COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Hazard and Risk Maps and Second Flood Risk Management Plans Member State: Ireland Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC) Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Risk Management Plans
Date: 2025-02-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: Ireland, adaptation to climate change, application of EU law, environmental risk prevention, flood, risk management, water, water management, water pollution, watercourse

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.2.2025  SWD(2025) 31 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Third River Basin Management Plans    Second Flood Hazard and Risk Maps and Second Flood Risk Management Plans   Member State: Ireland  Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC)        Third River Basin Management Plans    Second Flood Risk Management Plans {COM(2025) 2 final} - {SWD(2025) 13 final} - {SWD(2025) 14 final} - {SWD(2025) 15 final} - {SWD(2025) 16 final} - {SWD(2025) 17 final} - {SWD(2025) 18 final} - {SWD(2025) 19 final} - {SWD(2025) 20 final} - {SWD(2025) 21 final} - {SWD(2025) 22 final} - {SWD(2025) 23 final} - {SWD(2025) 24 final} - {SWD(2025) 25 final} - {SWD(2025) 26 final} - {SWD(2025) 27 final} - {SWD(2025) 28 final} - {SWD(2025) 29 final} - {SWD(2025) 30 final} - {SWD(2025) 32 final} - {SWD(2025) 33 final} - {SWD(2025) 34 final} - {SWD(2025) 35 final}  
 
 
y
n
a
r
V
n
a
p
e
t
S

|

m
o
c
s
l

.

e
x
e
P
©

Country specific staff working document 

Ireland 

ENVIRONMENT 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Content 

Content ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 

SECTION A: WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE .......................................................................................................................... 3 

SECTION B: FLOODS DIRECTIVE ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 

1. Flood risk management under floods directive (FD) ............................................................................................... 6 

1.1 Flood hazard and risk maps ......................................................................................................................................... 7 

1.2 Flood risk management plans ..................................................................................................................................... 8 

2. FD recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................ 10 

2 

 
 
 
SECTION A: 
WATER FRAMEWORK 
DIRECTIVE 

3 

 
 
 
Ireland has failed to comply with its legal obligation and has not reported the 3rd RBMPs in time. The 
Commission has thus been bound to launch legal proceedings.  

4 

 
 
SECTION B: 
FLOODS DIRECTIVE 

5 

 
 
 
1. Flood risk management under floods directive (FD) 

The Directive requires each Member State (MS) to scan its territory for flood risks, assess the potential 
adverse  consequences  of  future  floods  for  human  health,  the  environment,  cultural  heritage  and 
economic  activity,  identify  the  significant  risks,  map  the  flood  extent  and  the  potential  adverse 
consequences, and take measures to reduce the flood risk. These activities are reflected in (a) the 
preliminary  flood  risk  assessments,  or  PFRAs  (including  the  identification  of  areas  of  potential 
significant flood risk, or APSFRs), (b) the preparation of flood hazard and risk maps, or FHRMs, and (c) 
the establishment of flood risk management plans, or FRMPs. The preliminary assessments, mapping 
and planning for flood risk are repeated in six-yearly cycles. 

There are three Units of Management (UoMs) in Ireland, which are the same as the Water Framework 
Directive’s River Basin Districts (RBD).  Fluvial,  pluvial, groundwater, sea water, and Artificial  Water 
Bearing Infrastructure types of floods are considered as potentially significant sources of flooding in 
Ireland. Ireland has designated 199 Areas of Potential Significant Flood Risk (APSFRs). The impacts 
of climate change on flood risk have been considered in Ireland at the time of the second preliminary 
flood risk assessment. Climate change has been assessed for the 300 previously designated APSFRs 
though the Irish Coastal Protection Strategy Study (ICPSS) and the National Catchment Flood Risk 
Assessment and Management (CFRAM) programme. The ICPSS was completed in 2013 and provides 
strategic current and future scenario (up to 2100) coastal flood hazard maps and coastal erosion 
maps  for  the  national  coastline.  These  two  studies  have  determined  that  the  impact  of  climate 
change can significantly increase flood risk in Ireland, particularly in coastal areas. They also highlight 
that in addition to the flood relief schemes proposed under the FRMPs, the need for further, additional 
flood risk management measures may arise over the coming decades for other communities, where 
the current level of risk is low, due to the projected increases in flood risk. The Office of Public Works 
published the Draft Climate Change Sectoral Adaptation Plan for Flood Risk Management in 2019 
which includes a set of adaptation objectives and a series of actions aimed towards the achievement 
of these objectives. 

