Download 2nd Joint International Workshop – June 21st 2004

ESPACE 2ND JOINT INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP
JUNE 21ST 2004 – TECHNICAL SESSIONS
GOLDEN TULIP HOTEL, ZALTBOMMEL, THE
NETHERLANDS
WORKSHOP REPORT
N.B. This Workshop Report provides details of the discussions that took place on Day 1 of the
ESPACE Workshop. All presentations and additional documents referred to in the text of this report
are available on this page - see below.
ESPACE Partners
Hampshire County Council (HCC) as Lead
 Bryan Boult
Partner
 Chitra Nadarajah
 Jill Rankin
 Ruth Hale
 Jeremy Owen (Land Use
Consultants)
Hampshire County Council as Partner
 Christine Seaward
 Doogie Black
Environment Agency
 Tim Reeder
 Stephen Walker
 Bill Donovan
 Merylyn Hedger
Regionaal Landschap Zenne, Zuun en Zonien
 Ann Gaeremynck
South East Climate Change Partnership
 Mark Goldthorpe
South East England Regional Assembly
 David Payne
 Joanna Cleasby
Surrey County Council
 Phil Sivell
 Gary Black
Waterschap Rivierenland
 Johan Bakker
 Niels Nijmeijer
 Eric Kuindersma
 Inge Lucas
West Sussex County Council
 Abby Pulham
 Tim Yair
 Fran Wallington
 Harold Hall
 Jo Seydel (Rosslyn Research)
Ministerie van VROM
 Marieke Soeters
Bayerisches Landesamt fur Wasserwirtschaft
 Reinhard Schmidtke
 Hans Weber
 Thomas Beckmann
Extended Partners
UK Climate Impacts Programme
 Jacqueline Harman
European Commission, Joint Research Centre
 Jose Barredo
Finnish Environment Institute
 Tim Carter
Defra - Water Supply & Regulation Division
 Joanne Turner
National Freshwater Institute of the
 Willem Oosterberg
Netherlands
Climate Change and Biosphere Centre,
 Jeroen Veraat
Waginengen University
TOPIC SESSIONS AGENDA 08.45 – 17.45
08.45
Welcome
08.55
Extended Partner presentations
09.25
Introduction to Topic Sessions
09.30
Presentations & discussions on Topic 1: Raising Awareness
(West Sussex County Council)
09.45
Presentations & discussions on Topic 1: Raising Awareness
(West Sussex County Council) continued
10.30
Coffee
11.00
Discussions on Sub Topics:
a. Methodologies (WSCC, HCC Partner, RLZZZ, SECCP,
SCC, LFW)
b. stakeholder participation (WSCC)
c. raising awareness strategies (HCC Partner, WSCC, LFW)
d. community involvement (WSCC, HCC Partner, RLZZZ,
LFW)
12.15
Lunch
13.15
Presentation on Topic 2 – Developing an Information &
Knowledge Base (Land Use Consultants)
13.45
Discussions on Topic 2 – outcomes of study and benefits
(HCC Lead Partner)
14.30
Presentation on Topic 3 – Review of policies & development
of adaptation strategies (jointly led by – Ministerie van VROM
& South East England Regional Assembly)
15.00
Coffee / Tea
15.30
Discussion on Topic 3 – actions & outcomes
16.30
Discussion on Sub Topics:
a. Decision Testing Tool (EA, VROM, WSRL)
b. Case Studies (SEERA, EA, WSRL, VROM, RLZZZ, LFW)
c. Policy review (SEERA & VROM)
d. Development of adaptation strategies (SEERA, EA, VROM,
WSRL, LFW)
17.45 - 18.15
Drinks in “Bommelbar”
19.15
Dinner in “Brasserie”
WELCOME
Bryan Boult, Hampshire County Council (HCC) as Lead Partner
Welcome to the second ESPACE Joint International Workshop but the first of the
technical sessions. I would like to welcome all the ESPACE Partners and also the
members of the Extended Partnership. Extended Partners are present because they
can benefit from the outcomes of the ESPACE Project by helping them in their areas
of work but they can also provide valuable contributions towards the delivery of the
outcomes of the ESPACE Project.
We would very much like to thank the Waterschap Rivierenland, particularly Eric
Kuindersma, for all their hard work in organising and hosting this event.
Johan Bakker, Waterschap Rivierenland Director
Welcome to the Netherlands and particularly to Zaltbommel. The venue for this
workshop has been specifically chosen for it’s location in the middle of the wetlands
which is particularly relevant for our discussions today. This is an important meeting
for the ESPACE Project and I hope that we will have some good discussions today.
EXTENDED PARTNER PRESENTATIONS ( see also “Additional Documents” )
Bryan Boult
We thought we would start this workshop with a series of small presentations from
each of the Extended Partners, which should provide some understanding of where
their interests and expertise lie and what they are interested in gaining from the
workshop today and from the ESPACE project in the long-term.
1. United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP) – Jacqueline
Harman
UKCIP was set up in 1997 by the UK Government and is funded by the Global
Atmospheres Division of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
(Defra). The role of UKCIP is to help organisations identify which climate change
impacts may affect them and to develop effective responses, by:




promoting stakeholder-led, problem-oriented research
providing core tools
providing guidance/advice
encouraging integrated approaches
UKCIP have produced a number of reports in partnership with other organisations
based on regional and sectoral research. Other key outputs include tools such as the
UKCIP02 climate scenarios and guidance on subjects such as risk, uncertainty and
decision-making. A new web-based tool called the Adaptation Wizard can be used to
assess risk and uncertainty and the need of an individual organisation to adapt.
UKCIP is linked to the ESPACE project through partnerships such as the South East
Climate Change Partnership (SECCP) and by reviewing of the recent “Developing an
Information and Knowledge Base” report. UKCIP can also provide guidance for
decision makers to develop effective responses to climate change impacts.
2. European Commission – Joint Research Centre, Institute for
Environment and Sustainability (IES) – Dr Jose Barredo
The Floods and other Weather Driven Natural Hazards (WDNH) project has been
developed within the Land Management Unit of the IES.
Action is focused in several areas related to floods and other weather driven natural
hazards:



Simulation of realistic scenarios at pan-European level of floods, taking into
consideration technical and spatial measures and weather conditions;
Developing a European Flood Alert System (EFAS);
Integrating aspects of spatial and regional planning with hazard mitigation
strategies.
