A flood of plans, a drain in proper implementation

Flood damage is the result of a struggle between the natural hazard of rainfall and the capacity of human society.

Kim Young-oh The author is a professor of Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringSeoul National University.

Flood damage is the result of a struggle between the natural hazard of rainfall and the capacity of human society. Naturally, flood damage can be prevented only when the response capacity is greater than external force, but it is not so simple. The magnitude of external force and responsiveness is always uncertain. In other words, the external force of rainfall is a natural phenomenon and varies by nature, and the responsiveness consisting of dams, embankments, rain pumps, reservoirs, and flood warnings often does not work as expected due to various complexities. Therefore, the responsiveness should be greater than the external force.

Economically solid countries and local governments can afford to minimize areas of uncertainty by making the average responsiveness much greater than that of the external force through careful analysis. Disaster management starts from there. However, watching the flood damage over the past few years, few would feel that Korea is a safe country despite its economic position. So what is the problem?

In short, so many measures are announced, but few are implemented. Around this time of the year, many plans are announced, but they are forgotten in two months. There is no system of experts, government or non-government, watching and evaluating whether the measures announced by the related ministry or local government are carried out properly. Before discussing whether to remove the four major rivers or not, or whether to transfer water management from the Ministry of Environment to the Ministry of Land, there is something we need to think about. What is important is the meticulous implementation of the plans, continuous monitoring and objective evaluation. This is at least how I feel, having watched flood and countermeasures announcements repeated over the past 25 years.

Let's take an example. The longest-ever rainy season in 2020 resulted in the casualty of 49 people, and the government issued the “comprehensive innovation plan of storm and flood damages caused by climate change.” It was the fruit of a three-month deliberation by 16 ministries, including the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Land, Korea Forest Service, and the Korea Meteorological Administration. I checked again and noticed that among the five major strategies of the comprehensive plan, dams and river safety would be reinforced, and the frequency of river design would be updated from the current 100 to 200 years to up to 500 years, considering the increasing precipitation from climate change.

In an era of climate crisis where the term "extreme rainfall" is officially used, it is clear that raising the design goal is an urgent measure. The problem lies in the gap between goal and reality. According to statistics submitted by the Ministry of Environment to the National Assembly in 2020, more than 20 percent of national rivers have a design frequency of less than 100 years, let alone more than 200 years. After three years, how much has it improved?

Another major reason why measures are not being implemented properly is the budget of local governments that suffer from floods. Let's take a look at the case of Seoul. The budget for flood management had been more than 600 billion won in 2019 but was reduced to 420 billion won in 2022. In February 2020, the Government Collective Transfer Act was enacted, and local governments received the total budget, and the city of Seoul did not allocate a sufficient budget on river projects. In the past, central and local governments invested 50 percent each on regional river projects, but now they are pushed aside by other projects of the local governments.

Have you seen a case where the main stream of the Han River overflows recently? Most of the flood damage occurs in tributary regional rivers such as Dorimcheon Stream. In Korea, 90 percent of the rivers are classified as regional rivers, but the maintenance rate of regional rivers remains at about 50 percent. It is fortunate that interest in the maintenance of regional rivers is growing in the wake of the painful Mihocheon disaster in Cheongju, North Chungcheong Province, last month.

There will be two solutions. Major regional rivers should be upgraded to national rivers and maintained with a state budget. Or the vast central government’s human resources should be distributed to local governments, along with incentives, to be in charge of regional rivers and basin management.

Lastly, I want to mention one more sector that local governments neglect in budget investment. It is the maintenance and repair of old infrastructure. Elected heads of local governments prefer new projects, and the central government's support system is poor. In Seoul alone, old infrastructures that are more than 30 years old exceed 30 percent as of 2018, and will be over 60 percent by 2028. Aging is in progress independent of climate change. We must be aware that we are weakening our own responsiveness.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff