STATEMENT OF THE
5TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FLOOD MANAGEMENT (ICFM5)“FLOODS: FROM RISK TO OPPORTUNITY”
27‐29 SEPTEMBER 2011, TOKYO JAPANOn 27‐29 September 2011, the 5th International Conference on Flood Management (ICFM5) was
held in Tokyo, Japan with more than 450 participants gathered from 41 different nations
throughout the world. The participants applaud the local organizers for their great efforts to ensure
the success of ICFM5 in the face of the extreme difficulties that Japan experienced as a result of theGreat East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami in March of this year.
Following three days of extensive discussions on the important issues that communities, nations
and regions face in flood management, the participants of ICFM5 declare the following as their own
commitment, and appeal to all of the professionals, managers and decision makers in thisimportant field as well as the public to carry out such statements for life security, social welfare, andenhancement of land and water related environmental management:

1.

ACKNOWLEDGE:Events beyond Expectation.

The Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami of 11 March 2011

revealed that events beyond expectation (Soteigai in Japanese), or beyond the realm ofassumptions used in disaster management planning do occur. It is a violation of the law of livingwith nature to establish limits related to extreme events and, thus, neglect the potential
occurrence of events that might exceed those limits.
Increasing Complexity of Socio‐Economic Systems.

It is recognized that the components ofsocio‐economic activities are increasingly dependent upon each other and the impact of local
disasters may quickly extend to national, regional and global scales through the market
network (e.g., supply chains).

There is a critical need to evaluate, comprehend and address

the complexity of existing and future socio‐economic systems. As societal vulnerability todisasters increases through economic development and globalization, Asia is a “hot spot” ofincreasing global disaster risk while local disasters have disrupting consequences anywhere in
the world.


Increasing Floods. Floods are the most extensive and frequently occurring disaster in the world,
resulting in the largest socio‐economic impacts to most nations in comparison to all othernatural disasters. Flood frequency and severity continue to rise at many places, along with theaccompanying socio‐economic impacts. It is further recognized that the flood risk is becoming1increasingly important in those urban areas that are experiencing expansion and higher
densities of population throughout the world.


Increasing Flood Risk. Climate change is a serious factor that acts to increase the flood risk. The
intensity and frequency of torrential rains have markedly increased, as evidenced in Taiwan in2009 and in Japan in 2011. The flood risk is further heightened as a consequence of
unprecedented urban growth, human encroachment in disaster prone areas, continued poverty
rates, poor governance, environmental degradation, water illiteracy, corruption and otherrelated human practices.

2.

DECLARE:

From Risk to Opportunity. The scientific knowledge of risk, as a combination of hazard andvulnerability, provides an opportunity to improve societies and their ways of life. This era ofincreased risk presents new opportunities for societies to shift from high risk, unsustainable
cycles to low risk, sustainable cycles. Particularly when the scientific basis of a risk becomes
known, it serves as an indispensable occasion to make critical societal adjustments. We now
have the opportunity to balance desired life styles with enriched ecological environments. We
have a unique opportunity to advance science and make wise use of our scientific knowledge.
Reducing the disaster risk reduces damages that might otherwise impede continued economic
development and environmental sustainability.

Management of Flood Disasters under High Levels of Uncertainty.

As a result of increased

complexities, shifting populations and climate change the concept of flood management under
uncertainty is no longer an abstract concept. The total elimination of the flood risk is
impossible and new risk‐based tools and techniques are necessary to advance flood
management policy, engineering design and operations, along with the disaster management
process.


Flood Management as Part of IWRM.

Flood management is a critical part of Integrated

Water Resources Management (IWRM). More efforts to integrate land and water developmentwith basin‐level management are necessary, including the involvement of the industrial,
agricultural, environmental and administrative sectors. Integrative practices continue to lag inmany nations. In this respect, the UNESCO publication on IWRM guidelines (2009) and theConcept Paper on Integrated Flood Management (2009) by the Associated Program on FloodManagement are major contributions and their recommendations should be more fully
promoted.
Balance of Structural and Non‐Structural Infrastructure.
2

There is an increased emphasis inmodern flood management thinking on non‐structural methods, such as land use planning,
insurance, education, early warning and evacuation protecting high valued and/or important
real estate. While these options are all very important, it cannot be understated that in manynations, many people have no choice but to live in flood prone areas where structural
measures are critical for their settlement. Especially for high economic activities, such
exercises as evacuation, business discontinuity with or without insurance and strong limitationin land use are not compatible. Continued economic development, therefore, requires arational balance of structural and non‐structural infrastructure.
Preparedness beyond Expectation.