Two simulation models are being developed in a new approach for floods and other
natural hazard assessment:
1. The MOLAND model – this is a spatial dynamics model used to simulate and
forecast land use changes in urban areas and regions.
2. The LISFLOOD model – this is a flood modelling system that can assist in
evaluating flood control measures in medium and large size catchments.
I would also like to announce that there will be a technical workshop held at the JRC
in Ispra concerning Spatial Planning and Natural Hazards towards the end of 2004 /
start of 2005.
3. Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) – Professor Timothy Carter
The Finnish Environment Institute has developed a scoping project called Finadapt
which will focus on adaptation to climate change in Finland. The objectives of the
project are to assess vulnerability and adaptation processes in Finland and raise
awareness of climate change and possible response measures. It aims to engage key
individuals and institutions with a stake in climate impacts and the design of response
measures to identify major gaps in knowledge. This project co-ordinates with a new
Government climate change programme starting in 2006 and the revision of the
National Climate Change Strategy which will include adaptation for the first time.
Finadapt has 11 partners and aims to focus a number of different sectors such as
forestry, agriculture, water, health, transport, the built environment, energy, tourism,
urban planning, etc.
The opportunity to be an extended partner in the ESPACE project will provide us
with a chance to observe and learn from experiences outside Finland on how
stakeholders have been dealing with the question of climate change adaptation and
specifically how spatial planning issues are being handled in different sectors. Finally I
am also interested to see how awareness of climate change adaptation is being
pursued in different parts of North West Europe.
4. DEFRA – Water Supply and Regulation Division – Joanne Turner
I work in the Water and Marine Directorate of DEFRA which is responsible for
policy on the water industry framework and structure. We are mainly involved in
the five yearly process of assisting OFWAT (The Economic Regulator for the Water
and Sewerage Industry in England and Wales) in their job of setting price limits for
the water companies. We also advise on new burdens to affect the water industry
including an element of horizon scanning.
Climate change is a potentially significant issue for the water industry and will
undoubtedly lead to more investment in the future, not least to enable the ageing
sewerage systems in urban areas to cope with larger volumes of flood water and
peak rainfall events. DEFRA is encouraging the water industry to develop strategies
to identify areas where additional investment will be needed.
Current DEFRA activity relating to climate change includes:




The Water Sector –increasing the rate of water metering,; maintaining the
supply and demand balance and planning for changes in the South East; setting
minimum standards for water efficiency, flood management, coastal issues;
and water research (including recent studies of Climate Change and the
Demand for Water and Climate Change and the Impact on Reservoirs).
Sustainability - sustainable drainage (SuDS) can be used to manage run-off
rates, protect water quality, retain rainwater, etc. The Water Framework
Directive has introduced a new responsibility to address urban diffuse
pollution which may affect the use of SuDS.
Agriculture – current issues include the reform of the Common Agricultural
Policy and water resources.
Atmospheric emissions – greenhouse gas emissions and meeting the UK
Kyoto target.
DEFRA as an extended partner of the ESPACE project hopes to observe the
programme and use it to help inform our decision making and strategic planning.
5. RIZA, National Freshwater Institute of the Netherlands – Willem
Oosterberg
RIZA is the freshwater institute of the Netherlands and is part of the Dutch Ministry
for transport, public works and water management.
Climate change and the consequences for water management have been well
thought through in the Netherlands. Extreme flood events in 1993 and 1995 have led
to policy change. In the previous century the Netherlands used to rely on dykes and
pumps to manage the water carefully, but since the floods of 1993 and 1995 we have
had to re-think our approach and have realised that we need more space for water.
Because of the new water policy and its implementation by the Government, water
has now entered the spatial planning arena. Also as a consequence of this change in
policy, a new department to look at spatial planning and water management has been
established at RIZA – the Department for Spatial Planning and Water Management.
Water is divided into a two-tiered system in the Netherlands – national waters
(rivers and lakes) and regional water bodies. RIZA is responsible for providing advice
on the policy and implementation of national waters.
RIZA are also involved in projects looking at the long-term predictions of what will
happen to rivers as a result of climate change and using these to make plans for what
should be done in, for example, the river area. The physical side of this issue involves
identifying water retention areas and the next step is getting the stakeholders to
realise the need for the space.
RIZA also has an indirect role in advising our Minister on implementation of policies
at the regional level, as the Minister is responsible for regional water management.
National level water management also influences the regional level, for example all
developments now need a water test. It has become mandatory in the Netherlands
that all developments such as housing, and also spatial planning, have a water test,
that assesses their impacts on the water system. My department has devised this test
and is supporting its implementation. We also have a national agreement that all
regional water managers must identify what spatial claims are necessary to account
for climate change and these are then incorporated into the spatial plan of the
Netherlands.
From my presentation I think it has become clear what my interest will be in this
workshop – incorporating water management into spatial planning as a result of
climate change.
6. Climate Change and Biosphere Centre, Waginengen University –
Jeroen Veraat
I am involved in three climate change programmes, the third one is the most relevant
to ESPACE:
1.
2.
The Climate Change and Biosphere Research Centre’s programme which
focuses on climate change issues in the broadest sense, including the study of
the feedbacks between the vegetation, land use and regional climate in order to
improve anticipating measures, especially with regard to the implications of
climate change for land use planning, ecosystem management and the
development of environmental policies.
An international dialogue on water and climate (2000). This project recognises
that climate change is threatening the world's fresh water resources. Through
increasing awareness of the issues and of potential solutions, the dialogue will
seek to set in motion social and political processes that will lead to the
eventual adoption of coping strategies and 'best practices' for sustainable water
management.
3.
A public and private sector research programme based on climate change and
spatial planning running from October 2004-09 called “Climate Changes Spatial
Planning”. The main objective of this project is to establish climate change as
one of the guiding principles of spatial planning in the Netherlands. It covers
four main themes – climate scenarios, mitigation and land use and the
relationship with spatial planning, adaptation to climate change and spatial
planning (in water, transport, agriculture, fisheries sectors, etc), and integration
involving stakeholders (including cost-benefit analysis and community strategy).
We are also interested in developing a communications strategy for communicating
to the public the risks associated with changing spatial planning as a result of climate
change.
INTRODUCTION TO TOPIC SESSIONS
Bryan Boult
This workshop and future workshops to follow are an important part of developing
and delivering the overall transnational outputs of ESPACE. This process will be
helped by the presence of the Extended Partners and the expertise they can
contribute. It is also an opportunity for partners to share information and
experiences, build transnational actions and benefits and improve delivery of actions.
