Policy paper

Strategic environmental assessment: statement of particulars

Updated 18 April 2023

Applies to England

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose of this statement of environmental particulars

This statement of environmental particulars (SOEP) is a statutory requirement under the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 (the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Regulations). The SEA regulations require that a statement of particulars is made available as soon as reasonably practicable after the adoption of the Thames river basin district (RBD) flood risk management plan (FRMP). This SOEP is the final stage in the SEA process.

This SOEP sets out:

• how we have integrated environmental considerations into the Thames RBD FRMP
• how we have considered the findings of the SEA
• how the opinions expressed in response to the consultation on the SEA environmental report have been considered
• the reasons for selecting the Thames RBD FRMP as adopted
• how we will monitor the likely significant environmental effects of implementing the Thames RBD FRMP

1.2 Flood risk management plans (FRMPs)

The second cycle Thames RBD FRMP is a strategic plan for the period 2021-2027 to manage significant 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. Producing the plan for these areas and updating them every 6 years is a requirement of the Flood Risk Regulations (2009). It is recognised that there are areas at risk of flooding outside of these FRAs. The Environment Agency and risk management authorities (RMAs) actively plan for and manage the risk of flooding to all communities. This is regardless of whether they are in an FRA or not.

FRMPs highlight the hazards and risks from flooding. They describe how RMAs will work together, and with partners and communities to manage flood risk in the places where we live, work and play.

We have worked with lead local flood authorities (LLFAs) and other RMAs to prepare and develop the final FRMP.

FRMPs:

• align with the national flood and coastal erosion risk management (FCERM) strategy for England and the FCERM strategy roadmap
• describe the sources and risks of flooding within a river basin district
• include information about how RMAs plan to work with communities and businesses to manage and reduce flood risk
• help to promote a greater awareness and understanding of the risks of flooding, particularly in communities at significant risk
• encourage and enable householders, businesses and communities to take action to manage the risks

FRMPs, together with other plans and strategies, help everyone involved in managing flood risks to make decisions that are best for people and the environment. These other plans include:

• river basin management plans (RBMPs)
• local flood risk management strategies (LFRMS)
• shoreline management plans (SMPs)
• drainage and wastewater management plans (DWMPs)

Alongside flood risk management planning, we work with others to protect and improve the quality of the water environment through river basin management. We have co-ordinated production of the FRMPs and the RBMPs (RBMP 2022) to encourage better join-up in the management of flood risk and the water environment. This will help to deliver more integrated water solutions that help both flood and drought resilience as well as water quality issues. We have worked with LLFAs and other RMAs to develop joint measures in both FRMPs and RBMPs to reduce flood risk and improve the wider water environment. Aligning measures helps to simplify and improve the efficiency of the delivery of outcomes.

The final Thames RBD FRMP provides further information.

1.3 The SEA process

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is a process that ensures consideration is given to the environment during the development of certain ‘plans and programmes’. In doing so, it contributes to the promotion of sustainable development and environmental protection.

Detailed requirements for SEA are set out in the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 (the SEA Regulations). In accordance with the SEA Regulations the Environment Agency determined that the second cycle FRMPs required an SEA.

The SEA process requires us to:

• identify, describe and evaluate the likely significant environmental effects of implementing the strategy and any reasonable alternatives
• identify measures to prevent, reduce or as fully as possible offset any significant adverse effects
• provide an early and effective opportunity to engage in the preparation of the FRMP through consultation
• monitor the implementation of the FRMP to identify any unforeseen environmental effects and take remedial action where necessary
• report all the above in an environmental report, drawn up during the preparation of the FRMP and before its adoption

We published the SEA environmental report together with the draft Thames RBD FRMP as part of the public consultation. This was held between 22 October 2021 to 21 January 2022. For further information on how the SEA was undertaken and its findings please see the SEA environmental report. You can request a copy of the environmental report from the Environment Agency National Customer Contact Centre.

The SEA recognises that many of the measures in the FRMP are carried over from the first cycle FRMP or are ‘agreed measures’ (measures that are already being implemented) and as such have already been subject to environmental assessment. It also recognises that the strategic nature of the FRMP and many of the measures mean that we’ll need to investigate to decide the nature and extent of flood risk management activity at a project level. As such, at this stage the nature and extent of activity is not known and therefore cannot be assessed. Project level environmental assessments will be undertaken, where relevant, and many will require planning consent. Our process of business case approval and assurance associated with flood and coastal risk management grant in aid funding, will help to further assure that environmental implications are being considered in the implementation of projects.

2. Integration of environmental considerations into the Thames RBD flood risk management plan

2.1 Introduction

This section explains how we integrated environmental considerations when developing the FRMP. A number of interrelated activities supported this. These are outlined and relate to the:

• development of the Thames RBD FRMP
• consultation
• Thames RBD FRMP SEA
• habitats regulations assessment (HRA)

2.2 Development of the Thames RBD FRMP

The environment and sustainability were considered throughout the preparation of the Thames RBD FRMP.

In preparing the FRMPs, we and other relevant RMAs developed 18 nationally consistent objectives for each FRMP in England. In setting the objectives we and other RMAs gave regard to the flood risk regulations’ aims. These are to:

• reduce the adverse consequences of flooding for human health, economic activity and the environment
• reduce the likelihood of flooding

FRMPs are one of many important steps in achieving the ambitions of the national flood and coastal erosion risk management strategy for England (FCERM strategy) and the government’s 25 year environment plan – a green future: our 25 year plan to improve the Environment (25 YEP). They also support the direction set by government policy in the FCERM policy statement. These objectives reflect this. Climate change was also taken into account when developing these objectives.

The objectives have been developed to be consistent with the national FCERM strategy ambitions of:

• climate resilient places
• today’s growth and infrastructure resilient in tomorrow’s climate
• a nation ready to respond and adapt to flooding and coastal change

The 25 year environment plan has also been an important influence, in particular, in relation to the ambition:

• to leave the environment in a better state than we found it
• improving the long term resilience of our homes businesses and infrastructure at risk of flooding and coastal change
• using more natural flood management solutions

Taking this context into account all FRMPs include the following strategic objectives that specifically deal with environmental aspects:

• objective 6: by 2027, risk management authorities will have worked with communities, landowners and catchment, coastal and estuary partnerships, to identify and carry out schemes which work with natural processes to reduce the risk of flooding and coastal change
• objective 8: by 2027, actions by risk management authorities to address current and future risk of flooding and coastal change will have helped achieve the environmental objectives set out in the river basin district’s river basin management plan
• objective 9: by 2027, risk management authorities will have worked with catchment and coastal partnerships, landowners and managers and communities to make use of nature-based solutions to reduce the risk of flooding and coastal change and contributed to achieving wider environmental benefits
• objective 10: by 2027, risk management authorities will have worked with Natural England and other partners to ensure that the delivery of flooding and coastal change risk management programmes have contributed to the local nature recovery strategies so that new and restored habitats contribute to reducing flood and coastal risk

The Thames RBD FRMP also includes the following national and FRMP specific measures in relation to environmental aspects.

