Periodic Report 1 - EU Grants: Periodic Report (V1.1 – 01.05.2023)

Periodic Report 1 EU Grants: Periodic Report (V1.1 – 01.05.2023) Tuesday, 23 September 2025 Max Steinhausen1, Tracy Irvine17, Sukaina Bharwani18, Pia-Johanna Schweizer5, Valeria Pancioli8, Dominik Hedderich9, Jana Löhrlein11, Paolo Mazzoli4, Janne Parviainen18, Lydia Cumiskey6, Neharika Chebrol1, Tobias Conradt2, Martin Drews3, Jacob Pedersen7, Stefano Bagli4, Francesca Renzi4, Valerio Luzzi4, Marco Renzi4 ,Sandro Nanni13, Christopher Genillard9, Stefan Hochrainer-Stigler10, Levente Huszti12, Heiko Apel14, Shahin Khosh Bin Ghomash14, Benedikt Gräler15, Julia Kraatz15 Chahan Kropf16, Julian Struck11, Benjamin Hofbauer5 1. TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BRAUNSCHWEIG 10. INTERNATIONALES INSTITUT FÜR ANGEWANDTE SYSTEMANALYSE 2. POTSDAM-INSTITUT FÜR KLIMAFOLGENFORSCHUNG EV 11. ERFTVERBAND 3. DANMARKS TEKNISKE UNIVERSITET 12. ZALA KÜLÖNLEGES MENTŐK ÉS ÖNKÉNTES TŰZOLTÓ EGYSÜLET 4. GECOSISTEMA SRL 13. AGENZIA REGIONALE PER LA PREVENZIONE, L'AMBIENTE E L'ENERGIA DELL'EMILIA-ROMAGNA 5. RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABILITY 14. HELMHOLTZ ZENTRUM POTSDAM DEUTSCHES GEOFORSCHUNGSZENTRUM GFZ 6. UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK - NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, CORK 15. 52°NORTH SPATIAL INFORMATION RESEARCH GMBH 7. REGION HOVEDSTADEN 16. EIDGENÖSSISCHE TECHNISCHE HOCHSCHULE ZÜRICH 2 Periodic Report 1 Report overview Project number 101073978 Project acronym DIRECTED Project name Disaster Resilience for Extreme Climate Events providing Interoperable Data, Models, Communication and Governance Call HORIZON-CL3-2021-DRS-01 Topic HORIZON-CL3-2021-DRS-01-02 Type of action Innovation Action Responsible service Horizon Europe Project starting date 01/10/2022 Project duration 4 Years Period covered 01/10/2022 – 31/01/2024 Reporting period number 1 Periodic report date and version 30/03/2024 - Interim 3 Periodic Report 1 Document history Version Date Comment 1 10.03.2024 Initial draft merging all WP reports 2 12.03.2024 Restructuring of chapters 3 22.03.2024 Offline editing of the report 4 28.03.2024 Final review by project partners 5 31.03.2024 Final version for submission 6 23.09.2025 Reworked version for upload to Zenodo 4 Periodic Report 1 Executive summary The DIRECTED Project was awarded an Innovation Action Grant by the Horizon Europe Programme in October 2022. This report sees the first of three periodic reviews set as a part of the ongoing development and implementation of the DIRECTED Project. The report summarises comprehensive work that has been ongoing between the period of October 2022 to the 31st of December 2023 and therefore represents the initial phase of the four-year project. The first fifteen months has primarily included: • The set-up and understanding of issues, data and tool availability that is seen at grassroots levels within the four Real World Labs – in The Capital Region of Copenhagen, Emilia-Romagna, Rhine-Erft and Danube Regions. This has included building stakeholder partnerships at local level. • The understanding of data standards required for the work on the interoperability of tools and services offered by partners and how these tools can be made interoperable for the benefit of the Real World Labs • Initial augmentation and further development of existent models, tools and methods towards main-streaming, enhanced interoperability and applicability within the Real World Labs and beyond (aligned with above-mentioned points) • The integration of Tandem co-production and co-design of tools with a range of risk governance systems in the Risk-Tandem Framework was completed. • Application of the Risk-Tandem Framework in the four Real World Labs has begun and will continue in an iterative process to understand current and future risk governance challenges • Initial analyses were carried out to understand data availability at Real World Lab and Project level and how these tools and governance systems may be improved using the Data Fabric • Set-up of all communications and dissemination channels and project branding and first phase work in this in line with our communications and dissemination strategy • Reaching out to and knowledge exchanges with related projects and initiatives within the sphere of DIRECTED • Set-up of all project agreements and management systems, as well as baseline planning on data management and ethics. The report summarises work under each of the eight Work Packages and provides updates on each of the tasks as outlined in the grant agreement and as well as updates on deliverables, milestones, objectives, and impacts. The report also highlights deviations to the original DIRECTED Project plans. Collaboration between all consortium partners has been strong throughout the entire first reporting period with high participation and engagement in project meetings and activities (see Annex 1). The combined effort has led to the completion off the majority of planned deliverables, milestones and tasks in this reporting period. 5 Periodic Report 1 Contents Report overview .................................................................................................................... 2 Document history .................................................................................................................. 3 Executive summary ............................................................................................................... 4 Table of Figures .................................................................................................................... 7 Index of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 8 List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. 9 1 Overview and Progress ................................................................................................ 10 1.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Explanation of the work carried out per WP ............................................................ 13 1.2.1 Work Package 1 – Real World Labs ................................................................. 