Three topics will be covered today :



Raising awareness
Developing an information and knowledge base
Review of policies and development of adaptation strategies
Presentations will focus on methodologies and overall outcomes (or intended /
expected outcomes) of actions, including details of experience gained, lessons learnt
and issues faced.
The core themes of the presentation and the discussions that follow will focus on
areas where transnational co-operation and/or influence can be maximised, and
where input is required from the partnership to deliver transnational outcomes of
value to the partnership.
To start the day I am going to hand over to Abby Pulham from West Sussex County
Council (WSCC) who will chair the first session on Raising Awareness.
TOPIC 1: RAISING AWARENESS
Chair: Abby Pulham, West Sussex County Council
The main aim of the West Sussex County Council ESPACE programme is to raise
awareness of the need for adaptation to climate change and the role of spatial
planning. There are two elements of the project. One is looking at county-wide
raising awareness amongst the general public and businesses. The other is a case
study of the Manhood Peninsula focusing on a small area within the County, an area
of low-lying land that is facing flooding and other issues.
There will be three presentations during this session, two of which will be given by
members of the West Sussex team and one by the consultants we have engaged for
the survey work – Jo Seydel.
The first presentation will be given by Tim Yair who will speak about the countywide element of the West Sussex project.
Presentation
1. ESPACE – A Climate for Change – Tim Yair, West Sussex County
Council
See “Presentations “
Questions & Discussion
Merylyn Hedger, Environment Agency – How will you connect with the need for
everyone to reduce greenhouse gases, how are you going to cover mitigation in your
campaign? I’m also interested in your point about a lack of leadership in national
policy by the UK Government - hopefully things will be clearer when we get the
adaptation framework out. You also need a hit-list of what you actually want people
to do.
Tim Yair – That is why we have the project leaflets to connect with people and to tell
individuals and businesses and organisations exactly what they can do. In terms of
national support, local district planners feel that they are not supported at the
national level from a planning perspective to ensure that things actually happen and
are implemented.
Inge Lucas, Waterschap Rivierenland – We have national support here in Holland
where we have a national campaign called ‘Holland Lives With Water’ featuring a
local weatherman who talks about climate change and the impacts on water
resources. The public like it and it is a way for them to connect with the whole
issue.
Tim Yair – I think Holland is a good example of national support. We need to learn
from good examples like this from the partnership.
Joanne Turner – Do you have good links with Southern Water and other water
supply companies?
Tim Yair – We are planning to work with Southern Water particularly on education
and hopefully by pooling our resources we can provide a better overall service.
Tim Carter – How did West Sussex County Council get involved in the ESPACE
project?
Abby Pulham – Local residents of the Manhood Peninsula together with West Sussex
County Council and Chichester District Council, invited Dutch planners to the UK
for a conference to explore radical and innovative ways of dealing with flooding
problems in the area. From there West Sussex made a commitment to take the
work forward. Around the same time the ESPACE project was being developed and
we saw the possibility of creating a project and a case study from this issue.
Phil Sivell, Surrey County Council – Can I add that it began prior to that in 1998 when a
group of local authorities from the south east of England got together to talk about
climate change as an issue and explore what we could do about it. We produced a
scoping report for the South East – Rising to the Challenge which came out 1999.
West Sussex were one of the original partners in that work.
End of discussions
The next presentation will be given by Jo Seydel, from Rosslyn Research. Jo will
speak about the survey work that West Sussex County Council have commissioned
to deliver to determine levels of awareness.
Presentations
2. Measuring Climate Change Awareness – Jo Seydel, Rosslyn Research
See “Presentations “
The final presentation will be given by Fran Wallington from West Sussex County
Council who will speak about the work at the Manhood Peninsula.
Presentations
3. A Climate for Change on the Manhood Peninsula – Fran Wallington,
West Sussex County Council
See “Presentations “
Summary of Topic 1 presentations – Abby Pulham, WSCC
I would like to quickly summarise the three presentations you have heard as an
introduction to the discussions that will follow. Tim Yair gave a presentation on the
county-wide raising awareness elements of the project. He mentioned the need for
us to be integrated, not just in terms of climate change experts but planning officers,
policy makers and, water companies, people delivering services, etc. We need to
pool inspiration and use the expertise of others to share resources. This can be
done through the ESPACE partnership.
Jo Seydel went into detail on the consultancy process that we used to establish
current levels of awareness and the process that we are going to use in order to
establish how we might evaluate the effectiveness of our programme.
Fran Wallington mentioned the need to overcome barriers in communications,
politics, and to share any experiences you have had in overcoming those barriers.
We have got an hour and a quarter to discuss a variety of topics that have arisen as
a result of the presentations. We would like to focus the discussions on
methodologies, stakeholder participation, raising awareness strategies and
community involvement. We would like to get some feedback from you on the work
we have done, the work that you are doing and the strategies that you are
implementing and how they might benefit all of us. The key focus of this session is
to look at areas of transnational working, how can we help each other effectively.
Topic 1 Questions & Discussion
Jeroen Veraat – How have you dealt with the problem of uncertainties in climate
change and incorporating this into the Community Strategy at West Sussex County
Council?
Abby Pulham – We have used information based on the figures from the UKCIP and
South East Climate Change Partnership which is the best available information.
Mark Goldthorpe, SECCP – Uncertainty about the future is not a new phenomenon
when we are planning for the future and therefore it should not be an excuse for not
taking action on climate change. With specific scientific uncertainties all we can do is
communicate that we are using information that isn’t perfect but is the best available
and it is good enough to use to make some decisions. I would stress that these are
messages for organisations rather than the community. I have exactly the same
question as to how to communicate our uncertainty to the public.
Jacqueline Harman – We have developed two tools for dealing with uncertainty:
 Risk and uncertainty decision making framework – helps organisations to identify
risks and what they can do about it.
 A new tool which will be more useable by the community. It is web-based with
simple language, and works on the basis of establishing the level of risk an
individual is willing to accept. It promotes low or no risk adaptation options, and
will eventually be linked to a database that will provide adaptation options that
have been implemented by others.
Abby Pulham – Within our project, we have had issues where we are raising
awareness of what we understand to be the impacts of climate change and we get
questions about the Gulf Stream shutting down and how we are planning for that.
Our response has been that we are using the best available information but also
acknowledging that information can change and so we need to be adaptable. Are
there any good examples of incorporating uncertainty into policies?
