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 Northumbria 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 Northumbria 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 Northumbria RBD FRMP as adopted
• how we will monitor the likely significant environmental effects of implementing the Northumbria RBD FRMP.

1.2 Flood risk management plans (FRMPs)

The second cycle Northumbria 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 Northumbria RBD FRMP provides further information.

1.3 The SEA process

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 Northumbria 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 Northumbria 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 Northumbria RBD FRMP
• consultation
• Northumbria RBD FRMP SEA
• habitats regulations assessment (HRA)

2.2 Development of the Northumbria RBD FRMP

The environment and sustainability were considered throughout the preparation of the Northumbria 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 Northumbria RBD FRMP also includes the following national and FRMP specific measures in relation to environmental aspects.

2.2.1 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

2.2.2 Local measures

The Northumbria RBD FRMP includes the following specific measures in relation to environmental aspects at a river basin district level:

• by 2027, the Environment Agency will work with risk management authorities and wider communities to deliver innovative and natural improvements to flood risk and habitat quality in North East of England to reduce community flood risk and improve water quality while improving future collaborative working in the Northumbria river basin district
• by 2027, the Environment Agency and risk management authorities will collaborate with environmental partners and major landowners to increase peatland and wetland restoration in North East of England to reduce flood risk, improve water quality, restore natural habitats, promote carbon storage or allow for carbon sequestration to counter the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss in the Northumbria river basin district
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency and risk management authorities within the Northumbria integrated drainage partnership will deliver a collaborative programme of flood risk management works in North East of England to protect communities from multiple sources of flooding and implement environmental improvements in the Northumbria river basin district
• by 2027, the Environment Agency will identify and map opportunities to deliver nature-based solutions in North East of England to provide a shared resource that can be used to deliver schemes that reduce flood risk and benefit the natural environment in the Northumbria river basin district
• by 2027, the Environment Agency will work with risk management authorities and wider communities to deliver innovative and natural improvements to flood risk and habitat quality in North East of England to reduce community flood risk and improve water quality while improving future collaborative working in the Northumbria river basin district
• by 2027, the Environment Agency and risk management authorities will collaborate with environmental partners and major landowners to increase peatland and wetland restoration in North East of England to reduce flood risk, improve water quality, restore natural habitats, promote carbon storage or allow for carbon sequestration to counter the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss in the Northumbria river basin district
• between 2021 and 2025, the Environment Agency will support the north east coastal group to review, update and where appropriate change their shoreline management plans in North East of England to better reflect adaptive approaches to managing coastal change in the Northumbria river basin district
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work with coast protection authorities to undertake estuary wide studies that establish intertidal linkages with flood risk and coast erosion in North East of England to identify natural flood risk management and habitat gain opportunities and establish long-term offset programme in the Northumbria river basin district

In addition to this, some of the measures were developed at smaller spatial scales, covering a specific flood risk area. Specifically for the Northumbria RBD FRMP, measures were developed for the Newcastle Upon Tyne flood risk area (FRA). One of these measures will contribute to positive environmental outcomes through reducing carbon emissions and improving climate resilience, detailed below:

• between 2021 and 2027, Newcastle city council’s lead local flood authority will aim to deliver priority actions on climate change adaptation and sustainability in Newcastle city centre flood risk area to comply with the net zero Newcastle - 2030 action plan in the Newcastle upon Tyne, Northumbria flood risk area.

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 Northumbria RBD river basin management plan and objective 10 contributes to local nature recovery strategies and habitat restoration. Due to the changing nature of FRMP measures, funding constraints, evolving studies and ways of thinking, we currently believe that:

• 28% of the measures have the potential to contribute to objective 6
• 25% of the measures have the potential to contribute to objective 8
• 17% of the measures have the potential to contribute to objective 9
• 14% 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.

Information on all the national level measures and measures which have been developed locally for each FRMP is provided in the interactive mapping tool – flood plan explorer . This information includes which national objectives each measure helps to achieve.

2.3 Consultation

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

A public consultation on the draft FRMPs and associated SEA environmental reports (including Northumbria RBD FRMP and 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. Nationally, stakeholder events were carried out and a social media campaign was launched 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 13 specific to the Northumbria 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 document 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 Northumbria RBD FRMP SEA

We carried out a SEA of the Northumbria 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 Northumbria 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 Northumbria 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. We consulted NatureScot in relation to cross boundary effects but did not receive a response. 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. Read the full HRA here.