13 1.2.1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 13 1.2.1.2 Progress per task........................................................................................ 13 1.2.1.3 Stakeholder engagement ............................................................................ 20 1.2.2 Work Package 2 – Interoperability .................................................................... 27 1.2.2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 27 1.2.2.2 Progress per task ....................................................................................... 27 1.2.3 Work Package 3 – Governance ........................................................................ 32 1.2.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 32 1.2.3.2 Progress per task........................................................................................ 34 1.2.4 Work Package 4 – Knowledge co-production ................................................... 39 1.2.4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 39 1.2.4.2 Progress per task........................................................................................ 40 1.2.5 Work Package 5 – Data Fabric ......................................................................... 43 1.2.5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 43 1.2.5.2 Progress per task........................................................................................ 43 1.2.6 Work Package 6 – Communication and Dissemination .................................... 47 1.2.6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 47 1.2.6.2 Progress per task........................................................................................ 47 1.2.7 Work Package 7 – Project Management .......................................................... 57 1.2.7.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 57 1.2.7.2 Progress per task........................................................................................ 58 1.2.8 Work Package 8 – Ethics ................................................................................. 63 1.2.8.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 63 1.2.8.2 Progress per task........................................................................................ 63 1.3 Impact ..................................................................................................................... 64 1.4 Publications ............................................................................................................ 68 1.5 Update of the plan for exploitation and dissemination of results .............................. 68 2 Follow-up of recommendations and comments from previous review ........................... 71 3 Exploitation primarily in non-associated third countries ................................................ 71 4 Open Science .............................................................................................................. 71 5 Deviations from the project plan ................................................................................... 72 6 Periodic Report 1 5.1 Work Packages ...................................................................................................... 72 5.1.1 Work Package 1 ............................................................................................... 72 5.1.2 Work Package 2 ............................................................................................... 73 5.1.3 Work Package 3 ............................................................................................... 73 5.1.4 Work Package 4 ............................................................................................... 73 5.1.5 Work Package 5 ............................................................................................... 74 5.1.6 Work Package 6 ............................................................................................... 74 5.1.7 Work Package 7 ............................................................................................... 74 5.1.8 Work Package 8 ............................................................................................... 74 5.2 Use of resources..................................................................................................... 75 5.2.1 Unforeseen subcontracting ............................................................................... 77 5.2.2 Unforeseen use of in kind contributions ............................................................ 77 6 Concluding remarks ..................................................................................................... 78 Annex 1............................................................................................................................... 79 Partners .............................................................................................................................. 83 7 Periodic Report 1 Table of Figures Figure 1: DIRECTED Real World Labs. RWL 1: Capital Region of Denmark, RWL 2: EmiliaRomagna Region, RWL 3: Danube Region, RWL 4: Rhine-Erft Region………….15 Figure 2: Gridded runoff in the Danube River Basin, example of a daily output from the Danube Model developed at PIK. ………………………………………………………….18 Figure 3: Initial flood simulation results from RIM2D (hydrodynamic model by GFZ) for the Erft Region………………………………………………………………….…………………19 Figure 4: Example of the interactive Miro Board used to collect ongoing progresses of RWLs including RWL 2 outcomes of September 2023 workshop.....................................24 Figure 5: Chosen test location near Copenhagen, Denmark, used to validate the workflow of data exchange among the models and tools as an integral component of Task 2.1…………………………………………………………………………………………28 Figure 6: Illustration of the user interfaces for the developed tools designed for the hydrodynamic model RIM2D as part of Task 2.1……………………………………………...29 Figure 7: Illustration of the user interface of the The SaferPlaces cloud web platform……...30 Figure 8: A schematic representation of the Risk-Tandem Framework……………………….32 Figure 9: Impressions from the stakeholder workshops and training the trainers …………...37 Figure 10: High-level Concept of the Data Fabric...................................................................44 Figure 11: Detail Architecture of the Data Fabric in context of the RWL Danube Region......45 Figure 12: Most popular content on the project website……………………………….