Structural challenges for flash flood management in Jordan

WP_1_Infosheet_Structural_challenges.pdf

Background

The development and implementation of technical and societal measures for flash flood prevention and emergency is not only a question of funding and the technical applicability of measures in a certain flood-prone area, but efficient flash flood management requires political and administrative support and has to be embedded within the local community of the flood-prone area. After a flash flood near the Dead Sea killed several people in 2018, the Jordanian government prioritized the flash flood management. In consequence, flash flood management projects and activities proliferated. As it is common for new governance challenges, the activities were uncoordinated in the beginning and several state entities and donor-funded projects worked on the same aspects of flash flood management in parallel. Therefore, it is necessary to fit flash flood management into the governance structure and adapt the governance structure accordingly. Furthermore, it is necessary to implement participatory processes to integrate local communities in the decision-making about flash flood prevention and emergency measures. This needs an identification of structural challenges, to understand the interrelations between the structural challenges and to develop solutions to enable efficient flash flood management in Jordan.

Data and Methods

For data collection, we applied expert interviews, which is a method widely used in social science. In contrast to surveys, expert interviews are not standardized, but an open conversation based on pre-fixed questions and topics. Therefore, it is possible to discuss the relevant topics at length to gain deeper insights. However, fewer interviewees can be included than in a survey. Expert interviews were used to get an in-depth, well informed perspective on different aspects of flash flood management in Jordan such as structural challenges, relevant stakeholders, flash flood drivers and measures. Between October 2021 and February 2023, we conducted 15 expert interviews with representatives from ministries, local authorities, international organizations, international cooperation entities, scientific entities, NGOs, and consulting companies.

Analytical steps:

1. Using qualitative content analysis, we identified the relevant text parts and grouped them in meta- and subcategories.
2. Focusing on structural challenges, we counted by how many experts the individual challenges were addressed (see figure 1).
3. We checked, how the experts interrelated the individual challenges to each other (see figure 2).

Results

Relevance of structural challenges

• Experts focused more on structural challenges regarding state entities and international donors than on issues regarding local communities.
• The fragmented and overlapping responsibilities, caused by a surge in flash flood management activities, are the key challenge. The National Center for Security and Crises Management can be the coordinating body for flash flood emergencies. However, a coordinating body for flash flood prevention is still needed.
• There is no overarching flash flood management strategy and many activities are reactive. For flash flood emergencies an overarching response plan led by the National Center for Security and Crises Management and a respective plan of each relevant state entity is in place. However, there is no overarching strategy for flash flood prevention.
• State entities in general are lacking funds for flash flood management, the second most relevant topic, but there are disparities. For example, PDTRA is well funded, but had temporary financial issues due to the drop of visitors in times of the Covid-19 pandemic.
• Lacking funds for flash flood prevention measures are not only an issue for state entities, but also for local communities. Although flash flood prevention measures are mandatory for new buildings, the construction companies and the local people often do not comply, because the measures are costly. The inspections by the authorities are not effective.
• The international donor and project dependence was mentioned by several experts, but they connected it to different effects. The duplication of work is not only caused by the missing coordination of state entities but also of international donors. Projects were qualified as unsustainable, because they were not maintained by state entities after the projects ended due to lacking funds and missing links between projects and state entities. Furthermore, international donors also follow their own agendas and capacities setting-up projects.
• Local communities are mostly not included in decision-making processes for flash flood management through state entities and projects. This is also an issue regarding other governance topics. However, some projects started to implement participatory processes to integrate local communities.

Figure 1. Relevance of structural challenges for flash flood management (share of 15 experts addressing the aspect, color coding: ≥ 70 %, ≥ 60 %, ≥ 50 %, ≥ 40 %, < 40 %)

Interrelations of structural challenges

• Because of the lack of state funds to finance flash flood management, this topic is covered by donor funded projects, which surged in the last years without a coordinating body. This exacerbates the preexisting fragmentation and overlap of state entities’ responsibilities. By that, the insufficient coordination between state entities, which can be observed also in other countries, becomes even more challenging.
• Because of the lack of funds, coordination between state entities and qualified state officials, state entities are only able to fulfil reactive management.
• The lack of qualified state officials, due to missing capacity building and low wages in the public sector, causes an outsourcing of project activities to consulting companies. This outsourcing weakens the link between state entities and projects.
• The proliferation of projects’ activities, which are not taken up by state entities after the projects end, and the lack of local communities participation in the project design and decisions cause mistrust and lead to low rule compliance by local communities, which hinder the accomplishment of efficient flash flood management.
• The lack of coordination between state entities hinder law enforcement. For example, the responsibility for inspections is pushed from one state entity to another. Furthermore, rule compliance of local communities is low.

Figure 2. Interrelations of structural challenges for flash flood management (based on 15 expert interviews)

Key findings

• Some structural challenges such as donor and project dependence are difficult to tackle, but projects and state entities can be better interlinked.
• Coordination between state entities for proactive management is key.
• It is important to strengthen the relationship between state entities and local communities, what is also possible through projects.
  Recommendations by experts, which are already partly implemented:
• Development of overarching strategy for flash flood management
• Implementation of steering and technical committees for projects to enhance coordination between state entities and between state entities and projects
• Capacity building for state officials to guarantee ownership of project results and strengthen state officials’ qualifications
• Incentives for local communities to build flash flood measures
• Integrate local communities into project designs and decision-making processes

Acknowledgements

The German Jordanian research project “CapTain Rain – Capture and retain heavy rainfalls in Jordan” is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). We would like to thank the interviewees for participating in our study.
Authors: Dr. Markus Rauchecker, Dr. Katja Brinkmann, Ahmad Awad (ISOE- Institute for Social-Ecological Research)