3. The findings of the SEA

The Northumbria RBD FRMP SEA assessed the likely effects of the plan on the wider environment, and identified any mitigation or enhancement opportunities. The scope of the SEA including the approach taken for the assessment of ‘reasonable alternatives’ and quantifying the significance of effects can be found within the SEA environmental report. Effects were assessed on biodiversity, population and human health, soil, water, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage, and landscape. The findings of this report are summarised in Table 1 below.

The SEA assessment concluded that the proposed Northumbria RBD draft second cycle FRMP is likely to have some positive effects on population and human health and neutral effects on biodiversity, soil, water, climate factors, and cultural heritage (see Table 1).

Table 1: summary of the conclusion of the assessment of the Northumbria RBD FRMP SEA

Topic	SEA question	Conclusion of assessment
Biodiversity, including flora and fauna	Does the plan protect and recover nature?	Neutral effects
Population and human health	Does the plan improve health, wellbeing and equality?	Some positive effects
Soil	Does the plan improve and sustain resources?	Neutral effects
Water	Does the plan protect and improve the water environment?	Neutral effects
Climatic factors	Does the plan help to mitigate and adapt to climate change?	Neutral effects
Material assets	Does the plan support communities and a prosperous economy?	Neutral effects
Cultural heritage	Does the plan conserve and enhance the historic environment?	Neutral effects
Landscape	Does the plan conserve and enhance landscape and seascape character?	Neutral effects
Inter-relationships	Does the plan have implications for the relationship between the environmental topics?	No, inter-relationship between effects not identified

Within the SEA, effects were assessed by individual topic. The findings of this assessment are summarised below. It should be noted that many of these assessments found that, due to the limited number of measures proposed within the plan that have the potential for any environmental effects, the implementation of these small number of measures is unlikely to have any significant effects at a RBD scale.

3.1 Summary of key effects

3.1.1 Biodiversity, including fauna and flora

The SEA identified an overall likely neutral effect on biodiversity from the implementation of the Northumbria RBD FRMP.

Positive effects:

Measures which would result in positive effects include:

• a programme of collaborative flood risk management works in Newcastle Upon Tyne, potentially involving blue-green infrastructure, habitat creation/enhancement and urban greening
• measures which involve ‘working with nature’, such natural flood management
• flood risk policy measures which promote habitat creation or improved ecological networks

Negative effects:

Localised and potentially negative effects were identified where measures involve hard engineered solutions to flood risk management. For example, a permanent Quayside barrier in Newcastle could limit the passage of migratory fish (such as salmon) and alter flow characteristics. Any habitat loss or fragmentation during the construction, operation or demolition phases of hard-engineered solutions could also result in negative effects.

3.1.2 Population and human health

Measures within the Northumbria RBD FRMP were assessed as having likely positive effects on population and human health overall.

Positive effects:

The SEA identified some flood risk management interventions which are likely to reduce flood risk to communities and improve resilience as offering positive effects. Those measures which specify the delivery of flood alleviation interventions and asset maintenance are most likely to bring direct benefits. Public engagement, planning policy controls, flood risk assessments and partnership approaches were also identified as delivering positive effects through reducing flood risk and improving resilience. Community engagement was identified as an important element which could enhance communities’ ability to cope with floods, by reducing anxiety.

Negative effects:

Whilst there may be some negative effects on communities during the construction of flood risk management schemes (such as disruption and noise pollution), these effects would be temporary. The Quayside barrier and associated defences were identified as potentially limiting access for the community and restricting views – an overall negative effect. If opportunities to work with nature by increasing the provision of habitats and enhancing townscape are implemented, these effects could be mitigated. This is due to the delivery of opportunities for recreation offering benefits to local communities.

3.1.3 Soil

Potentially positive and negative localised effects were identified upon soil from the delivery of the Northumbria RBD FRMP.

Positive effects:

Measures which propose working with nature were identified as potentially having positive effects on soil. For example, Newcastle Upon Tyne was identified as potentially benefitting from a measure which could implement sustainable urban drainage features or enhance blue and green infrastructure to achieve environmental benefits. This would improve soil permeability from tree planting or the creation of new green space.

Negative effects:

Some measures have the potential for negative effects on soil, particularly where they involve flood risk management schemes which require soil excavation. In addition, if river flow is denaturalised as a result of any measures, soil erosion could occur from increased velocities or changes to flow patterns.