It is now necessary to prepare for potential events thatexceed expectations. The theoretical maxim of combined multi‐hazard effects must be
considered in community, national and regional risk management. Extreme floods andlandslides beyond expectation that may result from typhoons, earthquakes, tsunamis, storm
surges and other extreme events should be fully incorporated into the field of flood
management.


Methods of Assessing “unexpected, extreme event” and Cascading Effects. The assessment
methodology on the impacts of very rare, difficult to identify the probability of, and extremely
high consequent events (black swan events) and cascading events should be more fully
focused and developed.



Scientific Advancement of Prediction.

Unlike earthquakes, floods are largely predictable andto some extent controllable. Disasters of hydro‐meteorological origin can be far better
managed through the applied use of science and technology. Research and knowledge‐based
decision making should be greatly promoted in the flood management field.
Floodplain Protection.

A large number of concentrated populations throughout the world

are living in floodplains and utilizing seasonal flooding water as a heavenly gift for theiragriculture, fishery, transportation, etc. Flood management should not destroy nor neglect,
but rather protect such ecological health and lifestyle of living with nature.

3.

AGREE:



Implementation of HLEP/UNSGAB Action Plan.

UNSGAB/HLEP’s Action Plan on Water andDisaster is unique in its commitment to implementation. The national and internationalorganizations that participated in this Conference should make strong commitments to theimportant items discussed during ICFM5, including early warning systems, preparedness
indices, climate change adaptation and mega‐delta protection.

3



Spreading the Word.

The participants agree to distribute this statement at other key related

international events, such as the 1st Integrated Research on Disaster Risk Conference (Beijing,2011), the 6th World Water Forum (Marseille, 2012), Rio+20 (Rio de Janeiro, 2012), Flood risk
2012 Conference in Rotterdam and the 3rd World Conference on Disaster Reduction (Japan,2015).


Sharing Knowledge and Experience.

Information sharing on the local, regional, national andinternational scales is an essential element of the flood risk management process.


Education and Training. The participants recognize the huge need to enhance education andtraining related to the field of Integrated Flood Management (IFM). Furthermore, theeducation needs to be revised to train effective experts in IFM with a strong interdisciplinary
background. A system thinking, that considers the different components of the system in
relation to each other and tries to understand the whole systems in a holistic way, is pivotal to
improve IFM and has to be introduced to students and practitioners. The importance of live
long learning in an IFM context is essential.

4.

INVITE:ICFM6.

The Ad Hoc Committee will organize a 6th ICFM to continue the exchange ofinnovative flood management research and practices and national, regional and international
policy developments.

ATTACHMENTS
The two plenary and 34 special and parallel technical sessions focused on several flood
management themes, including risk management, emergency response, early warning, climatic
regimes and cross‐cutting themes.

Related discussions took place on how communities,

nations and regions can, based on scientific knowledge, reduce levels of flood‐related disasters
and create resilient societies that are adaptive to global changes and future uncertainties. The
outcomes of these discussions are attached in Annex 1.
The International Forum on Mega‐Water‐Disasters was organized in conjunction with ICFM5 inorder to incorporate recent experiences and lessons learned from the Great East Japan
Earthquake and Tsunami. Sessions of high‐level experts and decision makers were convened
and the discussions were reflected during the conference. The outcome and message of theForum (Tokyo Statement) is attached in Annex 2.