National measures:

• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will invest in flood risk management projects in England to contribute to the resilience, adaptation and improvement of the natural, built and historic environment where appropriate across all river basin districts
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will plan all flood risk management projects in England to achieve biodiversity net gain where appropriate and wider environmental benefits across all river basin districts
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will plan all flood risk management projects in England to help achieve the objectives in the appropriate river basin management plan across all river basin districts
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work with catchment partnerships, communities and other risk management authorities to maximise the use of nature based solutions in England to reduce the risk of flooding from all sources across all river basin districts
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will drive down carbon emissions and deliver the required flood risk management outcomes when planning and carrying out flood risk management works in England to achieve its net zero by 2030 target across all river basin districts
• between 2021 and 2027, lead local flood authorities may work with other risk management authorities, communities, and all relevant partners to identify a programme of nature based approaches in their area to reduce the risk of flooding from all sources
• between 2021 and 2027, lead local flood authorities may start implementing steps to work towards net zero carbon in their area to mitigate the effects of climate change
• between 2021 and 2027, lead local flood authorities may plan flood risk management projects to achieve wider environmental benefits where appropriate in their area to work towards biodiversity net gain

When creating measures, plan makers were asked to link individual measures to the objectives set out in Part A of the FRMP. In addition to the SEA, these raised the profile of certain environmental aspects in the plan development. In particular, objectives 6 and 9 relate to working with natural processes, objective 8 helps to achieve the environmental objectives set out in the Thames river basin management plan and objective 10 contributes to local nature recovery strategies. Due to the changing nature of FRMP measures, funding constraints, evolving studies and ways of thinking, we currently believe that:

• 18% of the measures have the potential to contribute to objective 6
• 22% of the measures have the potential to contribute to objective 8
• 25% of the measures have the potential to contribute to objective 9
• 6% of the measures have the potential to contribute to objective 10

We will refine our understanding of how individual measures link with objectives during the implementation of the measures, so the figures above represent our understanding at the time of adopting the plan. In particular, the percentages may increase when measures involving investigations and studies evolve into projects.

River basin district (RBD) scale measures in the Thames FRMP reflect the strategic challenges and opportunities we face. The following measures highlight the links:

• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work in partnership with other risk management authorities to support proactive development of strategic environmental plans in Thames river basin district to identify opportunities with stakeholders, ensure an aligned approach, improve drainage and environmental water quality and reduce the risk of flooding from all sources in the Thames river basin district
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work as part of the collaborative delivery framework to promote new ways of working in Thames river basin district to increase efficiency, value for money and the green legacy of our capital investment programme in the Thames river basin district
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work in partnership with other risk management authorities to support the implementation of the Thames regional flood and coastal committee 25 year vision in Thames river basin district to reduce flood risk and provide environmental benefits in the Thames river basin district.
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work in partnership to develop a catchment-scale approach which will complement local place based flood risk schemes in non-tidal River Thames catchment (Thames Valley) to reduce flood risk, build climate resilience, enhance the environment, grow the economy, support sustainable growth and improve health and wellbeing for local communities in the Thames river basin district.

2.3 Consultation

In preparing the Thames RBD FRMP we worked in partnership with LLFAs and other RMAs.

A public consultation on the draft FRMPs and associated SEA environmental reports (including the Thames RBD FRMP SEA environmental report) ran for 3 months, from 22 October 2021 to 21 January 2022. The consultation ran on the online consultation tool Citizen Space, and we engaged with stakeholders both nationally to encourage responses. Relevant LLFAs worked collaboratively with the Environment Agency to plan and run consultation activities for shared local stakeholders. We also ran stakeholder events and a social media campaign to advertise the consultation.

We received 255 responses in total, 29 of these were responses applied to all of the FRMPs being undertaken in England, and 50 specific to the Thames RBD. Responses received were from both individuals and organisations/groups. A range of environmental organisations responded to the consultation including Natural England and Historic England. Overall, there was broad support for the information and measures included in the FRMPs. The responses expressed through the consultation have helped to shape the final FRMP. The summary of response was published on 18 May 2022.

Sections 4 and 5 below outline how consultation responses were addressed and the changes made to the FRMP as a result of the consultation. For further information on the consultation responses and how we acted on these responses please see the FRMP ‘you said, we did’ document.

2.4 Thames RBD FRMP SEA

We carried out a SEA of the Thames RBD FRMP. This ensured we took environmental effects into account throughout the development of the FRMP. We also took technical, economic and other factors into account.

The SEA environmental report sets out the findings of the assessment. It outlines:

• the likely significant environmental effects of implementing the FRMP and of reasonable alternatives
• mitigation measures to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset potential negative effects
• enhancement opportunities to help realise greater environmental benefits

For further information on the SEA environmental report and its findings please see section 3 below, and the SEA environmental report. You can request a copy of the environmental report from the Environment Agency National Customer Contact Centre.

The FRMP sets out how to manage significant flood risk in nationally identified FRAs and how RMAs will work together, and with partners and communities to manage flood risk. It is a framework for RMAs to undertake other plans and individual FCERM projects. Many of these local level plans and projects will also undergo separate environmental assessments. These environmental assessments are at a more relevant scale to consider the potential effects of managing flood risk in different places.

2.5 Thames RBD FRMP habitats regulations assessment

We carried out a habitats regulations assessment (HRA) in accordance with The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) for the Thames RBD FRMP. The HRA considers the potential implications of the FRMP on designated European conservation sites. These sites contain species and habitats that are important at a European scale. The sites include the following designations: special areas of conservation, special protection areas and ramsar sites.

We have consulted with Natural England in the production of the HRA. The FRMP HRA recognises that many strategies, plans and projects developed within the framework set by the FRMP will be subject to their own requirements for HRA. This provides a local level framework to appropriately assess the effects of specific risk management policies and actions on European sites.

Section 5.3 provides a summary of the conclusions of the HRA. View the full HRA.

3. The findings of the SEA

Overall, the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) of the Thames river basin district flood risk management plan (FRMP) has found that the identified environmental effects are likely to be predominantly positive or neutral. Table 1 summarises the main outcomes of the assessment, which are discussed further below.

Table 1: summary outcome of the SEA

Topic	SEA question	Conclusion of assessment
Biodiversity, including flora and fauna	Does the plan protect and recover nature?	Positive
Population and human health	Does the plan improve health, wellbeing and equality?	Significant positive
Soil	Does the plan improve and sustain resources?	Neutral
Water	Does the plan protect and improve the water environment?	Positive
Climatic factors	Does the plan help to mitigate and adapt to climate change?	Neutral
Material assets	Does the plan support communities and a prosperous economy?	Positive
Cultural heritage	Does the plan conserve and enhance the historic environment?	Neutral
Landscape	Does the plan conserve and enhance landscape and seascape character?	Neutral
Interrelationships	Does the plan have implications for the relationship between the environmental topics?	Neutral

Our assessment was split into three elements. These elements were combined to form the overall conclusions of the SEA:

1. An assessment by each environmental topic. This assessment was undertaken for all national level measures and in detail for selected new local measures. The local measures had to contain sufficient information to undertake a more detailed assessment and it where it was likely to result in construction activities in this cycle of the FRMP. They were excluded where they involve a first planning stage of studies and investigations or preparing strategies. This assessment includes a summary of the other 2 assessments by topic
2. An assessment of the key locations identified in the FRMP. This includes a higher-level assessment of all the measures in flood risk areas and strategic areas
3. An assessment by type of measures proposed in the FRMP. Using broad categories of measures and types of work, a high-level assessment of all the local flood risk measures

Overall, the detailed assessment undertaken for the SEA of the FRMP has found that the identified environmental effects are likely to be predominantly positive or neutral. Further detail can be found in the SEA environmental report and non-technical summary .