………..51 Figure 13: Referrers from other websites to directedproject.eu………………………….……..51 Figure 14: Logo designs for the DIRECTED project…………………………………………….52 Figure 15: Overview of project governance structure…………………………………………...56 8 Periodic Report 1 Index of Tables Table 1: Progress on project objectives............................................................................... 11 Table 2: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 1. .......................... 13 Table 3: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 2. .......................... 27 Table 4: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 3. .......................... 34 Table 5: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 4. .......................... 40 Table 6: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 5. .......................... 43 Table 7: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 6. .......................... 47 Table 8: DIRECTED communications timeline. ................................................................... 49 Table 9: Summary Project Social Media Coverage for YR1 (excludes individual beneficiary engagement) found here. .................................................................................... 55 Table 10: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 7. ........................ 58 Table 11: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 8. ........................ 63 Table 12: DIRECTED Project Impacts. ............................................................................... 64 Table 13: Progress on Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) levels. .................................... 70 Table 14: PMs planned vs. used in RP1 per partner and WP. ............................................. 75 Table 15: Overview of project meetings (non-exhaustive list). ............................................. 79 9 Periodic Report 1 List of Abbreviations ACRONYM DEFINITION API APPLICATION PROGRAMMING INTERFACE CCA CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION CDS COPERNICUS CLIMATE DATA STORE DMP DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN DRM DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT DRR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION EFAS EUROPEAN FLOOD AWARENESS SYSTEMS FAIR FINDABLE, ACCESSIBLE, INTEROPERABLE AND REUSABLE FPC FLOOD PROTECTION CORPORATION GA GENERAL ASSEMBLY GloFAS GLOBAL FLOOD AWARENESS SYSTEMS ICPDR INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE DANUBE RIVER OKF NATIONAL DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR DISASTER MANAGEMENT OGC OPEN GEOSPATIAL CONSORTIUM PSC PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE RWL REAL WORLD LAB SDG SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS WP WORK PACKAGE 16 Periodic Report 1 measurable impacts in real world settings – thus cultivating an evidence base for novel approaches. On the other hand, by working with partners from WP 5, WP 1 continues to increase the practical applicability and usability of state-of-the-art climate and risk data and models by providing inputs to the design of the Data Fabric (see Box 1). The RWLs, acting as collaborative spaces for learning and innovation, have seen a significant increase in their output and contributions towards achieving the ambitious outcomes outlined in the DIRECTED project's grant agreement. In the Labs we extensively use cutting-edge digital tools and platforms that facilitate continuous and interactive stakeholder engagement, coupled with traditional workshops and interviews. The integrated participatory approach, followed in the laboratories from their setup phase, not only pushes the envelope in multi-hazard risk assessment but also in the practical application of these assessments to improve resilience and inform policy and practice in real-world contexts. Finally, recognizing the critical role of local governance, our participatory approach to the Lab activities not only involves stakeholders in the decision-making process but also in the co-design and co-implementation of solutions, thereby ensuring that strategies are more adaptable and tailored to specific local needs and in the longer term enable usability in the exploitation of developed processes and systems. Ongoing Task 1.2 (as 1.3) is closely interlinked with WPs 3 and 4, focusing on applying the Risk-Tandem Framework (D3.1) supported by the strategy for capacity development for the training of trainers (D1.2). To achieve outcomes regarding increasing resilience through governance, communication, and information interoperability, partners continue this work in 2024 by applying the remaining Risk-Tandem tasks and risk management approaches (from coexploring risk governance contexts to understanding capacity development needs, and most importantly, co-designing scalable and fit-for-purpose solutions based on this evidence). This process will be reported in the incoming Periodic reports on outcomes of the RWL co-production process #2 under preparation in Task 1.2 as ongoing active Milestone 8 and will be aided by WP 4 by continuing scope of RWL needs and by designing capacity development interventions, aims to maximize the potential of RWLs in terms of enabling transdisciplinary knowledge co-production (applied through autonomous RWL workshops). D1.2 Capacity development strategy for Training of Trainers on implementing transdisciplinary knowledge co-production processes in the RWL (SEI) The main ambition of this strategy is to empower Trainers to pursue DIRECTED's ambitions in their Real-World Lab’s through co-exploration of issues and co-production of solutions relating to holistic risk management, governance strategies and data interoperability issues with local stakeholders. The strategy outlines an approach to enabling these through capacity development, beginning with a discussion regarding the theoretical and contextual challenges