Johan Bakker, Waterschap Rivierenland – The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is a
good example. We all have to work with it. In the Netherlands there is uncertainty
in water levels, it provides the challenge of how to get communities and landowners
to agree on the water levels.
Joanne Turner – How do the public get involved?
Johan Bakker – We have public evenings where anyone can come along and ask
questions. There are a lot of stakeholders and everyone has a reason to ask about
the water levels, for their gardens, for agriculture, etc.
Fran Wallington – To pick up on the issue of uncertainty, planning is a rolling process
that needs reviewing. We all want to look at 100 year plan scenarios but we are
looking at scenarios of 100 years and writing plans for 5 years. Reviewing the plan
every four years often means that you can accommodate changes and new
information.
Merylyn Hedger – Yes I think that is what is happening. Climate change drives the
existing policy agenda. For example for areas of water scarcity and you have got to
look at new solutions and you therefore need to do what’s right in terms of the
long-term framework of climate changes. I take your point about the planning
framework. It seems to me that the Water Framework Directive will help to get
climate change adaptation implemented over time. It is however regrettable that the
directive doesn’t actually action climate change.
Bryan Boult, HCC Lead – Talking about uncertainty, there is no mention of extreme
events in the Manhood Peninsula work, these events are a good way to raise public
awareness. For example in the insurance industry it is the frequency of extreme
events that drives awareness.
Abby Pulham – The feedback from the focus groups seems to agree, nothing will be
done until something major happens. On the Manhood Peninsula the sea breaches
the embankment frequently so things are happening.
Fran Wallington – Using scare tactics, is that what makes people change their
behaviour?
Inge Lucas – It shouldn’t be too threatening, fear only works for a short time. For
example the weatherman that I mentioned, people see that climate change is the
reason for more rain, it’s not threatening as there are options for action. You need
to make people aware of the problem.
Phil Sivell – The heat wave in Europe last year is another example, the French and
Italian Governments have introduced rapid plans to prevent this happening again.
This shows the role that extreme events can have. Another issue is climate change in
policies. All UK local authorities are required to produce a Community Strategy
which is a process of getting the local community to help shape your forward
programmes over the next few years. In Surrey after a wide range of consultations,
climate change as an issue got a lot of mention from the public, therefore it will be at
the core of the Community Strategy. This wouldn’t have happened 6-12 months ago.
Joanna Cleasby, SEERA – As part of phase one of our futures work for the Regional
Assembly, we held a workshop with stakeholders to look at identifying uncertainties
for the next 25 years. Climate change was identified as one of the key uncertainties
and it was agreed that the importance of that uncertainty on spatial planning was
high. We also discussed how sure we are that the uncertainty would continue in that
direction, which was quite interesting. At a second workshop we asked the
stakeholders to identify how you could influence that uncertainty, for example for
climate change how do you mitigate, how to you then adapt, how do you monitor?
These questions could act as a proofing exercise to see if your policies are able to
cope with a future event.
Reinhard Schmidtke, Bayerisches Landesamt fur Wasserwirtschaft – The important thing
is raising awareness at different levels and understanding what information is needed
for which group. If you use different regional climate scenarios, there are a range of
possible changes in the hydrological regime and how do you cope with uncertainty
on that level? Another interesting point is how are different groups affected by
changes in the hydrological regime, and who should be responsible for what
adaptation measures. The Government needs to do one thing and stakeholders
another, what is the optimal mix? It tends to be a decision based on willingness of
the groups to pay. You then need a risk assessment of the different groups.
Inge Lucas – When you create awareness amongst stakeholders they must also know
what they can do. You need to plan on different levels, to establish what different
people can contribute and at what cost. You can’t ask a big contribution if they can’t
provide it.
Chitra Nadarajah, HCC Lead - Are communities expecting decision makers and policy
makers to go ahead and ensure that spatial planning is adapting to climate change or
do they want to be involved in the process?
Fran Wallington – There seems to be a lack of co-ordination between the different
authorities and therefore people are not clear about who is responsible for what.
There is also a lack of central Government support for local authority delivery. We
need to get people involved who don’t want to be involved.
Mark Goldthorpe – We are trying to get all stakeholders together to develop specific
groups within the SECCP, for example business, tourism, etc, and to engage
individual officers to link with others and propose actions that the SECCP as a whole
can action. You can then ask the stakeholders what they understand about the
actions and what they can commit.
Abby Pulham – It’s hard to identify and engage all the relevant stakeholders and at
what level you engage them.
Marieke Soeters, Ministerie van VROM – In Holland we have signed a national
agreement on water which gives all parties the opportunity and responsibility to do
what they must about water management.
Abby Pulham – Does the agreement help implementation?
Marieke Soeters – Yes, as it is a national agreement that gives a legal basis to their
actions.
Chitra Nadarajah – In the UK we seem to be good at community engagement and in
Holland you seem to be good at the top down approach. Holland seems to have
national support whilst the perception in the UK is that there is a lack of national
support.
Eric Kuindersma, Waterschap Rivierenland – I think the most important thing about the
Dutch national water policy is that the problem is shared by all who are responsible
for water management and within the problem, everyone has their own task.
Reinhard Schmidtke – We need to design an action plan for measures to cope with
climate change with a lot of options for the responsibility of different players.
Merylyn Hedger – One of the problems is that there are a lot of different agendas and
in the UK there is some confusion as they are not branded as climate change. We
need to make sure we are talking consistently about the right thing and that all policy
areas such as water resources, flooding, agriculture, etc, in all countries are aware of
climate change.
Fran Wallington – I think we also need to consider retaining credibility. The
community need to know what the issues are.
Joanne Turner – There are lots of plans that the UK are involved in and networks are
already there, but the issues are not thought of in terms of climate change. We need
to make people aware of what is already happening.
Chitra Nadarajah – There seems to be clear branding of what we’re doing about
mitigation at a national level, but communicating the work on adaptation isn’t done
as well, people aren’t aware of this part.
Tim Carter – Are there national climate change strategies in Germany, the UK and
Holland and are they integrated? There seems to be a problem with integrating air
quality with climate change which would make sense to be integrated. In Finland we
are aiming for an integrated national climate change strategy.
Merylyn Hedger – In the UK we have the UK Climate Change Programme which has
an adaptation chapter in the climate change report which is being revised this year.
Jeroen Veraat – In the Netherlands the climate change policy seems to focus on
mitigation, there is not a task force for adaptation yet.