4

Annex I:
ICFM5 Plenary and Special Session Outcomes
Plenary Session 1: Flood Forecasting and Early Warning Systems
UN Secretary‐General’s Advisory Board (UNSGAB)’s High‐Level Expert Panel in the “Water andDisaster” identified flood early warning as an essential element that supports the Hyogo
Framework for Action. Many international efforts are focusing on assisting nations and regions indealing with challenges of water related disasters. The International Flood Initiative jointly
proposed by UNESCO and WMO and supported by ISDR, UNU, IAHS and IAHR; the AssociatedProgram on Flood Management and other similar initiatives, in their own way are implementing
follow up on the actions identified therein. The session provided a brief overview of some of thepresent mechanisms being used for transferring the existing technologies in flood forecasting andearly warning to the developing countries and discussed the advancements in the flood forecastingand early warning technologies and the gaps that need to be addressed through research.
Plenary Session 2: Floods, Landslide and Debris Flow due to Torrential Downpours
The objective of this plenary session was to explore the new features of such calamities in context
of the global climate change and socioeconomic development, and how to strengthen the capacity
building in a comprehensive way to restrain the growth of the risk effectively. The key points thatwere discussed in the session include:Disaster chain of torrential downpours, floods, landslide and debris flow and their risk
features;Predictability of the outburst floods, landslide and debris flow and the effectiveness ofcountermeasures

Appropriate coping strategies for nations or regions with different social economic
development level.

The session highlighted the main issues to be addressed and then to look at the measuresthat can be taken to mitigate the risk.

Special Session 1: Flood Risk Management Approaches as Being Practiced in Japan, theNetherlands, United Kingdom and United States
The Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), the Dutch
Rijkswaterstaat, the United Kingdom Environment Agency, and the United States Army Corps ofEngineers agreed to develop a document to explore risk‐informed approaches as being practiced
and developed primarily in those four countries.
These include adapting to new understandings of risk that take into account the impacts of climate
5change, bridging gaps between land‐use decisions and flood risk management considerations,effectively communicating risk to the general public in a way that promotes individual as well associetal responsibility, and aligning planning and actions to identify and meet the most critical risks
within a framework that is socially, environmentally, economically, and politically acceptable.
This special session provided an overview of the four countries’ collaboration and their resulting
jointly‐prepared document. Presentations by each country highlighted example approaches, thedrivers for those approaches, and practices that are working or hold particular promise.
Special Session 2: Practical Steps for Adapting to Climate Change
UNSGAB Action 29 (Report: Water and Disasters: High Level Expert Panel on Water andDisasters/UNSGAB, March 2009) reads as follows:“National and international hydrological institutes must take the initiative to identify underlying
analyticaland data requirements to meet climate changes that are likely to be highly uncertain

and so as to support structural and non‐structural measures for disaster risk deduction.”
Major practicing hydrologic research institutions worldwide should form a consortium to develop a
new family of practical hydrologic engineering tools, methods, procedures and professional
standards for the planning, design, operation and maintenance of infrastructure undernon‐stationary climate trends and climate change uncertainty. The consortium would assess
existing, and generate new ‘best management practices’ under climate uncertainty, that could be
used by water managers and specialists throughout the developed and developing countries thatwould guide them through the transitional period of improved GCM development. International aid
agencies such as the World Bank, USAID, FAO and UNDP, would be engaged, as they would also
benefit from these new procedures.
Special Session 3: Associated Programme on Flood Management 10th Year Anniversary
Established jointly by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the Global Water
Partnership (GWP) in 2001, the Associated Programme on Flood Management (APFM) is the world’s
premier comprehensive knowledge base for the development and implementation of best practices
in Integrated Flood Management (IFM), worldwide.
Case studies, demonstration projects, and a considerable number of technical tool publications are
the main elements that form the growing knowledge base of the APFM since its inception. The IFM
HelpDesk is the main access gate to this knowledge base that has been accumulated to facilitate
finding pragmatic solutions bridging the gap between international policy consensus andmanagement challenges.
In occasion of ICFM5, the APFM Team and its partners presented its achievements and lessons
learnt over the past decade and to express its continued dedication to promote the IFM concept.
6

Special Session 4: Education and Capacity Building in Flood Management
This session discussed (i) challenges for education with particular emphasis on integrated flood
management. (ii) Competency profiles for flood experts of the future. And finally, (iii) different ways
to improve the education of flood experts. This includes revisiting the university curricula, CPD
programmes, applied teaching and learning methods, and joint educational activities in knowledge
partnerships.
The participants recognize the huge need to enhance and education related to the field ofIntegrated Flood Management. Furthermore, the education needs to be revised to train effective
experts in IFM with a strong interdisciplinary background. Systems thinking, that considers thedifferent components of the system in relation to each other and tries to understand the wholesystems in a holistic way, is pivotal to improve IFM and has to be introduced to students andpractitioners. The importance of live long learning in an IFM context is essential.
Special Session 5: Building Flood Resilient Communities
Building community resilience to flood risk, which promote an integrated flood risk management
approach that incorporates both hard and soft measures with active participation of community, isthe way forward. Building flood resilient communities will become an essential adaptation measure
to cope with flood risk increases brought about by climate change. This necessitates the need toincorporate ‘flood resilient communities’ as a specific target in development programmes.