6 

 
 
1.1 Flood hazard and risk maps 

Ireland  is using  an  open-access  online  map  portal1  for  their  FHRMs.  FHRMs  were  prepared  at  the 
national level and show the whole country. Maps for floods with low probability (1/1 000 years), with 
medium  probability  (fluvial  and  pluvial:  1/100  years  and  coastal:  1/200years)  and  with  high 
probability (1/10 years) are provided. Flood extent is shown on the maps. Water depth is shown on 
the maps. Number of inhabitants is shown. Likewise, type of economic activity is shown on the maps. 
IED installations are shown. Potentially affected protected areas identified in Annex IV(1)(i), (iii) and 
(v) to Directive 2000/60/EC are shown in the FHRMs. 

In the first FHRMs, Ireland reported 300 APSFRs. As an output of the work for the second PFRA and 
for the second FHRMs, 199 APSFRs are reported. However, the online  viewer and the CFRAM PDF 
maps are not exclusive to these 199 APSFRs, but also cover the wider set of areas identified as Areas 
for Further Assessment (AFAs) for 300 communities. 

In terms of changes of contextual information (i.e. the way in which information about the maps is 
conveyed to the public) since the first FHRMs, the extent of information available on flood hazard and 
risks on the main website2 has increased since the first FHRMs. For example: different sources/studies 
have been used to create the flood maps, and there are different layers that show hazards from 
different  flood  sources  and  flood  probability  scenarios.  In  addition  to  the  online  GIS-based  maps, 
downloadable PDF maps for 300 “significantly at risk” communities are available3, and these PDF 
maps show information on both risk hazard (flood extent, flood depth, water level, and total water 
flow) and flood risk (e.g. inhabitants potentially affected, economic activities at risk). Similarly, the 
available features in the main website have also increased. For example, a weakness identified in the 
first FHRMs was that it is not possible to search for areas of interest. The main website now has this 
function. In the first FHRMs, it was deemed that labelling on climate scenarios was unclear. This has 
improved in the second FHRMs; climate scenarios are now clearly labelled as mid-range or high-end4. 
Additionally, on the online version of the maps, layers showing past flooding events are available, 
and other online maps related to flooding (e.g. drainage, flood plans, and coastal hazard maps) are 
also available. 

In terms of changes in methodologies used to prepare flood hazard maps since the first FHRMs, for 
the first FHRMs, Ireland assessed hazard from pluvial floods but did not publish associated maps. For 
the second FHRMs maps for pluvial hazard for the Dublin City and the Raphoe APSFRs have been 
published as they have been identified as having significant risk from pluvial floods. 

In  terms  of  changes  in  methodologies  used  to  prepare  flood  risk  maps  since  the  first  FHRMs, 
additional  potential  adverse  consequences  were  included  in  Ireland’s  second  FHRMs  that  were 
previously not included in the first FHRMs. These are types of economic activities, location of IED 
installations and WFD protected areas. 

1 https://www.floodinfo.ie/  
2 www.floodinfo.ie 
3 Ireland subsequently clarified that for the second FHRMs, they are only reporting 199 APSFRs. The PDF maps cover a 
larger number of areas than the reported APSFRs for the second FHRMs, as these maps are generated for national use 
and are not limited to fulfilling reporting requirements of the Floods Directive.  
4 The “current” climate scenario used in the first cycle seems to have been replaced by a “present day” scenario which is 
assumed to be the baseline scenario shown in all maps (except for those showing the mid-range and high-end climate 
scenarios).  

7 

 
 
 
 
Climate change in the second FHRMs 

The European Commission’s assessment of Irelands first FHRMs5 stated that flood maps have been 
produced under climate change scenarios; however, it does not state which flood sources have had 
maps produced. For the second FHRMs, the climate change scenarios were applied to fluvial flooding 
(under the CFRAM programme and the National Indicative Fluvial Mapping) and to coastal flooding 
(under  the  National  Coastal  Flood  Hazard  Maps  and  the  CFRAM  programme).  Similar  to  the  first 
FHRMs, the source(s)  of information used to (qualitatively)  define the flood parameters under the 
climate change scenarios were not explicitly mentioned. 