Marieke Soeters – There is a national platform for sustainable development, is climate
change just part of that?
Reinhard Schmidtke – You need to do a cost-benefit analysis of adaptation. In
Germany we plan to have action plans for all river basins and we now have a strategy
for flood protection. Awareness of the community is a key issue we are working on
through the ESPACE project.
Fran Wallington – We have discussed cost-benefit analysis but at the moment in the
UK there is no precedent for compensation for moving houses at risk from flooding.
Are other countries tougher on this, because this is what the community want to
know – who is paying to maintain my house?
Reinhard Schmidtke – There seems to be a lack of policy in this area.
Marieke Soeters – With cost-benefit analysis, who does it benefit? People think about
their position and comfort. Is the social-economic benefit considered?
Reinhard Schmidtke – Yes.
Jeremy Owen, Land Use Consultants - We also need to consider the future costs of
doing nothing.
Willem Oosterberg – I’m still unclear on the UK position, do you have a national
climate change strategy?
Merylyn Hedger – The UK has a climate change programme not a strategy, there is
not much policy delivery on adaptation.
Phil Sivell – The general public and businesses don’t have an awareness of the
adaptation to climate change section of the UK Government’s climate change
programme. No-one knows what it is other than people working in field of climate
change. The national programme doesn’t mean anything to them.
Joanne Turner – It is through the water related issues that the public are coming in to
contact with climate change, there is still lots more to do with raising awareness.
Bryan Boult – The ESPACE project is about spatial planning and we have heard people
talk today about different levels. Different levels of planning, national or regional and
down to the local level. We have talked about different levels of engagement in
terms of raising awareness. We have talked quite a bit about the local impacts of
climate change, examples like sea walls or specific areas of coast, but what I am
interested in is the larger area above the local level but below the national level. To
explain this I’m going to use a Dutch example, there are lots of people living at the
end of lots of rivers which may rise rapidly due to climate change and the volume of
water might be considerably more than is dealt with on a normal day-to-day basis.
There are different strategies which have been adopted in Holland to deal with this
increase in water level and these have an influence on people over a wider area than
just the immediate location. Raising awareness above the community level may help
people to understand and accept that adaptation in one place may be necessary even
though it has an impact somewhere else. This level of raising awareness has not yet
been discussed and is harder to engage in. The Dutch seem to have some experience
of that and perhaps we can move the discussion in that direction, it is about raising
awareness above the community level with a clear idea that your spatial planning
options are impacting over a much wider area than the person you’re talking to.
Johan Bakker – Another example is the floods of 1993/95. Due to disaster awareness,
all the farmers here had to move out of the area, but it involved everyone as those
not affected by the floods helped the farmers who were impacted.
Bryan Boult – Are you using examples of disasters as part of your raising awareness
work?
Johan Bakker – Yes, because of the floods, the policy is now to explain that as we are
a publicly controlled body, if you don’t want to co-operate between areas there will
be big costs for everyone.
Marieke Soeters – Disaster events like these floods have given the basis for the
national agreement on water. It is an opportunity to bring parties to together to
anticipate and prevent future problems.
Hans Weber, Bayerisches Landesamt fur Wasserwirtschaft – Is action being taken due to
climate change awareness or flooding?
Marieke Soeters – It is taken because of water first but we bring the issue of climate
change in after.
Willem Oosterberg – We use climate change, for example we say that there is 20%
more water coming through the River Rhine, where should we put it? One part of
the country has to sacrifice space for another.
Bryan Boult – I think this discussion has demonstrated the purpose of this workshop
and the purpose of the project. That is that each of us has got different experiences
and this project is a transnational project which will allow us to pull all these
experiences together. At the end of the day we are making recommendations about
European spatial planning and those recommendations will be based upon a synthesis
of workshops such as this one and all the work that is to follow. The discussion this
morning has started to show where we can pull all this together.
We will now break for lunch. This is also an opportunity to continue questions and
discussions that have started this morning.
End of discussions
Summary of Key Points – Raising Awareness:





Uncertainty about the future is not a new phenomenon when we are planning for
the future and should not be an excuse for not taking action on climate change.
This is a message for businesses and organisations but not communities – that is
still an issue – how do we communicate our uncertainties with the public?
Extreme events can force actions and using them to raise awareness can be
effective. However, scare tactics only work for short periods of time.
Raising awareness at different levels and knowing what information is required by
each level is important.
When raising awareness amongst stakeholders it is important to ensure that they
know what they can contribute to resolving the issues and at what cost.
Communities need to understand and accept that adaptation in one place may be
necessary to alleviate problems somewhere else – e.g. adaptation upstream to
resolve problems downstream.
TOPIC 2: DEVELOPING AN INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE BASE
Chair: Chitra Nadarajah, Hampshire County Council as a Lead Partner
The next presentation will be given by Jeremy Owen from Land Use Consultants.
They were commissioned by the ESPACE Project to deliver the “Developing an
Information and Knowledge Base” study. Jeremy will present the main findings of
their work and outline their recommendations to the ESPACE project on how to
take this forward. I would like to ask all partners to think about how well this report
summarises the situation in your country and how realistic the recommendations are
for future action.
Presentation
Developing an Information and Knowledge Base - Jeremy Owen, Land
Use Consultants
See “Presentations “
Topic 2 Questions & Discussion
Marieke Soeters – Considering existing spatial planning networks, how do we
incorporate the overarching ESPACE objectives into existing national policy?
Jeremy Owen – Partners need to establish dialogue with spatial planners, not just
environment departments. The UK needs to establish a dialogue between ODPM
(the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister) and Defra (the Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs).
Marieke Soeters – What’s recommended is not new, what more do I need to do?
Jeremy Owen – The role of ESPACE is to raise adaptation to climate change on the
political agenda. Maybe it’s not new but maybe it needs to be said louder.
Marieke Soeters – The ESPACE Project is not a basis to convince ministers, it gives
more information, local information from other countries.
Reinhard Schmidtke – We need to focus on what we can do. The report is a good
start and gives us some ideas, but the situation on the ground in Germany is very
complex. We need to make sure that more information is available to the public.
Jeremy Owen – Climate change is happening but this is not transmitted to action on
the ground. Some things seem more important at the moment like new housing
which must be delivered.
Merylyn Hedger – A lot of recommendations are already in hand, for example the
Better Building Summit, Foresight report, etc. The Environment Agency have
produced guidance for regional spatial strategies. There is lots of information in the
report but we need to think about what is the added value.