Biodiversity, including flora and fauna

The detailed assessment concluded an overall positive effect on biodiversity. In terms of the key locations, a range of uncertain, neutral and positive effects was determined. Across the measure types, positive effects from protection and prevention measures were highlighted. However, the number of studies, appraisals and investigations included in the measures provides a lower certainty on the potential positive outcomes.

It is likely that the plan will improve biodiversity, with an overall likely positive effect on this topic.

Population and human health

The detailed assessment identified positive effects across almost all the measures screened in. Over three quarters of the key locations reported positive outcomes for population and human health, with one resulting in a significant positive effect. Almost all the measure types also reported a positive effect on this topic.

The plan is likely to help reduce the mental health impacts associated with living in an area at risk of flooding and the consequences of flooding across the river basin district. In combination the measures cover a wide geographical area resulting in a likely significant positive effect on population and human health.

Soil

In the detailed assessment, soils returned the most neutral effects of all the topics. In the key locations and types of measure assessment, flood risk management activities represent a small overall percentage of the land coverage in the river basin district. This resulted in neutral effects on this topic. However, there will be localised measures which reduce soil erosion and promote soil health.

The plan is likely to result in neutral effects on soils.

Water

Most of the measures screened in for detailed assessment identified a positive effect on water quality, with no negative effects identified. The key locations assessment identified neutral effects in the majority of locations, with areas of positive and uncertain outcomes. Through the measure type assessment, a number of measures promoted sustainable drainage and natural flood management which are likely to result in positive effects on the water environment. The potential for positive effects was also identified through many of the prevention and protection measures.

The plan is considered likely to result in positive effects on the water topic.

Climatic factors

Carbon emissions from construction activities were identified as a potentially significant negative effect on climatic factors through the detailed assessment of the national measures. However, across all strands of the assessment, adaption to climate change through a wide range of measures provides a strong positive impact on this topic.

We anticipate significant progress during the lifespan of the plan towards net zero carbon in line with UK and Environment Agency greenhouse gas reduction targets. A number of lead local flood authorities have also declared a climate emergency. If we can all make progress on these targets, the significance of construction effects on climatic factors will be reduced.

The overall outcome was a likely neutral effect on climatic factors.

Material assets

Measures which directly reduce flood risk often resulted in improvements to the resilience of communities and infrastructure to flooding. A positive effect on the associated material assets factor has been determined across all strands of the assessment over much of the river basin district.

The SEA reports a likely positive outcome on the material assets topic.

Cultural heritage

The potential for both positive and negative effects was across all strands of the assessment. Various measures could reduce flood risk to heritage features and support opportunities to enhance the historic environment. However, there are also potential direct impacts on heritage from construction activities.

Subject to an appropriate programme of archaeological mitigation and heritage assessment at a lower tier environmental assessment level, the outcome of the SEA was a likely neutral effect on cultural heritage.

Landscape

The potential for both positive and negative effects was across all strands of the assessment. Flood risk management measures can help to reduce the impacts to existing landscapes from the effects of flooding and coastal change. Many measures offer opportunities to enhance the quality of landscapes, by improving or extending green infrastructure networks or enhancing the public realm. New or improved infrastructure, however, can also result in the loss of landscape features that contribute to the character of a place and its use by people.

Mitigation can significantly reduce potential negative effects at the local level. With these measures in place the SEA determined an overall likely neutral outcome.

Mitigation and opportunities

With many measures currently at investigation or appraisal stage, the environmental effects were difficult to determine in the SEA. In these cases, the assessment was based on the measure type identified through the plan making process and an assumption that best practice is used on future projects. Where appropriate, a level of uncertainty was recorded in the assessment, which influenced the outcome of the SEA.

The same investigation and appraisal processes also offer an opportunity to implement the more uncertain beneficial aspects identified in the SEA. Identification and adoption of options with potential to improve the existing environment should be promoted. Options that avoid environmental effects should be considered ahead of those requiring mitigation or compensation. Adopting this approach could result in a wider range of positive effects being delivered through the FRMP than has currently been determined through this assessment. Specific topics where project level assessment of environmental effects would provide benefit and reduce uncertainties include:

• biodiversity
• water
• cultural heritage
• landscape

It is recommended that the mitigation actions below are incorporated at the project level and applied to the project planning, design and construction stages:

• in determining preferred approaches follow the mitigation hierarchy
• consider the environment alongside other measures in project development
• determine and mitigate for environmental effects

Place based alternatives

The approach to developing and agreeing the measures to be included in the FRMP differed between RBDs. Some held face to face or virtual workshops whilst others developed and refined measures via technical correspondence. In all cases the views of environmental and SEA specialists were central to this process, helping to shape and influence the plans and the measures which they comprise.

A presentation on how to consider alternatives was provided at the outset of the Thames river basin district second cycle FRMP. This was recorded and made available to the various plan contributors. Virtual workshops, internally within the Environment Agency, alongside lead local flood authority (LLFA) counterparts, were held to aid the development of measures for the Thames second cycle FRMP and regular discussions held with the plan contributors.

Specialists within the Environment Agency were invited to workshops to discuss development of the measures. Some other LLFAs also held workshops attended by a range of stakeholders who fed into the development of the plan. Environmental constraints and sustainability were considered as part of this process.

The proposed measures of the FRMP aim to build on first cycle FRMPs in setting out the flood risk management needs between 2021 and 2027 focusing on Flood Risk Areas. The ‘do nothing’ alternative is represented by the evolution of the baseline environment in the absence of the second cycle FRMPs. In the Thames RDB, measures tend to set preliminary actions for the future investigation and development of business case appraisals and options. As such, further planning processes and supporting environmental assessments will consider alternatives at the programme and project levels. Therefore, the consideration of alternatives measures for this FRMP SEA was limited.

4. How opinions expressed in response to the consultation have been taken into account

4.1 Introduction

The consultation on the draft Thames river basin district FRMP and the SEA environmental report took place between the 22 October 2021 to 21 January 2022. This section only refers to the views expressed in relation to the SEA environmental report. It summarises the key issues raised in the consultation and how we have taken them into account in finalising the Thames RBD FRMP. The ‘you said, we did’ document provides a full outline of the responses received on the draft FRMP and outlines how we took them into account in finalising the FRMP.