1.2 Flood risk management plans 

Objectives and measures 

Ireland did not develop new or updated second FRMPs, instead publishing a review of the FRMPs in 
December 2021 (‘2021 Review’). The 2021 Review6 is not a new plan in itself. The 2021 Review sets 
out an overall objective, 15 detailed objectives and 18 sub-objectives at national level. The objectives 
are tailored to local conditions through a weighting system applied to each measure. These objectives 
have not changed since Ireland’s first FRMPs. The common overall objective calls for a reduction of 
the  potential  consequences  of  flooding.  The  overall  objective  refers  to  managing  and  reducing 
consequences of flooding for human health; to managing and reducing consequences of flooding for 
economic activity; to managing and reducing consequences of flooding for the environment; and to 
managing and reducing consequences of flooding for cultural heritage. Beyond the overall objective, 
one objective refers to minimising risk to human health and life. One objective refers to minimising 
economic  risk  (and  others  to  minimising  risk  to  transport  infrastructure,  utility  infrastructure  and 
agriculture).  More  detailed  objectives  concern  potential  adverse  consequences  to  specific 
environmental components, such as damage to flora and fauna. One more detailed objective refers 
to avoiding damage to cultural heritage. Ireland reported 601 measures. These measures cover three 
of the four aspects of flood risk management: protection, prevention, and preparedness. Recovery 
and review measures fall under preparedness measures in the Irish reporting to EIONET, and the 
2021 Review refers to a preparedness pillar that includes recovery and review. Ireland’s reporting to 
EIONET categorises all measures as either very high or high priority The 2021 Review does not set 
out  the  methods  used  to  prioritise  measures  and  only  briefly  mentions  prioritising  structural 
measures.  The  2021  Review  includes  an  assessment  of  progress.  The  description  of  progress  on 
national measures in the 2021 Review does not draw a conclusion on the status of progress – it is 
not clear whether these measures are completed or not. On the other hand, the community-level 
measures have clear progress status. 

The 2021 Review does not detail the assessment of economic costs and benefits. Costs are provided 
for some schemes (groups of measures) but not for all measures. The Review refers to CBA for some 
potential measures and its use for flood relief measures under a different document, the Climate 
Change  Sectoral  Adaptation  Plan  for  Flood  Risk  Management  (CCSAP).  One  of  the  15  specific 
objectives refers to the WFD’s objectives. Ireland’s reporting and the 2021 Review indicate the actions 
taken  to  address  WFD  objectives.  Water  retention  is  addressed  through  national-level  measures, 
including sustainable urban drainage. Local authorities are encouraged to use natural water retention 
measures in local urban planning. A multi-agency working group promotes the use of nature-based 

5https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/9ab5926d-bed4-4322-9aa7-9964bbe8312d/library/59099982-97cc-4a02-afec-
46e4def92dfa/details 
6 https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/bab83-review-of-the-flood-risk-management-plans-frmps-2021/ 

8 

 
 
solutions for flood risk management. Flood-related objectives include supporting the objectives of 
the Habitats Directive and avoiding damage to (and, where possible, enhancing) flora and fauna. Sub-
objectives include avoiding damage and enhancing Natura 2000 areas and maintaining/improving 
conditions that allow upstream migration for fish species. 

Ireland reports 190 prevention measures (out of 601 measures); 269 protection measures (the 2021 
Review  lists  structural  flood  protection  measures,  primarily  community/local  measures);  and  113 
preparedness  measures.  The  2021  Review  sets  out  non-structural  flood  risk  prevention  and 
preparedness measures, including measures for flood forecasting and warning systems. Measures 
for spatial planning and land use are detailed in the 2021 Review: these call on local authorities to 
address flood risks in their spatial planning. The 2021 Review presents the same objectives as those 
set out in the first FRMPs. The objectives do not include quantitative targets. The 2021 Review sets 
out the contribution of measures to the objectives of the FRMPs7. Neither the 2021 Review nor the 
first FRMPs tie specific measures to objectives, and thus it cannot be considered that the 2021 Review 
sets  out  the  progress  towards  the  objectives.  Ireland  reported  the  same  measures  in  its  2022 
reporting  to  EIONET  as  in  2018.  Several  minor  changes  appear  to  be  administrative  rather  than 
changes to the measures themselves – the 2021 Review makes it clear that no new measures are 
necessary.  The  2021  Review  also  does  not  provide  further  information  on  the  methods  used  to 
prioritise measures (although it is clear in both the FRMP and the 2022 reporting to EIONET that 
measures  have  undergone  some  prioritisation).  The  2021  Review  provides  a  brief  description  of 
activities undertaken since the 2018 reporting to EIONET for the measures set out in the first FRMPs, 
though it does not explain what needs to be done before each measure can be considered complete. 
It also appears that the community-level measures have (for the most part) progress status. Several 
measures are being subject to SVRs8, however, it appears that 58 schemes recommended by the first 
FRMPs have not yet commenced, and it is not clear when they will start (although they are planned 
to  be  underway  before  2030,  capacity  shortages  are  hinted  at  in the 2021  Review)9.  In  its  2022 
reporting in EIONET, Ireland listed the priority of each measure, using only two of the five categories 
defined  at  EU  level:  all  measures  were  reported  as  having  a  ‘very  high’  or  ‘high’  priority  (i.e.  no 
measures were reported as critical, moderate, or low priority). The majority of measures, 436 of the 
601 (73 %) were reported as high priority and the remaining 165 (27 %) were reported as very high 
priority. The distribution across UoMs was fairly similar, with 63 % of measures in the Northwestern 
UoM (IEGBNIIENW) reported as high priority (22 measures), compared to 68 % of measures in the 
Neagh Bann UoM (IEGBNIIENB) (15 measures) and 73 % in the Republic of Ireland UoM (IEROI) (399 
measures). Protection measures had the largest share of very high priority measures, at 39 % (106 
measures),  compared  to  17  %  of  prevention  measures  (33  measures),  22  %  of  preparedness 
measures (25 measures), and 4 % of ‘other’ measures (1 measure). 