Jeremy Owen – In many instances it is not actually influencing what happens on the
ground.
Ann Gaeremynck, Regionaal Landschap Zenne, Zuun en Zonien (RLZZZ) – In Belgium we
have a national climate commission which was established in March 2004. It provides
details of who will be responsible for what, which should help us understand what is
happening in Belgium.
Joanna Cleasby – We need more information on what has worked well, good
examples of how people have been able to implement action.
Jeremy Owen – It takes time for ideas to be made into action, not that much has been
done yet. As a recommendation maybe this report can be used as an information
base and the ESPACE partnership can now identify where it needs to focus attention.
Reinhard Schmidtke – It is a good platform but maybe it has taught us that we need to
improve the information we give to consultants.
Chitra Nadarajah – It is a good starting point but the recommendations are not
realistic for the ESPACE project. For example establishing dialogues between
ministries is not something that I think ESPACE can easily achieve.
Jeremy Owen – What were other partners expecting from the recommendations of
this report?
Stephen Walker, Environment Agency – In the UK there is a need now for research to
take reports like the Foresight report and decide how it is going to change or
influence and convert that into action. We are working on how to translate the need
for adaptation, how can this be carried out by industry. This needs investigation.
Jeremy Owen – That is a sensible recommendation, and I would suggest that this
project try and raise adaptation on the political agenda to try and make things
happen.
Tim Carter –I have a question regarding the scenarios and the comparison across the
four partner countries. Is there any argument that might be made that we should all
be using similar scenarios maybe on an EU-wide scale? How much coordination is
there? Regional climate models are not a definite answer as they depend on global
climate models. If the global models get it wrong, regional models will too, we could
also get 10 different views from regional models. In Finland we have developed
scenarios for socio-economics, air quality, etc. We are also conducting a desk study
about adaptation, including what’s known about how the climate might change and
the possible impacts in Finland.
Tim Reeder, Environment Agency – The useful message from this day is that some
countries are good at certain things. In the UK we have lots of information but there
is little action on the ground or from the top down. Maybe one product of ESPACE
could be a prompting tool for the individual Governments as to what are the
strengths and weaknesses of each country.
Marieke Soeters – We need to learn from pilot projects. On a local scale climate
change is not an issue but planning and housing is.
Merylyn Hedger – The priorities in this report for the ESPACE Project as a whole are
better than those provided for each of the partner countries. We need dialogue
between partners and scientists like Tim Carter to find better ways to do things.
Jeremy Owen – So in summary we need to take the information in this report and
identify the areas that need to be looked at in further detail.
Bryan Boult – The ESPACE project is not a set of discrete time packaged projects, it
runs across all four years. This work from Land Use Consultants develops a
knowledge base to develop policy. The end point is in three years when we can
make a recommendation about European spatial planning at national, regional and
local level based on our experience and needs.
We have talked about raising awareness and an analysis of existing building blocks
that are already there in different countries. Our next topic area is about policies
and strategies. It is through the process of reviewing those, and through the process
of developing those that ESPACE will deliver the final project.
We have a section of work which has been prepared for this workshop by SEERA
and VROM (the Dutch Ministry). For the next part I’ll hand over to Joanna Cleasby
from SEERA who will chair the session.
End of discussion
Summary of key points – Developing an Information & Knowledge Base





The report provides a good platform and gives us a clearer picture of spatial
planning and climate change in each partner country.
This work has shown that a lot of information is hidden or difficult to find –
especially in terms of networks and spatial planning. We therefore have to
ensure that more information is published and made available to both experts
and the public.
A useful message from this work is that each partner country is good at certain
things and we need to make use of that expertise in this partnership.
The recommendations for ESPACE as a whole are more useful than those
provided for each partner country.
We must be realistic about what ESPACE can achieve and deliver.
TOPIC 3: REVIEW OF POLICIES AND DEVELOPMENT OF ADAPTATION
STRATEGIES
Chair: Joanna Cleasby, South East England Regional Assembly, SEERA
This next session will be in three parts. First we will start with a presentation by
Marieke Soeters from the Ministerie van VROM, looking at spatial planning at the
national level in the Netherlands which will be followed by a brief discussion. We will
then have a coffee break which will be followed by a presentation by David Payne
from the Regional Assembly on regional spatial planning and the South East Spatial
Strategy. We have about an hour after this presentation for questions and
discussions on the whole topic.
Presentation:
1. Spatial Planning in the Netherlands – the relationship between Dutch
policy and ESPACE – Marieke Soeters, Ministerie van VROM
See “Presentations “
Topic 3 Questions &Discussion
Reinhard Schmidtke – What strategy do you use to cope with conflicts, for example
land use conflicts, conflicts with water, with special projects, etc? How will you
compensate?
Marieke Soeters – We don’t have a strategy but compensation and mitigation are part
of the water test.
Eric Kuindersma – I don’t think there is really a conflict because everyone agrees on
the aims and objectives. All the parties involved with water management and spatial
planning have signed a national agreement. There are some dilemmas but this is
mostly about money. We don’t disagree about the process or the content or the
urgency of the situation. Who is paying for what, that is the question.
Joanne Turner – In the strategy does it say that you will abandon parts of land and use
them to accommodate floods, as a buffer?
Marieke Soeters – We will compensate the people who are working and living there
but the land use itself will not change, but the people must understand the risks.
Eric Kuindersma - We have created a kind of stand still situation with this kind of
policy and that is why we are arguing with the national ministry about how to fulfil
that responsibility.
Joanne Turner – Is it possible to continue compensating or do you need to consider
retreat, is it cost-effective?
Marieke Soeters – We have not got that far yet.
Tim Carter – Long-term plans are developed with assumptions about future land use,
without considering things like the global demand for food in the future. Perhaps we
will only need as much land as we do now.
Marieke Soeters – It is not achievable to take decisions on this at the moment.
Eric Kuindersma – The problems occur when you allocate space for increased river
flows down the Rhine and then it doesn’t happen, we need co-ordination and to
make decisions not just on a local level.
Marieke Soeters – We also don’t own the land so it’s dependent on the good will of
people.
Tim Carter – People could end up being compensated every three years, that could
be profitable.
Eric Kuindersma – No, we will ensure that this doesn’t happen.
Hans Weber – How did you determine the effects of climate change on water
availability?
Niels Nijmeijer, Waterschap Rivierenland – 2050s scenarios were used but we need
more data for the future and more knowledge.