The consultation included questions on the SEA environmental report. The questions asked the following:

• do you agree with the conclusions of the environmental assessment?
• are there further significant environmental effects, either positive or negative, of the draft flood risk management plans (FRMPs) which you think should be considered?
• are there further opportunities to enhance any positive or mitigate any negative environmental effects that should be considered for the final FRMPs?

4.2 Cross cutting themes

Many of the responses received in relation to the SEA environmental report relate to the content and measures within the FRMP and were cross cutting across the FRMPs. Cross cutting themes raised through consultation are discussed below, alongside our response to these. Please see the ‘you said we did’ document for further information .

Historic environment

Historic England outlined the importance of the historic environment in place-shaping, local and cultural identity and how it can support the resilience of places and people. Whilst heritage assets and the historic environment can be affected by flooding and flood risk management, they can also play a positive role through, for example, supporting community engagement with flood risk management, learning from traditional water management practices and living with water. There are opportunities for the historic environment to support natural flood management and help build climate resilience and adaptation to flooding and coastal change.

Historic England described how it was important to consider how FRMP measures impact on the historic landscape character and sense of place, as well as specific designated assets. Both direct and indirect effects (for example, through water level changes or mitigation measures for other environmental effects), both positive and negative effects, of flood risk measures should be considered. They would like to have increased collaboration and early engagement as measures progress to ensure that effects are adequately assessed, and opportunities maximised.

Historic England outlined the need for strengthened objectives and measures within the FRMPs to provide a consistent strategic approach to the integration of flood risk management and the historic environment. This should be consistent with the requirements for conserving and enhancing the historic environment set out in the national planning policy framework.

The SEA undertaken was proportionate to the strategic nature of the FRMP and many of the measures mean that we’ll need to investigate to decide the nature and extent of flood risk management activity at a project level. As such, at this stage the nature and extent of activity is not known and therefore cannot be assessed with any certainty. Project level environmental assessments will be undertaken, with Historic England and other relevant stakeholders consulted early in the process. The assurance of project proposals provides additional safeguards that make sure environmental implications are considered in the implementation of the second cycle FRMP.

Within the FRMP itself 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. This measure appears in each FRMP, and reflects the national FCERM strategy measure. The updated measure can be seen below:

Between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will invest in flood risk management projects in England to contribute to the resilience, adaptation and improvement of the natural, built and historic environment where appropriate across all river basin districts.

The national FCERM strategy roadmap and delivery plan will support the delivery of this FRMP measure and we will continue to work with Historic England and other partners to achieve this.

The wording in relation to early engagement and partnership working has also been strengthened, with further detail provided on our partnership approach.

Biodiversity and designated sites

Consultees outlined that an HRA should be undertaken, and that it is important to consider the impact of the FRMP on protected sites, priority habitats and protected species. Natural England felt that the SEA documents lacked detail and documentation which made it hard to understand how the assessment had been undertaken and on what basis, this was particularly with respect to designated sites. In addition, it was suggested that the SEA assessment criteria with respect to biodiversity should be strengthened to include the consideration of conservation objectives associated with designated sites and that the SEA should provide details on favourable condition tables, site improvement plans and supplementary advice on conservation objectives (SACOs).

Natural England identified that many schemes and measures carried over from the previous FRMP cycle have been indicated as not requiring an SEA at the scheme level due to no significant changes in the design. They were concerned that this approach does not consider changes in the ecological and policy context that may have occurred since the first cycle FRMP leading to potential environmental effects not being mitigated.

We have carried out an HRA in accordance with The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) for the Thames RBD FRMP. The HRA considers the potential implications of the FRMP on designated European conservation sites and provides figures to show the locations of these sites. These sites contain species and habitats that are important at a European scale. The sites include the following designations: special areas of conservation, special protection areas and ramsar sites. Please see section 5.3 of this report for further information on the conclusions of the HRA for the Thames RBD FRMP.

The SEA undertaken was proportionate to the strategic nature of the FRMP and many of the measures mean that we’ll need to investigate to decide the nature and extent of flood risk management activity at a project level. Many strategies, plans and projects developed within the framework set by the FRMP will be subject to their own requirements for environmental assessment and HRA and will be subject to planning or other consenting regimes. This provides a local level framework to appropriately assess the effects of specific risk management policies and actions on designated sites and biodiversity, including project specific design considerations.

For the second cycle FRMP SEA we revised and updated the baseline and policy context used to ensure that the latest information was being used to set the scope and assess effects. When deciding which measures to assess within the detailed assessment of individual measures or considered as part of a cumulative assessment, the type of measure and the nature of the activity involved was considered.

Measures that were carried over from the first cycle FRMP and were already being implemented or constructed were considered in the cumulative assessment

Measures which were yet to be implemented but had not changed significantly were considered in the cumulative assessment. This is because they had previously been through the SEA process. Updated baseline and policy context was taken into account during the assessment of cumulative effects.

The SEA methodology is outlined in further detail within the SEA environmental report.

Agriculture and land management

FRMPs will help to create a better place for people and wildlife. Consultees considered that when assessing and managing flood risk, there is a need to consider all land uses and land management practices. Adequate integration with planning to achieve more sustainable development was also raised.

The recognition of the importance of agricultural land in the SEA was appreciated. However, some respondents considered that the benefits that the farming community and agriculture bring should be better represented in the FRMPs. These include economic and environmental benefits, ecosystem services, biodiversity, carbon sequestration, water quality, landscape character, recreation and tourism. These benefits could be jeopardised if agricultural land is regularly flooded.

Consultees highlighted that the land use change impact on food production should be a key consideration that the FRMPs should cover. They explained that there needs to be a balance between flood risk management, including natural flood management, land use change and agricultural land loss. They wanted more consideration of the value of agricultural land regarding future flood protection and food production is needed. There were also concerns that using agricultural land for flood protection could have serious implications for the economy.

References to land management have been updated within the FRMP to provide additional information and emphasis on the significance of flood risk to agricultural land and food production. Wording has also been strengthened in relation to partnership working.

The FCERM strategy roadmap also includes actions that will support farmers and landowners to help adapt their businesses and practices to be resilient to flooding and coastal change. It outlines how we will work with others to develop land management practices that enhance flood resilience alongside sustainable food production.

Nature-based solutions

Comments related to nature-based solutions were primarily focused on the FRMP itself. They were focused on:

• the positive benefits of nature-based solutions
• the need for a balance between nature-based and engineered solutions
• the need for alignment with the national FCERM strategy

Please refer to the ‘you said we did’ document for our response to these comments and the changes made to the FRMP.

Catchment-based approach

Comments related to catchment-based approaches were primarily focused on the FRMP itself.

There was broad support for existing measures and a greater emphasis on a catchment- based approach for flood risk management. It was suggested that the focus on flood risk areas within the plans appears inconsistent with a catchment- based approach, which is vital to manage the movement and storage of water at the catchment scale and to maximise the use of nature- based solutions and looking at flood risk management more holistically. Consultees set out the need for collaborative working to optimise the benefits of a catchment-based approach. Please refer to the ‘you said we did’ document for our response to these comments and the changes made to the FRMP.

