Dr. Tadhg O'Mahony:

Recommendation No. 101 in the report refers to nature-based solutions and a whole catchment approach to flooding, which is exactly the point to which Deputy Matthews is moving towards. It is shown in the literature that typically a wider set of win-win outcomes and a wider set of synergies are available by going further back in the system rather than going to the end-of-pipe position, as he mentioned, in the risk management framework. We need to understand the catchments. We need to put on the table considerations around managing these catchments in a different way. What does that look like and what does it deliver? We do not typically know if that is an option. We need to study these options and get better awareness and information. Typically, a flood happens and people are distressed. We hear people in the media saying we must dredge rivers and put in walls. Such solutions often export the water further down. Responding to floods is about slowing the flow of water. We cannot get rid of the water. It is about slowing its flow. If we canalise upstream, that can create a motorway for the water to go quicker downstream and flood people further down. We must take a catchment-based approach and a nature-based solution approach has proved beneficial internationally in achieving that.

I have concerns about the system of project appraisal and cost-benefit analysis. Looking strategically across how we use cost-benefit analysis in Ireland and how it is implemented, it does not encourage a strategic approach. It does not capture risk. It can also subsume values that are very important to us, such as well-being, equity and nature. Those considerations can completely drop off. Exporting political decision-making to net present value is overly reductionist. It could be said that relying too much on cost-benefit analysis prevents us from looking strategically at solutions, getting at win-wins and better outcomes. I have concerns about how those analyses are applied in Ireland at the moment. In some cases, it can be useful but to take a blanket approach to its use as we try to understand whether we should give a green light to a project is problematic. It often favours the status quo. That is a problem of cost-benefit analyses.