3.1.4 Water

The effects on water from the implementation of the Northumbria RBD FRMP were assessed as neutral overall. However, both positive and negative effects could occur at a local level where measures involve the delivery of flood risk management interventions.

Positive effects:

Those interventions which seek to work with nature may offer benefits to water, for example the measures delivered in Newcastle City Centre FRA which include SuDS or green-blue infrastructure. Through SuDS features, water could be better infiltrated before reaching waterbodies, improving water quality. This could also help manage surface water runoff which can lead to pollutants entering watercourses. These types of measure could also support water environment regulations (WER) objectives. In addition, measures which aim to form partnerships to deliver stronger outcomes for flood risk management and environmental benefits could have benefits through facilitating knowledge exchange and potentially provide solutions which best deliver on WER objectives whilst mitigating flood risk to communities and businesses.

Negative effects:

One of the measures were identified as having potentially negative effects upon water. The construction of a flood defence barrier at Quayside could conflict with WER objectives by altering the natural functioning of the watercourse, and there could be the potential risk of contamination during the construction phase.

3.1.5 Climatic factors

The effects on climatic factors were assessed as neutral overall, with some potentially positive effects identified locally.

Positive effects:

Measures which involve the delivery of flood risk management interventions are likely to bring about direct positive effects through the reduction of flood risk and enhanced flood resilience. Measures which involve the delivery of flood alleviation works which work with the environment could support climate adaptation by reducing flood risk and enhancing communities’ resilience to climate-related floods. These measures also offer the potential for carbon sequestration through the creation of new habitats which store carbon. However, the extent of these benefits depends on the type of interventions. The delivery of the measure which supports the net zero Newcastle 2030 action plan could support solutions which offer climate resilience and carbon offsetting potential in the future.

Negative effects:

However, alongside positive effects, there is the potential for measures to release carbon emissions during the construction phases of delivery of both nature-based approaches and built infrastructure approaches to flood risk management. For example, vehicles and machinery used to implement blue-green infrastructure could release carbon, and there is carbon embodied in the material used to build hard engineered solutions. If opportunities to offset carbon emissions are explored, low carbon materials are sourced, and energy sources of a renewable nature are used in vehicles and machinery, these effects could be mitigated at the project level.

3.1.6 Material assets

Overall, neutral effects were identified on material assets.

Positive effects:

Measures which include asset maintenance and the delivery of flood risk management schemes will reduce flood risk, improve flood resilience, and increase the speed of recovery from flooding, having an overall positive effect on material assets. This will benefit businesses, communities, and the local economy, especially in urban centres such as Newcastle Upon Tyne. Measures which inform future flood risk strategies will further enhance the protection of communities and infrastructure and will improve the resilience of material assets.

Negative effects:

Measures involving the delivery of flood risk management schemes may, however, result in construction waste or require the extraction of new resources to build these assets which may result in negative effects on material assets.

3.1.7 Cultural heritage

The effects of the Northumbria RBD FRMP on aspects of cultural heritage were assessed as neutral.

Positive effects:

The Newcastle FRA has many listed buildings. Measures which would implement flood risk management interventions may help protect these heritage assets by reducing flooding overall, such as the Quayside scheme which would protect cultural heritage assets from flooding such as Hadrian’s wall which runs through Newcastle city centre. If measures are adopted which work with nature, these could protect cultural heritage assets as well as improve townscapes through the delivery of SuDS or green-blue infrastructure rather than hard-engineered solutions which may impact the heritage character. The maintenance of existing flood assets in the Northumbria RBD could have positive effects on cultural heritage by ensuring flood assets are functioning efficiently to offer protection to heritage assets during flood events. As these assets are existing it is unlikely there will be any negative effects on heritage.

Negative effects:

Negative effects on heritage may arise from measures which involve construction, leading to damage or the destruction of archaeological remains. Some hard-engineered approaches may also degrade the quality of the townscape, negatively impacting the heritage of an area. For example, the Quayside scheme may affect buried archaeological remains and listed river walls, or visually affect the setting of heritage assets and key views. It should be noted that flood alleviation approaches that work with nature still present the risk of physical harm to buried archaeology if they require digging up buried remains.

3.1.8 Landscape

The effects of the Northumbria RBD FRMP on landscape are assessed as neutral overall, as measures may result in positive or negative effects.

Positive effects:

Where a nature-based approach is applied to flood risk management interventions, such as SuDS or blue-green infrastructure, opportunities to create habitats and green space may improve the surrounding landscape and protect it from future damage.

Negative effects:

Measures which use construction-based approaches may negatively affect the landscape, by destroying habitat during construction, operation or demolition. Schemes such as Quayside in Newcastle could limit views and negatively affect the local townscape character.

3.2 Placed based alternatives

At the individual plan level, the approach to developing and considering which objectives the measures would meet differed between RBDs. Some held face to face or virtual workshops while 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. Furthermore, the draft SEA assessment framework was consulted upon alongside the scope of the SEA and where appropriate, this framework was amended.

The proposed measures of the draft FRMP for the Northumbria RBD aim to build on first cycle FRMPs in setting out the future flood risk management needs. At the RBD scale they 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 at the programme and project levels will focus on alternatives. Therefore, the focus of alternatives for the Northumbria RBD FRMP SEA is limited.

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

4.1 Introduction

The consultation on the draft Northumbria RBD 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 Northumbria 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. 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 Northumbria 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 Northumbria 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 ‘our 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 Northumbria RBD FRMP

Analysis of the responses to the draft Northumbria RBD FRMP consultation identified common themes which emerged across answers to three questions (detailed in section 4.1) relating to the SEA environmental report. The points raised which specifically relate to the Northumbria RBD are captured under the headings below.

Respondents were asked whether they agreed with the conclusions of the environmental assessment. The majority (91%) agreed totally or partially with the conclusions.

In response to the question of additional environmental effects, the majority (63%) of respondents that answered did not identify any additional significant environmental effects which should be considered. Those who identified further effects highlighted discharges from combined sewer overflows as a result of surface water flooding and the need for increased coastal resilience and intertidal habitat as a way to contribute to ocean recovery.

About half (50%) of the respondents who answered felt that there were further opportunities to enhance positive and mitigate negative effects. Many of the responses to this question referenced nature-based solutions as key tools to mitigate effects, such as coastal habitat creation and maximising the delivery of environmental enhancements as part of the delivery of existing measures. The FRMP measures that deliver on objective 6 and objective 9 will contribute towards this, which means they will work in partnership to make use of nature-based solutions to reduce flood risk and wider environmental benefits.

Some key themes emerged from the responses to these three questions, the points raised are captured either under the national summary, or those which were specific to this FRMP are captured under the headings below.

Biodiversity and designated sites

Recurring theme: The SEA states that measures will have a potentially negative effect on biodiversity. These measures should be developed to ensure they have an overall positive effect, in line with biodiversity net gain targets.

Response: The draft plan includes measures to adopt nature-based solutions to manage flood risk and measures that require flood risk management projects to achieve biodiversity net gain and wider environmental benefits. The scale of positive impact on biodiversity should increase over time as new approaches to working with nature are embedded. At the programme and project level, in line with Environment Agency ambitions, we will strive to deliver above the legislated minimum of 10% biodiversity net gain on projects and aim to deliver a target of 20% biodiversity net gain across our framework of projects. Therefore, in the delivery of these measures at the project level, overall positive effects to biodiversity will be achieved.

Nature-based solutions

Recurring theme: the need to prioritise nature-based solutions above hard engineered solutions in the delivery of measures and integrating this into wider coastal management

Response: there are several measures within the Northumbria RBD FRMP that capture the ambition to deliver nature-based solutions, detailed in Section 2.2. For coastal management specifically there are two measures which are also detailed in Section 2.2 that will deliver, in partnership:

• “adaptive approaches to managing coastal change”
• “identify natural flood risk management and habitat gain opportunities” which will support the delivery of nature-based solutions above standard hard-engineered solutions

Coastal habitats

Recurring theme: There are opportunities to use the delivery of flood alleviation schemes to deliver new coastal habitats

Response: coastal habitats are of principal importance and are already being lost due to sea level rise and erosion. All development, including infrastructure to manage flood risk and coastal change, will need to show how it contributes to biodiversity net gain. Through the delivery of the Northumbria RBD FRMP measures listed below, this challenge will be addressed through projects which will deliver enhanced or new coastal habitats:

• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work with coast protection authorities in the North East coastal group to improve engagement with local authorities with responsibility for estuaries in North East of England to ensure flood risk and biodiversity is understood and mitigated in estuary environments reducing flood risk to coastal communities, businesses and critical infrastructure while also aiding habitat creation and enhancement and species recovery in the Northumbria river basin district
• between 2021 and 2027, the Environment Agency will work with coast protection authorities to undertake estuary wide studies that establish intertidal linkages with flood risk and coast erosion in North East of England to identify natural flood risk management and habitat gain opportunities and establish long-term offset programme in the Northumbria river basin district

Managing surface water and sewer overflows

Recurring theme: surface water should be managed in a way that reduces combined sewers overflowing to protect the environment.