Alignment of plans and strategies

Respondents outlined the need for greater clarity as to how the FRMPs fit with other plans and strategies (including, the national FCERM strategy, RBMPs, local nature recovery strategies, drainage wastewater management plans, shoreline management plans). They considered the alignment of strategies and plans to be essential to ensure a comprehensive approach and effective delivery.

The alignment between FRMPs and RBMPs was welcomed to optimise environmental opportunities and benefits.

Please refer to the ‘you said we did’ document for our response to these comments and the changes made to the FRMP.

SEA plans, policies and programmes review

Some consultees proposed additional plans, policies and programmes for consideration in relation to the SEA. These included the chalk stream restoration strategy and the UK peatland strategy, details of which are summarised below.

Chalk stream restoration strategy (CaBA, 2021)

A plan to address the ecological health of chalk streams across the UK. It considers three main themes alone and in combination: water quantity; water quality; and physical habitat quality. Recommended actions across a range of organisations are proposed to strengthen the protection for chalk streams. New actions and improving actions in existing plans, policies and programmes are proposed. These include RBMP measures, catchment abstraction and wastewater treatment. Nature based solutions are promoted in chalk stream catchments. The FRMP aligns with and supports the actions set out in the chalk stream restoration strategy, in particular regarding objectives and measures relating to natural flood management, catchment based approaches, and partnership working

The UK peatland strategy (IUCN, 2018)

The UK peatland strategy aims to capture and embed a shared vision for peatlands across the UK. It has a 2040 vision that ‘uor peatlands are protected, enhanced, sustainably managed and are recognised for their intrinsic value and the public benefits they provide’. It sets out six key goals to support the achievement of the 2040 vision:

• conserve, restore and enhance the best peatlands
• restore damaged peatlands to functioning ecosystems
• adapt management of drained peatlands
• sustainably manage healthy peatlands with compatible land uses
• maintain a programme to oversee process against strategic goals
• communicate value of peatlands to a wide audience

The FRMP aligns with the strategy, in particular, regarding objectives and measures relating to natural flood management, catchment-based approaches and working in partnership. There are also specific measures regarding peatland areas, where relevant.

In summary, the FRMP aligns with both of these strategies and aims to work with natural processes in order to deliver flood risk management. It also outlines how we will work in partnership with others and use catchment-based approaches to maximise outcomes.

4.3 Themes specific to the Thames RBD FRMP

Coastal and estuarine habitats

Theme:

Coastal and estuarine habitats have not been sufficiently identified or assessed through the strategic environmental assessment.

Response:

Whilst several specific habitat types and biodiversity have been mentioned, we recognise that coastal and estuarine habitat type was not specifically mentioned in the Thames river basin district second cycle flood risk management plan – strategic environmental assessment: environmental report. The coastal and estuarine habitats are explored further below.

Much of the coastal and estuarine habitat is within the London and Thames Estuary main rivers and the sea flood risk area and the Greater London surface water flood risk area. Other smaller FRAs, such as The Canvey Island surface water flood risk area, also include intertidal habitat. Apart from a small area of the estuary marshes to the east of Southend and the land to the south and east of the Medway, these habitats all fall in the Thames Estuary 2100 plan area.

Most of the Thames Estuary has areas of protected intertidal habitats, not all of which are covered by national and international designations. Most of the estuarine and intertidal habitats downstream of Tilbury and Gravesend are nationally or internationally designated. Upstream of these locations the designations are smaller and less numerous, but the habitats outside of the designations remain important. We recognise the importance of rising sea levels on estuarine and intertidal habitats and the interactions of these habitats with new and existing defences.

The measures which may interact with the estuarine environment at scale relate to the London and Thames Estuary main rivers and the sea flood risk area. As noted in section 6.2.18 of the Thames river basin district second cycle flood risk management plan – strategic environmental assessment: environmental report, most of the measures involve studies around options or investigating flood risk processes in more detail. The outcomes of studies which inform future projects are particularly difficult to assess at a strategic scale. With a lack of certainty on how these studies will evolve, future project appraisal and assessment processes will have more certainty and will provide a better place to determine the impacts on intertidal and estuarine habitats.

Many measures in the relevant FRAs directly relate to the Thames Estuary 2100 plan for managing flood risk into the future. This plan has an associated strategic environmental assessment detailing the impacts and identifying potential mitigation on intertidal and coastal habitats. These reports are better placed to determine and manage the impacts of specific options on intertidal and estuarine habitats.

Given the nature of the measures proposed, the decisions to be made and future assessments required, it is unlikely that more detailed consideration of these habitats will alter the outcomes of the Thames river basin district second cycle flood risk management plan – strategic environmental assessment: environmental report.

Chalk stream habitats

Theme:

Links could be made with chalk stream priority habitat restoration, delivering on statutory water framework directive (WFD) goals and ecological enhancements such as fish passage benefits, that could be addressed while addressing flood risk.

Response:

The national chalk stream restoration strategy has been published since we undertook the SEA. Many of the objectives of this strategy align with WFD objectives for all waterbodies. Some chalk streams are covered by national and international biodiversity designations or the water framework directive. Additional datasets were considered for inclusion in the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) however, given the scale and strategic nature of the plan, the national datasets were considered most relevant for undertaking the assessment. The impacts on specific habitats, including chalk streams, are better considered through future project appraisal and assessment processes. This is because there will be more certainty about the proposed works and the scale of the potential impacts will be refined.

Habitats and species data

Theme:

Additional information on local wildlife sites and species could be included.

Response:

We considered including local wildlife sites and specific species data into the strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Given the scale and strategic nature of the plan, we determined that national datasets relating to national and international nature conservation designations were the most relevant against which to undertake the assessment. The impacts on specific wildlife sites and species are better considered through future project appraisal and assessment processes. This is because there will be more certainty about the proposed works and the scale of the potential impacts will be refined.

Landscape

Theme:

Protected landscapes (areas of outstanding natural beauty and national parks) are consistently ignored, and the measures could be harmful to these features.

Response:

The strategic environmental assessment of the second cycle flood risk management Plan has considered landscape as a topic and identified an overall neutral effect. However, many of the measures involve studies around options or investigating flood risk processes in more detail. The outcomes of studies which inform future projects are particularly difficult to assess at a strategic scale. With a lack of certainty on how these studies will evolve, future project appraisal and assessment processes will have more certainty and will provide a better place to determine the impacts on designated landscapes.

The majority of flood risk or strategic areas in the Thames river basin district are not within areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONB) or national parks. However, 14 are close enough to an AONB for measures to potentially interact with these designations. Of these, 7 are within or overlap to varying degrees with an AONB and a further 7 are adjacent to an AONB. None of the flood risk or strategic areas are near a national park.

In considering impacts on landscape designations the type of flood risk and the nature of measures have a role. It is likely that measures within surface water flood risk areas (FRA) will be contained within the FRA itself and be close to the properties at risk of surface water flooding. It is less likely that these measures will have an adverse effect on landscape designations. 8 of the FRAs identified relate to surface water, of which four overlap with AONB designation boundaries.