of multi-hazard risk governance in the European context, as well as integrating different DRM and CCA knowledges, data, or disciplines towards holistic risk reduction with the support of knowledge co-production. This approach enables locally led and tailored implementation of DIRECTED based on priorities identified by stakeholders themselves, reflecting the unique needs of stakeholders in the RWLs. Task 1.3 Evaluation and Outcomes/Impact monitoring of the RWL (M8-M48) (lead: RIFS, co-lead: G&C, contributors: OASIS, UCC, IIASA, RWL partners) This task focuses on evaluating the Risk-Tandem Framework within the RWLs, assessing its effectiveness in enhancing multi-stakeholder engagement, improving interoperability, and facilitating knowledge exchange for DRR and CCA integration. Despite not marking so far any expected official milestones or deliverables, the initial steps taken involved understanding each RWL's specific data, governance, and communication challenges through guidance documents and stakeholder workshop questionnaires, in collaboration with Work Packages 3 and 4. Based on the results of workshops, desk research and a serious game conducted at the GA in Cologne in September 2023 and continuous exchange with the RWLs, an initial scoping 17 Periodic Report 1 of the governance context as well as governance needs has been conducted. Progressing towards assessing Risk-Tandem's impact, development of a methodology using both quantitative and qualitative indicators has started and D1.3 Case Study (due next September 2024) has been planned. D1.3 Case Study (due next September 2024). The case study from this task has been planned and initiated, and it will focus on comparing July 2021 floods in Rhine-Erft and May 2023 floods in Emilia-Romagna, to offer a detailed analysis for enhancing future disaster management. This comparison will highlight lessons learned, successes, and areas for improvement from these major flood events and to define the report's scope, leveraging existing reports, papers, and communications on these significant flood events and collection of relevant material such as reports, papers, and communications related these events has been already started. Joint activities with WPs 3 and 4 include, active milestones include M12. (WP 3/4 milestone on engaging with the RWLs in a co-productive mode), M19 (scoping consultations), progress toward D4.1 (capacity development modules for ToT workshops), and tasks/milestones associated with the iterative refinement of the Risk-Tandem and Tandem Frameworks based on emerging evidence (T3.3/T4.4). Preparation work that is adjusting the hazard risk models to be used within the Real World Labs is also underway. The Danube Model had been originally developed at PIK as “Future Danube Model” in the EU INSURANCE project which ended in 2020. Both its components, the eco-hydrological model SWIM, used here for simulating runoff generation, and the hydrodynamical flood model CaMa-Flood have seen further development since, and many input and validation data have reached higher coverage, resolution, and quality in the meantime. To maintain the Danube Model at the current technological standard, recent E-OBS weather data were applied at 0.1-degree resolution (formerly 0.25 degrees) for re-calibration. Moreover, the CaMa-Flood part was swapped entirely for the most recent model version (4.1). This advanced the internal and output spatial representation from irregularly shaped subbasins to grids of higher resolution, namely 0.05 degrees (approx. 5 km). Figure 16 shows an example runoff output for a single day. A near-real-time application has been tested for the flood in Slovenia on 4th August 2023 and the following days, a first step towards an operative forecasting application dubbed “Seamless Forecasting Tool”. With a special stack of raster layers derived from MERIT and obtained directly from the leader of the CaMa-Flood development group Dai Yamazaki (University Tokyo) it is now possible to make very high resolution (approx. 90 m) downscaling products for single events. Also, GFZ tested and will further develop usage of its hydrodynamic model, RIM2D, to set-up a flood inundation model for the Erft Region which will enable the production of flood maps for the area. An initial simulation run of the model is depicted in Figure 24. 18 Periodic Report 1 Figure 2: Gridded runoff in the Danube River Basin, example of a daily output from the Danube Model developed at PIK. 19 Periodic Report 1 Figure 3: Initial flood simulation results from RIM2D (hydrodynamic model by GFZ) for the Erft Region. 20 Periodic Report 1 1.2.1.3 Stakeholder engagement Below, we offer an update on stakeholder engagement from October 2023 to January 2024, supplementing the information previously documented in D1.1 "RWL Description and Setup". As noted in the deviations section 5.1.1Fehler! Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden., we encountered some delays, but have adjusted the plans for interaction to address and mitigate any setbacks or slowdown faced, ensuring project objectives remain on track. Further details on these adjustments and the organization carried on for upcoming stakeholder engagements will be outlined. RWL 1: The Capital Region of Denmark Interviews The RWL 1 conducted a series of interviews with stakeholders back in the spring of 2023. The aim was to get a closer understanding of what challenges the stakeholders face regarding data use and sharing, organisation and collaboration and finally communication during climate related events but also regarding dialogue between Disaster Risk Management and stakeholders in charge of climate adaptation. To further comprehend the challenges and to better understand where DIRECTED might be able to make a difference for the way response and adaptation is conducted and not least potentially be intertwined, a second round of interviews has been prepared. To that end RWL 1 has formulated and interview guide to ensure a standard output across the three interview sessions planned. The interviews was held in March/April 2024. The sum of identified challenges from the interview sessions is as follows: Data and Modelling Needs: 1. