporated improvements to help embed better low carbon choices into our projects. We have published:

• valuing the net carbon impacts of FCERM projects
• carbon impacts tool

Together, these provide a method for including the value of carbon emissions in the cost-benefit analysis in appraisal of all our construction projects.

We are building the skills and knowledge we need to tackle the climate emergency. We have made our carbon literacy training available via the supply chain sustainability school to our delivery partners and other RMAs.

We are working to better understand how flood risk is changing across the country. To do this, we are collecting additional data from flood resilience actions such as new flood risk schemes and maintenance of existing defences. Examining this data alongside the emerging national flood risk assessment (NaFRA2) will allow us to understand how risk is changing each year and also over the longer term. In time, we will be able to define much more clearly how and why flood risk is changing year on year and examine this at a national and local level.

Regarding surface water management, the activities we deliver under our strategic overview role help to mitigate flood risk and improve future resilience. This includes helping others to understand risks, improve local surface water risk information, providing advice on spatial planning and place making, facilitating partnerships, and coordinating and assuring investment.

We are developing a new procurement framework for property flood resilience (PFR). This framework can be used by all risk management authorities to develop and deliver PFR schemes. It will ensure the PFR code of practice is followed, and products are certified. An enhanced level of support and training will be provided to ensure that all parties have the information they require to deliver increased resilience to property owners.

The Environment Agency is working in partnership on a cross-Defra initiative known as restoring meadows, marsh and reef (ReMeMaRe), to support the restoration, through habitat creation, of our key estuarine and coastal habitats in England. We are also capturing the learning from the coastal based solutions projects as part of the flood and coastal resilience innovation programme. The tools and learning from these two initiatives help us to better understand the likely evolution of wetlands and shorelines and feed into the shoreline management plan (SMP) refresh and associated habitat compensation and restoration programme (HCRP). The outputs will help us make better long term investment decisions and identify opportunities for creating habitat that delivers multiple benefits for nature and society.

The government’s £200 million flood and coastal resilience innovation fund will improve our evidence on the costs and benefits of innovative resilience actions as well as help inform future approaches to, and investments in, flood and coastal risk management. It comprises:

• the flood and coastal resilience innovation programme which will enable local authorities, businesses and communities in 25 places to test and demonstrate innovative practical resilience actions
• the adaptive pathways programme which will develop long‐term investment plans for managing flooding and coastal change to 2100 and beyond in strategic locations including the Thames Estuary, Humber Estuary, River Severn and Yorkshire
• the coastal transition accelerators programme which will support communities in areas at significant risk of coastal erosion to transition and adapt to a changing climate Funding

3.8 Funding

You said

Responses pointed out that securing short and long term resources and funding were potential constraints. You were concerned that funding will not be available for projects outside flood risk areas and wanted to optimise all funding sources. You considered that the scale of climate change impacts shouldn’t be underestimated and will need more funding to make schemes, now and in the future, climate resilient.

You said that making a clearer case of benefits from measures which protect or improve biodiversity, water quality, and wellbeing would help attract more funding. You considered that previous nature based and NFM projects may have not optimised delivery of wider benefits because funding guidance did not sufficiently account for them.

Responses showed a willingness to collaborate on joint work programmes as it leads to more efficient delivery. They considered that both resources and funding are needed to enable collaboration and ensure RMAs are in a better position to deliver multiple benefits. They explained that partnerships provide good value in the delivery of wider catchment scale measures but there is a need to coordinate plans with supporting investment programmes.

You explained that it would be preferable to update measure information held on the FPE with economic details about ongoing measure progress, including information about measure prioritisation and their context in the whole FRMP.

We did

We acknowledge that funding certainty is crucial for the implementation of the measures in the FRMPs and flood risk projects in general. We updated part a and explained that all works are subject to securing funding in line with government policy and associated guidance. We clarified that funding rules and eligibility is the same inside and outside of FRAs.

The implementation status of measures is explained in part a. Some have a status of “not started” because either funding is not in place at the time of publication or is due to start later in the cycle. Measure implementation status will be updated on FPE and used for reporting of progress in the FCERM annual report starting in 2023.

To support flood risk management, the FCERM appraisal guidance was updated in March 2022. The main improvements include:

• reducing the time, cost and complexity of appraisal by making it clearer what is needed for different types of projects
• working with partners from the outset by setting clearer project objectives and developing strong funding partnerships
• encouraging objectives which result in a broader range of outcomes, including carbon reductions and sustainability
• using the latest climate change scenarios
• streamlining the process for selecting options to achieve national FCERM investment priorities whilst balancing local choices
• supporting more nature-based solutions

Additional guidance on valuing environment, historic and heritage outcomes is planned for publication in 2022-23. This will enable multiple benefits to be better accounted for in project funding.

Through the investment and partnership funding community SharePoint site, more information resources have been made available to all RMAs to help teams develop capital projects and access funding. More tools and guidance will be added to make it easier and quicker to get business cases developed and approved, whilst also building capability through online training modules and other learning resources. Specific guidance and procurement frameworks to enable more smaller projects, including NFM, property flood resilience and SuDS are also planned.

In 2025 the Environment Agency will produce new long-term investment scenarios which will provide an economic assessment of future flood and coastal erosion risk management for the next 50-100 years in England.

3.9 Readability

You said

Readability is defined as the ability to find information in the plans and within flood plan explorer (FPE). You felt that there was too much documentation and clear summaries were needed for each section. Some of you thought that the documents were too long making it harder to find information quickly and to participate in the consultation. We received a mixed response on how easy FPE was to use.

Some of your suggestions included making it easier to find local measures, streamlining the presentation of national measures, providing economic analysis, more explanatory text or a shorter user guide with the option to see measures in a list format. You also recommended improvements to the FPE during the implementation phase and linking it to other systems and data explorers.

We did

Although the plans are more streamlined in this cycle and we have fewer measures we acknowledge documents are long because they cover many places and a large geographical area. Making the plans accessible is a legal requirement and it will help all readers but especially those with difficulties and certain disabilities. We have worked with accessibility experts to ensure that the plans meet the required standards. It is important to make sure that the plans reach wide audiences so everyone can have a say on their local environment.

To address the comments received regarding the FPE we made several changes. Part a and b of the plans include references to the help notes available on FPE which clarify what the FPE is intended and not intended to show. FPE now displays measure information below the map as the user hovers over measure areas. FPE also shows the implementation status, which will be updated over the planning cycle, so users can check how measures are progressing. Information showing the ongoing performance of measures will not be added as the FPE is designed only to hold measures as they were originally designed at the beginning of the planning cycle.

In summary, changes to the flood plan explorer are:

• updating the map to make clear that Wales and Scotland are not part of the flood risk management plans - both Wales and Scotland have their own FRMPs
• improving the search functionality so a more comprehensive list of measures containing the search terms will be returned - this will help users find measures of interest more easily
• making it easier to browse the general size and location of individual measures so that they can be identified more easily
• enhancing the map interface to improve responsiveness and ease of use - particularly in areas where many measures are close together and overlap
• making the measures clearer on the map
• text changes on various pages to clarify the purpose of FPE and other technical aspects - added additional help notes on the FAQ pages

We plan for measure information to be downloadable soon through a separate web interface. Guidance on using the FPE will be updated with additional information over time.