There is a higher risk that measures relating to the 5 rivers and the sea FRAs will be upstream of the FRA boundaries which could interact with landscape designations. However, most of the measures relating to main rivers and the sea flooding involve early stages of investigations or appraisal, raising public awareness or influencing planning policy. Where investigations and appraisal are proposed, project level assessments will be better placed to determine and inform the decisions and impacts on designated landscapes.

The strategic area is the Oxford to Cambridge arc, which spans a huge area. The measures comprise 1 plan, 2 police/guidance documents and 2 property level adaptation measures. None of these are likely, at this stage, to impact on landscape designations.

Erosion

Theme:

The impacts of erosion on habitats and infrastructure have not been adequately considered.

Response:

Erosion and high flows are natural processes which renew habitats. Losses through erosion are often balanced by gains through deposition. We recognise that climate change will increase rainfall, leading to higher river flows and associated increases in depths and velocities. This is likely to impact significantly on sediment transport processes.

Around infrastructure which interacts with watercourses, such as bridges, the structures can alter the local erosion and deposition patterns. Certain measures within the plan may also cause variations in flow patterns, locally altering the pattern of erosion and deposition. Measures which hold back or slow the flow of water are likely to reduce the frequency and impact of high flows and rate of erosion. Tree cover can also offer protection from soil erosion and slope failure, reducing the amount of sediment entering the watercourse. When considered at a river basin scale, these measures are unlikely to result in significant effects.

With local variations to flows and erosion, any potential impacts are best managed at a project level through subsequent environmental assessment, design and mitigation.

Wellbeing and Amenity

Themes:

Improving and creating green corridors along and to the Thames will increase wellbeing and resilience of people and improving biodiversity.

Investigate the links between litter, flood risk and flood risk management.

Response:

The links between landscape and biodiversity improvements and health and wellbeing is recognised in the SEA (section 5.2). Whilst green corridors are not specifically mentioned, the range of flood risk management proposed offers a wide range of opportunities for creating and improving green-blue corridors. These will be identified at a project level depending on the scale and nature of the measure proposed.

Rivers can be a path for the movement of litter. In flood events, litter from flooded areas can be washed into rivers and eventually the sea. It can also be deposited when the flows return to normal. Structures across rivers can also collect litter, which is why many of these structures have trash screens to prevent blockage and enable the litter to be removed. Whilst there are opportunities for flood risk management activities to remove some litter from rivers, the screens need to allow water to pass, so will not be able to capture smaller items. The plan is unlikely to be able to tackle this issue at scale.

Alignment of plans and strategies

Theme:

There were several requests to make links with plans, projects and strategies within the Thames catchment.

Response:

We welcome the opportunity to work with others where our measures could combine with the objectives of other plans, projects and strategies. When considering the range, breadth and number of local plans across the Thames river basin, it is not possible to represent them all in the strategic environmental assessment (SEA). We have focussed on regional and national plans in the SEA as these often guide more localised approaches. By not including any of the more localised plans in the SEA, we do not artificially increase or decrease the importance of some specific plans over others.

5. Reasons for adopting the Thames RBD FRMP

5.1 Introduction

This section provides an outline of the main factors taken into account in finalising the Thames RBD FRMP. The main factors include the:

• findings of the SEA process as described in the environmental report including the assessment of reasonable alternatives
• consultation responses to the draft FRMP
• consultation responses to the environmental report
• findings of the final HRA

In section 5.2below we summarise the main changes made to the FRMP as informed by the consultation. In section 5.3 we outline the relationship to the SEA process.

5.3 The final FRMP

A variety of changes have been made to the FRMP including the supporting text in Part A and Part Band to measures. Changes have also been made to the flood plan explorer (FPE).

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

• wording/supporting information for existing measures
• geographical extents
• measure(s) to be 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 and to feed into the decision as to whether to implement 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.

There were a number cross cutting themes from the consultation on the draft FRMP, which led to changes across all FRMPs. The changes reflect areas where responses identified common themes for improvement or which needed to be further clarified. Some of the general changes we have made include:

• explaining more about our approach and commitment to partnership working
• expanding on the information about NFM including its types, benefits and outcomes
• providing additional details about the role of catchment partnerships and the importance of the catchment-based approach
• clarifying how the FRMPs align with other plans and strategies including the national FCERM strategy and RBMPs
• greater clarity on the historic environment, with a change to a national measure to include adaptability and resilience of the historic environment, and additional wording to explain how we will work with others to maximise opportunities and minimise effects
• providing additional information on the significance of flood risk to agricultural land and food production
• increased clarity with regard to climate change and the contribution of FRMP measures to climate resilience
• explained the methodology used to identify FRAs in the preliminary flood risk assessments and provided clarification that no groundwater FRAs have been identified
• greater explanation with regard to funding
• made improvements to flood plan explorer

Some of the comments we received could not be addressed through changes in the FRMPs. Some comments identified local issues which needed consideration at a local level. These were passed to our and LLFA’s local teams and these are being considered. In addition, some comments related to our and the government’s wider remits. The ‘you said we did’ document provides further detail on these aspects.

Changes to Part B of the second cycle Thames flood risk management plan (FRMP) are summarised below:

• minor alterations throughout the document to aid clarity and readability
• recognised the impacts of flooding on agriculture and horticulture
• more information has been included around catchment-based delivery - offering multiple benefits to communities and the environment
• more information has been provided on partnership working and links with other plans
• updated information around flood risk and canals
• recognised that climate change predictions will evolve, replacing some of the presented river basin district level information and sign-posting up-to-date locational information
• The FRMP document details flood events from 2015-2020, as such information on the London 2021 flooding was not originally included. The collective review of the London 2021 flooding from a pan-London group is still ongoing. Following the consultation a decision was made to include this event, highlight the severity and number of residents impacted and outline the next steps to be taken.

In addition to the changes made from the consultation, we have also:

• reviewed and updated the information provided on temporary barriers
• updated information where local plans have progressed since the draft plan was produced

36 measures within the Thames FRMP have been updated. These updates can be viewed on FPE. These clarify wording and supporting information around the measures rather than altering the aims or outcomes.

• 27 measures alter the delivery timetable
• 1 clarifies the source of flooding
• 2 alterations to update measure identification or label
• 5 clarifications around the lead organisations and those involved in delivery
• 1 measure has been updated to make it more strategic - replacing specific location with key locations in the critical drainage area and updating the delivery timetable

One additional measure has been included in the FRMP with the aim of bringing multiple partners together to act on flooding in the London and Thames Estuary main rivers and the sea flood risk area.

The ‘you said, we did’ document summarises the responses received on the draft FRMP also how we took them into account in finalising the FRMP.

5.3 Review of the changes

We have reviewed the changes to the FRMP as part of the SEA process. The main purpose of this was to determine whether they could change the significant environmental effects identified in the assessment of the draft FRMP (see section 3 for an overview of these effects).