Thissession discussed the following themes:Capacity building at different institutional levels to enhance community based flood
management

Flood risk reduction projects that contribute to community development and vice versa

Interventions and strategies that enhance community flood resilience

Special Session 6: Advances and New Directions in Hydraulics of Flood Modeling
During this special session four invited presentations introduced a variety of topics such as
automated two‐dimensional dam‐break modeling, operational flood modeling using gameprogramming, bank stability and sediment transport issues during floods, the use of observations inflood modeling, and urban flood modeling. The panel discussion following the presentations
discussed recent advances and new directions in hydraulics of flood modeling.
Special Session 7: Flood Risk Management tools and their application
This special session was about Flood Risk Management (FRM) tools and their applications, with afocus on showing how FRM tools can be used to assist decision makers and practitioners involved in7

flood risk management. Several international projects are presented in which FRM tools have beendeveloped and successfully applied for flood mapping, risk mapping, calculation of failure
probabilities of flood defenses, risk assessment, etc.
Special Session 8: Flood resilience: Interdisciplinary approaches emerging from recent European
research projects
This session shared and demonstrated the research output of five leading EU projects, in acomprehensive way, to a wider scientific audience. Also another major objective of this session was
to bridge different aspects of floods resilience (economic, social, communication, vulnerability) andto open the dialogue for establishing an integrated flood risk assessment approach. The primary
ambition of this session was to deliver a step change in flood risk management communities’ ability
to exploit capacities as a way of enhancing resilience.

8Annex II:
International Forum on Mega‐Water‐Disaster Outcome (Tokyo Statement)‐ to be better prepared for Mega‐Water‐Disaster in future ‐September 27th, 2011, Tokyo, Japan

Water is life. But, water is also a threat to life. When a mega‐water‐disaster strikes a country people
suffer, and national development is severely hampered for years, making recovery even morechallenging. Unfortunately, many areas of the world are struck by such disasters over and over.
These disasters also know no borders, severe value chains and result in political social andeconomic shocks, severely affecting human development.
Countries that are considered vulnerable to recurring disasters often also have to deal with highlyvariable and challenging water, natural resources, social and economic situations. The poor suffer
the most from disasters as they tend to live under more vulnerable conditions with less protection
and preparedness. Human rights are recurrently violated through vicious circle of their living inlowland slums and losing everything by water‐disasters.
Global changes including climate change, population growth and fast urbanization are drasticallyincreasing risks of water‐disaster. There are increasingly more people in crowded urban areas whowill feel the impact of climate change through water. Green growth will not be materialized withoutsquarely addressing mega‐water‐disasters.
Having the above in mind, we share common understanding that water disaster should be urgently
addressed by leaders at global, national and municipal levels. Towards this end, we recommend thefollowing as priority actions for the international community which are inspired from Action Plan by
HLEP/UNSGAB:
International community, especially the UN, to conduct regular dialogue and promoteactions in order to share experiences and lessons globally and develop effective countermeasures to mitigate mega‐water‐disasters.



Governments to build social, administrative, and technical systems to be “reduce disasterrisk before disasters strike and be prepared for unexpected event” especially those toensure “best mix” of structural and non‐structural measures that optimally mitigate
mega‐water‐ disasters.

Regional bodies, including UN Regional Commissions and regional development banks toestablish mechanisms for regional cooperation to ensure concerted disaster response
especially across river basins.
9Appropriate processes and mechanisms should be established to turn the recommended actions
into reality. To implement the above we strongly support the recommendation by HLEP/UNSGAB
that a plenary discussion session on water and disaster takes place at the next UN General
Assembly.

10