PARs and StARs Archive

This section contains a selection of Project Appraisal Reports (PARs) and Strategy Appraisal Reports (StARs) from the last decade. In official purpose of PARs/StARs is to describe:

“The appraisal that has been carried out on a flood and coastal erosion risk management (FCERM) project and provides the supporting business case to your application for Flood Defence Grant in Aid (FDGiA). It should contain all relevant information and facts to satisfy a reader with no knowledge of the project that the correct investment decision, in technical, environmental and economic terms, is being recommended… [The] report should explain why [the] project deserves investment and evidence to support the decisions that led to the final conclusions and recommendation.” (Gov.uk, 2015)

However, beyond this definition this selection of PARs and StARs provides a useful insight into flood risk management (FRM) orientation in England and Wales, the prioritisation of specific project types, the benefits that are estimated, and the process by which funds are delegated. Points of interest to a researcher may include:

The variation in format between PARs
An initial point of interest is that not all PARs are formatted in the same manner despite that a standard template does exist and is freely available on the Gov.uk website. This selection of PARs demonstrates an array of formats, from presentations to standard reports.

The variation in project sizes
On examination of the PARs/StARs it may be of interest that some areas have multiple PARs for a number of small projects, whereas other areas conglomerate all projects into one PAR for assessment.

The professionalism in which the forms are complete
The variation in fastidiousness in the completion of PARs and StARs is of interest when viewing the forms in light of localism, and associated distribution of knowledge resources. A number of PARs/StARs have been completed with thorough assessments of all aspects of flood risk, while other reports look more like poorly thought out tick-box exercises. In regards to being able to form a persuasive business case, this variation in quality of reports is of concern. If a local authority does not have the skills to adequately complete a form they will be placed at a disadvantage in regards to attracting investment, which is a potent concern as areas with the least professional skills are also most likely to be the area’s most in need of investment.

The type of project
Almost all PARs and StARs put forward proposals for engineering-based flood risk management solutions. Such an engineering dominated focus highlights the extent to which FRM in the UK, despite leaning towards management, still has its institutions and processes designed to cater for flood defence. A framework which caters to the qualitative nature of socially based initiatives would enable local authorities that might gain the greatest benefit from socially based initiatives to submit project proposals of this kind. At current, calculations for the costs of socially based FRM initiatives over a project lifetime or their net value costs / benefits are highly unusual. The emergent deficit in institutional capacity for projects of a social nature discourages the initial formation and universal acceptance of community focused projects, such as warden schemes or community warning systems, which have been shown to be highly beneficial in instilling long term flood resilience across vulnerable populations. As such, there are a number of issues which should raise concern. First, there is enhanced difficulty in attracting funding for non-engineering projects, which deters applicants from the initial project conceptualisation. Second, those communities who are involved in such projects are not recognised for the value which they provide, as the only currency which is acknowledged is that of concrete costs and runoff values, as opposed to fund raising, awareness raising, and other forms of payment in kind; all of which encourage multi-scale adaptation.

Back to the Main Menu