Response: the FRMP identifies pressures that affect surface waters across the RBD, including the linkages between surface water flooding and foul sewer flooding. The Northumbria RBD FRMP SEA identifies the use of natural flood management (NFM) and sustainable land management practices as key in improving the storage of surface water run-off, which in turn reduces the input of pollutants, nutrients and sediments to watercourses and complements the delivery of WER objectives. In urban areas, the use of SuDS helps to manage surface water run-off. The Northumbria RBD FRMP contains several measures which deliver on objective 9 which means they will work in partnership to make use of nature-based solutions to reduce flood risk and wider environmental benefits. Furthermore, the SEA identifies specific interventions which will be delivered in Newcastle city centre FRA which could involve SuDS or blue-green infrastructure. These will reduce flood risk whilst working in parallel to manage and reduce surface water run-off and the amount of water in combined sewers.

Additionally, the SEA highlights Northumbrian Water’s emerging drainage and wastewater management plan, which will also help manage surface water flooding across the district.

5. Reasons for adopting the Northumbria RBD FRMP

5.1 Introduction

This section provides an outline of the main factors taken into account in finalising the Northumbria 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 5.2 below 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.

5.2 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 the 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.

Consultation responses specific to the Northumbria RBD were analysed and changes were introduced to the now adopted plan. Overall, the consultation showed support for the approach and ambitions set out in the plan. The changes reflect the feedback where responses identified measures which required strengthening or clarification, or common themes for improvement.

Some of the general changes that we have made to Part B include:

• simple changes made to address some of the feedback received in the RBD such as strengthened wording around the strategic approach to managing flood risk across the region and rural community
• approved measure changes through a formal process involving a legal review
• removal of references to “draft”
• updates to dates to reflect publication timeframe
• clarified wording around the locations which sit outside of flood risk areas
• added some paragraphs around the importance of the rural community and land use for agriculture but reflected that a balance needs to be found for flood risk and climate change
• updated climate change figures following recent updates to future projections
• clarified asset ownership

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 FRMPs. 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.

The changes to measures in the Northumbria RBD FRMP were limited, and minor in their extent. These measure changes would not make a difference to the overall SEA outcome.

We have concluded that the changes made to the FRMP do not materially affect the SEA findings and likely significant effects identified. This takes account of the nature of the changes and how they relate to the consultation on the FRMP and the environmental report. It also takes into account the changes made in response to the Northumbria RBD FRMP environmental report’s recommendations for mitigation and enhancement.

In addition, we have prepared a final HRA to assess potential effects on European sites. We have working with Natural England in preparing the final HRA and have taken into account the mitigation measures identified by the HRA in finalising the FRMP. The Northumbria HRA found that likely significant effects (LSE) of the FRMP on all European sites, assessed both alone and in-combination, were excluded for all measures and an appropriate assessment was not required. As details of the potential schemes are developed towards the planning application stage, the HRA process applied at a project level will ensure that adequate mitigation measures are incorporated where relevant. This will retain the integrity of European sites across the RBD.

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 Northumbria 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

Newcastle city council, 2022. net zero Newcastle: 2030 action plan. Net zero Newcastle 2030 action plan

List of abbreviations

Abbreviation	Description
25 YEP	25 year plan to improve the environment
CaBA	catchment-based approach
Defra	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
DWMP	drainage and wastewater management plans
EIA	environmental impact assessment
FCERM	flood and coastal erosion risk management
FRA	flood risk area
FRMP	flood risk management plan
HRA	habitat regulations assessment
LFRMS	local flood risk management strategies
LLFA	lead local flood authorities
LSE	likely significant effect
NBS	nature-based solutions
NFM	natural flood management
OM4	outcome measure 4
RBD	river basin district
RBMP	river basin management plan
RMA	risk management authority
SAC	special areas of conservation
SEA	strategic environmental assessment
SMP	shoreline management plan
SOEP	statement of environmental particulars
SSSI	site of special scientific interest
SuDS	sustainable urban drainage systems
WER	water environment regulations

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): is 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: net gain is 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: is 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: are 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): is 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.