Bryan Boult – I would like to pick up what I think are two interesting links with the
very first session we had on raising awareness. The first link is that Marieke talked
about a cultural gap between spatial planners and water managers. That doesn’t
seem that different to the discussions that take place between the people in this
room and the general public when we are talking about raising awareness. One of
the strands that we have picked up in ESPACE is the need to raise awareness and
something we have tried to do is create a common language that we can use in this
project that we all understand.
The second point links to raising awareness and how to engage the interests and
wishes of local people in the process of spatial planning, at the same time as getting a
top down approach. The example that was mentioned was housing, local people
seeing areas flooding and realising that because of climate change, in 10 years they
are going to continue to flood so saying we don’t want to build there do we. The
answer is no but the Government has to build more houses so there is a conflict. I
think what we have been talking about is what sort of processes do we need to bring
into spatial planning, at all levels, that would stop the conflict. Marieke talked about
the process that Holland has for water and maybe this process could be used for
climate change
End of Discussion
Joanna Cleasby
We have heard about spatial planning at a national level from Marieke and now I’m
going to hand over to David Payne from the Regional Assembly who is going to look
at spatial planning from the regional level.
Presentation:
2. Review of Policies and Development of Adaptation Strategies – David
Payne, SEERA
See “Presentations “
Topic 3 Questions & Discussion
David Payne – I am interested in case studies that illustrate the translation of policy to
action.
Joanne Turner –on the issue of sustainable drainage systems, this issue has been
around for a while and the UK government has been taking it seriously. Later on this
year there is going to be a consultation on means of tackling non-agricultural diffuse
pollution. It has often been said that the wrong kind of Suds scheme in the wrong
place can make things worse and not better. The national Suds working group have
got some demonstration sites which may be useful as a case study.
Tim Carter – Another example is a case study in Finland which was looking at the
possible implications of climate change on building regulations. The maximum
allowance for wind speed has now been changed as a result of looking at climate
change.
Jacquelyn Harman – There is another regional study which focuses on incorporating
climate change into the regional spatial strategy of the East of England. The process
of implementation is as important as the strategy itself.
Harold Hall, WSCC – Do you think that the UK Government is going to rely on the
water supply industry to deal with land acquisition and construction or will it enable
the Environment Agency to provide?
David Payne –I think they will rely on the water companies. The problem is that they
deal with a five year business planning cycle which is very short term, we are thinking
longer than that. A reservoir takes 15 years to build. The water companies now
want a longer-term spatial planning process to provide more certainty. But I think
the finance of infrastructure will be down to the water industry. How do you ensure
funding is there to deliver infrastructure? This is an issue not just for water industry
but all industry.
Merylyn Hedger – There is actually a real problem about timescale. The Thames
Barrier was a big event in 1953, and it took 30 years to deliver. We are now
planning for 2030. Reservoirs will take 15-20 years to go through the public enquiry
system which is why we have got so many acute problems in the South East region.
Abby Pulham – It’s not just water companies that only look five years ahead. How far
ahead are European plans looking?
Reinhard Schmidtke – In Germany there is a 30 year planning horizon.
Abby Pulham – this is a real issue in the UK – it is hard to get people to consider
adapting to climate change when plans are only set for five years ahead.
David Payne – This is where regional planning guidance which looks 25 years ahead
may be able to help.
Jose Barredo – It is difficult to develop a plan that accommodates all the needs of all
the stakeholders. But all plans need political acceptance and the way to gain political
acceptance is to give them money!
David Payne – In the UK water tends to follow development, rather than not building
in an area because there is no water. Is this the same in other countries?
Reinhard Schmidtke – In Germany we have lot of water scarcity problems so we build
water transport systems and pump water into the dry areas.
David Payne – Unfortunately in the UK we have a fragmented system of water
companies in the South East region so it’s hard to transfer water.
Ann Gaeremynck – As far as I know there were no problems with water shortage in
Belgium last year.
Tim Reeder – I think this might reflect the fact that the South East of England and
London has got the equivalent ratio between available water supply and population
to Sudan and Israel. So we are already pushing the envelope on water availability in
the South East without climate change. That is the challenge.
Stephen Walker – How do you pay for water treatment, sources, etc. Is it the
developer and if so is it reflected in house prices?
Marieke Soeters – In the Netherlands the person who takes the initiative should pay
for negative aspects in financial/spatial terms. This is part of the water test which will
be evaluated next year.
Stephen Walker – When does the water test apply?
Marieke Soeters – From the start or for development already under way. There will
be an inventory of experiences next year.
Reinhard Schmidtke – You spoke about avoiding flood risk. We have a certain amount
of knowledge of the existing risks so we avoid these areas. How do you find out the
increased risks of flooding in an area as a result of climate change?
Tim Reeder – Environment Agency’s mapping shows where the current risk areas are
and we are trying to extend it nationally to show, on a very crude basis, where
climate change might make a difference. We should have a consistent national map
set showing what a particular scenario for climate change would mean to the flood
plain.
Reinhard Schmidtke – Does it distinguish between small and large rivers?
Tim Reeder – Not on this scale.
David Payne – It would be useful to build this information into the South East Plan.
Merylyn Hedger – There have been problems getting the basic maps out . The process
has been accelerated in the South East due to extra pressure but not all the UK is
contributing at the same level.
Stephen Walker – Coming back to a small point made earlier, what makes the system
work is bringing together the water management process with the spatial planning
process – for example I am a planner employed by the Environment Agency which is
full of water resource engineers and climate change experts, so all the expertise is
brought together in the same office.
David Payne – Having Stephen as a planner with the Environment Agency and being
leading the work on ESPACE has helped me a great deal. We are making progress
much quicker and the outcome will be better I think.
Bryan Boult – Climate change is changing the pattern of rainfall and this is a spatial
planning problem. With intense bursts of rain, how do we make use of the water
while we’ve got it? Engineering at the moment is designed to get rid of it, it’s the
same in Holland. It could then be used for drinking, etc, but we need to be able to
store it. In both countries almost every piece of land has another use, so in spatial
planning what kind of policies can we have which stores water over only a short
period of time when the land would not be used for the rest of the year?
David Payne – I think flooding is as important an issue as water resources. We are
looking at all the issues including water resources and water quality. Flooding is not
unimportant in the South East, we have had major floods in very recent years. It is a
major issue.
Jeremy Owen – With competing demands on land, if you are creating areas where
flooding and infiltration may figure, there may be other uses for the land for different
times of the year like wildlife.