Governance 

The Review states that it was not considered appropriate to undertake public consultations (beyond 
stakeholder  consultations)  for  the  2021  review  of  the  FRMPs,  given  that  extensive  public 
consultations took place for the first FRMPs and the more recent Climate Change Sectoral Adaptation 
Plan. It notes that no additional measures or changes to the first FRMPs have been proposed in light 
of the 2021 Review, and the Review is limited to reporting on implementation progress rather than 

7 2021 Review, section 5.7.  
8 Scheme viability reviews (SVRs), which aim to determine whether or not a potential flood scheme should be taken to project stage. 
9 2021 Review, p. 33. 

9 

 
 
setting out any new proposals10. The 2021 Review of the FRMP refers to ongoing coordination with 
Northern Ireland. 

Consideration of climate change 

Since  the  first  FRMPs  (2018),  Ireland  has  published  its  CCSAP  for  flood  risk  management,  which 
represents  progress  in  considering  the  impacts  of  climate  change  on  flooding.  The  2021  Review 
indicates  that  the  CCSAP  includes  further  actions  to  support  non-structural  measures,  such  as 
enhancing knowledge and training of local authorities, with spatial planning and NWRMs clearly set 
out  in the  objectives  of  the  CCSAP.  One  objective  of  the  FRMP  refers  to  future  flood  risk  and the 
potential impacts of climate change. The 2021 Review refers to links with plans for climate adaption, 
such as the CCSAP, and briefly describes the expected impacts of climate change. It indicates that, as 
part of the 2021 Review, the measures were assessed in terms of climate impacts and coherence 
with new adaptation policy documents at local and national level. The 2021 Review indicates that 
existing flood measures were assessed for coherence with Ireland’s CCSAP. Additionally, it appears 
that some national measures (non-infrastructure measures applicable to all areas) have a significant 
climate change component. While the main sources of flooding were not expected to change, climate 
change is likely to have a considerable impact on flood risk in Ireland through rising mean sea levels, 
increased wave action, and potential increases in winter rainfall and intense rainfall events. Land use 
change, such as new housing and other developments, could also increase potential future flood risk. 

Progress identified in the second FRMPs 

The  2021  Review  now  includes  a  clear  description  of  how  the  first  PFRAs  were  used  in  the 
development of the FHRMs and FRMPs. Also, it describes how the results of the second PFRA were 
used in the second FHRMs and the 2021 Review. It also appears that the community-level measures 
have (for the most part) been confirmed and developed. The 2021 Review refers to a review of the 
approach  to  project  appraisal  undertaken  in  2021,  which  recommended  expanding  the  range  of 
potential benefits to better capture indirect and/or intangible environmental, cultural heritage and 
societal benefits, addressing the recommendation made concerning the first FRMPs. The 2021 Review 
indicates that existing flood measures were assessed for coherence with Ireland’s  Climate Change 
Sectoral Adaptation Plan for Flood Risk Management (CCSAP). Since the first FRMPs (2018), Ireland 
has  published  its  CCSAP  for  flood  risk  management,  which  represents  significant  progress  in 
considering the impacts of climate change on flooding and flood risk. The 2021 Review indicates that 
the CCSAP includes further actions to support non-structural measures, such as enhancing knowledge 
and training of local authorities, with spatial planning and NWRM clearly set out in the objectives of 
the CCSAP. 

10 2021 Review, p. ii. 

10 

 
 
 
 
2. FD recommendations 

Based on the reported information and the FHRMs and FRMPs assessed and in addition to the progress already 
achieved, Ireland should: 

• 

discuss APSFRs with more clarity throughout the products of the flood risk management cycle; 

•  add also maps to the online map viewer since information on flood risk that is only available in the 

CFRAM PDF; 

•  make available Information on cultural heritage in the online map viewer; 

• 

provide details in the FRMP on how the FHRM was used in the choice of objectives and measures; 

•  make the objectives of the FRMPs measurable and where possible linked to quantitative indicators and 
be timebound. An assessment of the progress made towards the achievement of the objectives should 
be included in the FRMP; 

• 

• 

• 

• 

provide information in the FRMP on the overall cost of measures; 

provide in the FRMP information on the methods used to prioritise measures; 

link in the FRMP the structural and non-structural measures to the objectives; 

set out a clear overview of the use of Cost Benefits Analysis the methodology behind it in the plan; 

•  when reviewing the FRMP, if a decision to not revise the FRMP appears likely, the draft findings and 
conclusions of the review should be the subject of a public consultation and the result of it incorporated 
in the review. 

11