Overall, there was broad support for the information and measures included in the FRMP. This supports the SEA conclusions on the assessment of alternatives and its approach to assessing the potential significant environmental effects of the FRMPs.

A substantial proportion of the changes to the FRMP are associated with additions to the supporting text or narrative. In some places the supporting text has also been restructured These changes have primarily sought to provide additional information and help clarify aspects following the consultation responses. Changes made to the Part A national objectives and the Part B national measures have been minor text changes to clarify or strengthen them.

We have concluded that the changes made to the FRMP do not materially affect the SEA findings and likely significant effects identifies. It also takes into account the changes made in response to the Thames RBD FRMP environmental report’s recommendations for mitigation and enhancement.

In addition, we have prepared a final habitats regulations assessment (HRA) to assess potential effects on European sites. We consulted with Natural England in preparing the final HRA. A summary of the conclusions are presented below:

Likely Significant Effects of the FRMP on all European sites, both alone and in-combination, were excluded for all measures and an appropriate assessment was not required. This was based on various factors, including some measures being carried over from the cycle 1 FRMP (which would have been subject to the statutory consenting process, including HRA), already implemented, not associated with impact pathways linking to European sites or too non-specific (either in terms of specific location, their nature or both) to allow for a detailed, meaningful assessment.

24 measures were screened out at the strategic FRMP level but recommended for down-the-line HRA since the measures are sufficiently broadly expressed that they could be delivered without adverse effects. The Thames FRMP also contains some measures that could lead to a positive outcome for the conditions of European sites, if these are adequately planned in consideration of site conservation objectives. These measures, which include a range of proposals ranging from enhanced collaboration, further scientific studies to the delivery of natural flood management approaches, have the potential to help mitigate some of the impacts currently affecting European sites, such as inadequate water levels, insufficient hydrological flows and continuing coastal squeeze.

Overall we consider the changes made to the FRMP are covered by the findings of the SEA, HRA and consultation processes.

6. How monitoring of the significant environmental effects of the implementation of the FRMP will be carried out

6.1 Introduction

The SEA Regulations require significant environmental effects of the final FRMP to be monitored. This section outlines the actions we will take to monitor the significant environmental effects of the second cycle FRMP.

We will use existing monitoring and reporting mechanisms to monitor environmental changes. This information will be used to determine whether the second cycle FRMP might contribute further to reducing potential environmental conflicts or make a greater contribution to the achievement of environmental objectives It will not be possible to determine whether any changes can be directly attributed to the second cycle FRMP because there are too many other influences on environmental change for a direct relationship to be identified.

The environmental topics that are being proposed for monitoring are identified below. The SEA only identified potential positive significant effects in relation to population and human health. However, given the uncertainty that has been acknowledged in this report over the likely impacts of the plan on other environmental topics, it is proposed to monitor a wider range of topics. In particular, the overall positive effect on biodiversity, flora and fauna is dependent on delivery of biodiversity net gain on development schemes. Regular review and monitoring of this delivery is fundamental.

Monitoring of progress towards the national FCERM strategy objectives, via the FCERM Strategy Roadmap, and of the FRMP will help to identify areas that need review and action in relation to the environmental ambitions of the plans. Please see FRMP Part B for further information on how we will monitor implementation of the FRMP.

In addition to the monitoring proposed below, our process of business case approval and assurance associated with flood and coastal risk management grant in aid funding, will help to further assure that management, mitigation and monitoring occurs at a project level. Project level environmental assessments will be undertaken, where appropriate, and many projects will require planning consent.

6.2 Population, human health and material assets

We are required to periodically report to the minister about flood and coastal erosion risk management outcomes. Data on the changes in the number of households and businesses at risk of flooding and those better protected from flooding is already collected and reported on for outcome measure 2.

Strategic objective 1.1 of the national flood and coastal erosion risk management strategy for England action plan states that ‘between now and 2050 the nation will bolster its resilience to flooding and coastal change’ and outlines a number of actions to help deliver it. Monitoring conducted to understand the extent to which this objective is achieved will be relevant also to understanding the extent to which second cycle FRMP resilience objectives and the respective benefits for people and human health are being achieved across RBDs.

6.3 Biodiversity, flora and fauna

Annual monitoring is already undertaken to determine the length of rivers improved to help show progress toward meeting the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) Regulations 2017 objectives. Over the lifetime of the plan we would expect to see the number of rivers reduce where flood risk management is a contributing factor in a rivers failure to achieve good status or potential.

We and other RMAs also report on outcome measure 4 (OM4), which measures

• km of waterbody improved
• hectares of habitat improved
• hectares of habitat created

We will also undertake monitoring associated with the implementation of biodiversity net gain (as set out in the 25 year environment plan and included in the Environment Act 2021).

6.4 Water

We undertake monitoring of the water environment to meet the requirements of the water environment regulations. Indicators used include water quality, ecology (for example invertebrates, fish) and morphology. Over the lifetime of the plan, we would expect to see a reduction in the number of rivers where flood risk management is a contributing factor to its poor status.

6.5 Climatic factors

The second cycle FRMP include measures that aim to help adapt to and increase resilience to climate change. General reporting and monitoring on implementation of these measures and their effectiveness will form a good indicator of progress. Furthermore, under the Climate Change Act 2008 we are required to report to Defra on climate change adaptation. Elements of the report that are relevant to Thames RBD FRMP include:

• working with our customers and partners to adapt to a changing climate
• climate resilient investment
• building the evidence base

Tools and methods, such as carbon budgets, are being developed by us to manage the reduction of carbon emissions to contribute our ambition to be a net zero carbon organisation by 2030. While a significant number of local authorities have declared a climate emergency and might be expected to reduce their carbon emissions there is no consistent method of monitoring this. It is therefore likely that our data will be used as an indicator of the performance of the wider programme.

7. References

CaBA, 2021. Chalk stream strategy. Chalk stream strategy - CaBA

IUCN, 2018. UK peatland strategy. UK strategy. IUCN UK peatland programme

List of abbreviations

Abbreviation	Description
AONB	area of outstanding natural beauty
BNG	biodiversity net gain
DWMP	drainage and wastewater management plan
FCERM	flood and coastal erosion risk management
FPE	flood plan explorer
FRA	flood risk area
FRMP	flood risk management plan
HRA	habitats regulations assessment
LFRMS	local flood risk management strategy
LLFA	lead local flood authority
NFM	natural flood management
RBMP	river basin management plan
RMA	risk management authority
SACO	supplementary advice on conservation objectives
SEA	strategic environmental assessment
SMP	shoreline management plan
SoEP	statement of environmental particulars
WFD	water framework directive

Glossary

Area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB): areas formally designated under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act (1949) to protect parts of the countryside of high scenic quality that cannot be selected for National Park status as they do not have opportunities for outdoor recreation.

Adaptation: means anticipating appropriate action to prevent or minimise the likelihood and consequences of flooding and coastal change. It has been shown that well planned early adaptation action saves money and lives late.

Baseline: a description of the present state of the environment with the consideration of how the environment would change in the future in the absence of the plan/programme/project as a result of natural events and other human activities.