Ann Gaeremynck – In Belgium there is a study where water is stored and retained and
not moved on too fast. Pavements are permeable, water meadows and ditches are
created to store water.
Marieke Soeters – There is a signal from the water board that areas used for excess
water from flooding are not the same as those that can be used for drought.
Tim Carter – What about sea level rise and saline intrusion?
Jeroen Veraat – Sea level rise and sea water intrusion can lead to water scarcity, it
would be useful to compare the UK and Holland.
Tim Reeder – Uncertainty is an issue for the Environment Agency and the Decision
Testing Tool may help with that. It is very difficult to make decisions and see how
sustainable they are given the uncertainties of climate change. Our idea is to simulate
making decisions given different socio-economic scenarios and different climate
change scenarios to see which approaches win the most often. There is a project in
the Thames Estuary which will be looking at flood defences for the next 100 years
and will need to take into account surges, increased fluvial flow and the uncertainty
of how often these events could happen. Which measures do you put in place that
will defend or mitigate those adverse effects most effectively?
David Payne – Do we build adaptation into development considering risk (not just
not building on the flood plain) and would it make the South East Plan more useful?
What are the other options?
Abby Pulham – In West Sussex part of development approval is to put in place flood
mitigation measures, for example a block of flats on the seafront have only got
underground car parks and added to that the developers had to build a flood wall
around the block of flats at a certain height, with flood gates, and that was at the
cost of the developer. Although this is not actually in planning policy as such, the
local authority decided to treat it in this way.
David Payne – This is the sort of example we need. If we set it in the South East Plan
it is stronger guidance for similar local authorities to be able to implement that at a
local level, even if it is not part national policy guidance.
Merylyn Hedger –But you must tackle this on an awareness raising level. There is
quite a negative connotation to being in a flood risk zone. People do not like their
houses appearing on flood risk maps because they think they will never be able to
sell. Maybe they need to think of it differently - will these measures add value in
future when I come to sell on?
Tim Reeder – We need to develop a strategy for development behind flood defence
areas but we also need to think about putting in measures to cope with water
shortages.
Chitra Nadarajah – There may not be that many examples of good case studies of
what should be happening so maybe you should look for ideas of what should be
done, i.e. combining flood management and water shortages.
Joanna Cleasby – It would also be useful to know what policies affected the
implementation of adaptation measures and whether they helped or hindered them.
Ann Gaeremynck – In Belgium we tried to bring all the stakeholders in a region
together including land owners, tourists, community members, etc, to produce a
management plan for water, nature, agriculture, etc. They were all sceptical at first
that the people could have a say on what to do with the region. There was no
agenda and we left it to the people to decide what they wanted to talk about. It
worked well.
Marieke Soeters – Models are important but knowing how to implement them is key.
We have had two days of stakeholder consultation about our guiding models for
water storage. Implementation requires real effort.
Niels Nijmeijer – We tried to map the choices for where you can and can’t build, and
came up with three choices – can’t build here, can build here, can build here but
you will need to take measures.
David Payne – Like zones of probability.
Joanne Turner – Are you succeeding in convincing planners?
Marieke Soeters – Spatial planners need alternatives for how to implement, not just
one solution from the water companies.
Eric Kuindersma – In Holland we have houses with cellars, but people don’t like it
when the cellar floods, so the answer is to not build houses with cellars.
Stephen Walker – We need to take flood management one step further and figure
out how it is integrated with spatial planning.
Reinhard Schmidtke – We have a flood protection scheme which looks at all the
possibilities, from reservoirs upstream to urban areas downstream.
Marieke Soeters – What about spatial quality, landscape and social considerations?
Thomas Beckman, Bayerisches Landesamt fur Wasserwirtschaft – There are a range of
options for flood protection and they are all subject to cost-benefit analysis including
social and environmental benefits.
Bryan Boult – As it is almost 17:30 I would like to draw this session to a conclusion
now. Discussions can be continued in the bar after this.
End of Discussion
Summary of key points – Review of Policies and Development of Adaptation
Strategies

Timescales are a very real issue when planning for climate change. Most plans in
the UK only look five years ahead, while some forms of infrastructure (e.g.
reservoirs) take 15 years to get through the public enquiry system. This makes it
very difficult to get people to consider adapting to climate change. In Germany
there is a 30 year planning horizon. The new UK regional spatial strategies will be
looking 25 years ahead which may help matters.





Examples of case studies where adaptation measures have been implemented are
not that common within the partner countries. Should the search area be
widened to the rest of Europe or further?
Land can be used for storing excess water for short periods of time during for
example intense bursts of rainfall. In Belgium water is stored and retained and
not allowed to move on too fast. In the Netherlands however, the areas used
for catchments to prevent flooding are not in the same locations for solving
water shortages.
Saline incursion is an issue for both the UK and the Netherlands which should be
investigated further.
Models are extremely useful for looking at combining different functions for land
to resolve issues like flood management and water storage. The bigger issue,
however, is implementation. This takes much more effort. Getting stakeholders
to commit to action is very difficult.
Germany have a very comprehensive system to assess how to cope with flooding
using a wide range of measures from reservoirs upstream to local measures like
flood walls or dykes. These are all subject to a cost-benefit analysis which takes
into account social and environmental benefits.
Conclusions
Bryan Boult
Today we have gone into some depth on three separate topics within the overall
ESPACE project. The topics are just one way of organising the work we are doing in
ESPACE and ultimately the conclusion of ESPACE will be the recommendations on
changes to the spatial planning system. We therefore need to integrate our work
across the topics, we need to integrate the case studies that we are doing and we
need to integrate the work we are doing over the whole four years of the project.
This workshop is not just about exchanging information and experiences, it is about
actively engaging with each other over the whole life of the project, which means
thinking about the relevance of your work to the other people around the table and
promoting that to them.
Hopefully now, at the end of this session, all the partners have an enhanced
understanding of the work that is going on and an increased ability to integrate their
work into the overall programme of actions over the next year. This workshop
should be informing your thinking to help us all deliver the outputs of the ESPACE
project. It is also important to recognise that this is just one workshop, we will have
more over the course of the project. We need to be aware of how to make the best
use of them in the development of this project as we are working towards
integration of all that we are doing.
Some of us are leaving at the end of today, and others are staying on for Days 2 & 3.
For those who are leaving, thank you very much for your contributions. Safe
journeys. I hope that today has been as valuable to you as it has been to us as a
group.