Baseline studies/survey: collection of information about the environment which is likely to be affected by the project.

Biodiversity net gain: an approach to development that aims to leave the natural environment in a measurably better state than beforehand by creating or enhancing habitat.

Catchment: a surface water catchment is the total area that drains into a river. A groundwater catchment is the total area that supplies the groundwater part of the river flow.

Coastal erosion: the loss of land due to the effects of waves and, in the case of coastal cliffs, slope processes (such as high groundwater levels). This may include cliff instability, where coastal processes result in landslides or rock falls.

Conservation area: an area designated under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 to protect its architectural or historic character.

Cumulative impacts: the combined impacts of several projects within an area, which individually are not significant, but together amount to a significant impact.

Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra): government department responsible for safeguarding our natural environment and setting environmental policy.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA): is an assessment process applied to both new development proposals and changes or extensions to existing developments that are likely to have significant effects on the environment.

Environmental land management scheme (ELMS): the cornerstone of the government’s new agricultural policy. The scheme means farmers and other land managers may be paid for delivering public goods such as clean and plentiful water, thriving plants and wildlife and reduction of and adaptation to climate change.

Environmental net gain: an approach to development that aims to leave the natural environment in a measurably better state than beforehand. The aim of environmental net gain is to reduce pressure on and achieve overall improvements in natural capital, ecosystem services and the benefits they deliver.

Environmental report: the document produced to describe the strategic environmental assessment process carried out for strategies. This report can be standalone or contained as an appendix to a strategy.

Flood defence: a structure (or system of structures) that reduce the risk of flooding from rivers or the sea.

Flood plan explorer: a new, online, map-based tool which displays all of the measures proposed as part of the second cycle of flood risk management plans in England.

Flood risk area: areas identified through the preliminary flood risk assessment process where the risk of flooding is significant nationally for people, the economy or the environment.

Flood risk management plan (FRMP): a statutory plan prepared by the Environment Agency and LLFAs under the Flood Risk Regulations 2009. The plans are reviewed and updated every 6 years.

Flood and coastal erosion risk management: managing the risks of flooding and coastal erosion to people, property and the natural environment through minimising predicting and managing the risk.

Green infrastructure: includes a range of environments such as parks, playing fields, woodland, street trees, rights of way, allotments, canal tow paths, green walls and roofs.

Habitats directive: EC Directive (92/43/EEC) on the Conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna. Implemented (with the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC)) in the UK as the Conservation (Natural habitats and wild flora and fauna) Regulations (1994). This establishes a system of protection of certain flora, fauna and habitats considered to be of International or European conservation importance. Sites are designated as special areas of conservation (SACs), special protection areas (SPAs) and/or ramsar sites. Together these sites are referred to as the Natura 2000 network.

Habitats regulations assessment: any developments in or close to a special area of conservation or a special protection area are subject to the habitat regulations for approval of Natural England.

Historic England: Officially known as the Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England. A public body that helps people care for, enjoy and celebrate England’s spectacular historic environment. They protect, champion and save the places that define who we are and where we’ve come from as a nation. Historic England are the government statutory advisor on the historic environment and are funded largely by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.

Internal drainage boards: a public body that manage water levels in an area, known as an internal drainage district, where there is a special need for drainage.

Lead local flood authority: these are county, unitary or metropolitan boroughs that are responsible for managing flooding from surface water, smaller watercourses and groundwater.

Main river: a watercourse designated by Defra. The Environment Agency has permissive powers to carry out flood defence works, maintenance and operational activities on main rivers. Responsibility for maintenance rests on the riparian owner.

Mitigation measures: actions that are taken to minimise, prevent or compensate for adverse effects.

Natural England: an executive non-departmental public body responsible to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Their purpose is to protect and improve England’s natural environment and encourage people to enjoy and get involved in their surroundings. Their aim is to create a better natural environment that covers all of our urban, country and coastal landscapes, along with all of the animals, plants and other organisms that live with us.

Natural flood management: implementation of natural measures which help to alleviate the risk of flooding. They can be used in conjunction with more traditional engineering techniques.

Nature based solutions: the sustainable management and use of natural features and processes to help address societal and environmental challenges.

Preparedness measure: a measure (action) which aims to prepare people for flooding. Examples include flood forecasting and warning, flood emergency response planning and improving public preparedness for flooding.

Prevention measure: a measure (action) which aims to avoid putting people or the environment at risk of flooding. Examples include watercourse regulation, flood risk modelling and mapping and development planning and control.

Property level resilience: actions to make people and their property less vulnerable to the physical and mental impacts of flooding, some which prevent water entering a house and others that minimise the impact should water enter the house, thus speeding up the recovery process.

Protection measure: a measure (action) which aims to better protect people from the risk of flooding. Examples include building flood defences, nature based solutions and asset maintenance.

Recovery and review measure: a measure (action) which aims to use learning from flood incidents. Examples include reviewing lessons learnt from flood response, supporting communities, businesses and the environment to recover from flooding.

Risk management authority (RMA): the collective of organisations who are responsible for flood and coastal risk management in England, including the Environment Agency, lead local Flood Authorities, district councils and internal drainage boards.

River basin district (RBD): large river catchments in England. They cover an entire river system, including river, lake, groundwater, estuarine and coastal water bodies.

River basin management plan: statutory plans developed by the Environment Agency which set out how organisations, stakeholders and communities will work together to improve the water environment.

Scheduled monument: nationally important historic sites, buildings or monuments identified by Historic England and designated by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. Any work affecting a scheduled monument must gain consent under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act (1979).

SEA directive: European Directive 2001/42/EC “on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment”.

SEA regulations: The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations (England) (SI 2004 1633) are the regulations transposing the SEA Directive into UK law.

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA): a process designed to make sure that significant environmental effects arising from proposed plans and programmes are identified, assessed, subjected to public participation, taken into account by decision-makers, and monitored. SEA sets the framework for future assessment of development projects, some of which require environmental impact assessment (EIA). SEA is carried out according to the requirements of the SEA regulations.

Sustainable development: a concept defined by the Brundtland Report (1987) as “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.

Sustainable drainage systems (SuDs): approaches to manage surface water that take account of water quantity (flooding), water quality (pollution), biodiversity (wildlife and plants) and amenity are collectively referred to as sustainable drainage systems (SuDs). SuDs mimic nature and typically manage rainfall close to where it falls SuDs can be designed to transport (convey) surface water slow runoff down (attenuate) before it enters watercourses.

Water body: a unit of surface water being the whole (or part) of a stream river or canal lake or reservoir estuary or stretch of coastal water A groundwater water body is a defined area of an aquifer with geological and hydrological boundaries to ensure consistency and avoid fragmentation.

Water framework directive (WFD): EC Directive (2000/60/EC) on integrated river basin management. The WFD sets out environmental objectives for water status based on ecological and chemical parameters, common monitoring and assessment strategies, arrangements for river basin administration and planning and a programme of measures to meet the objectives. This is transposed into UK law through the Water Environment Regulations 2017.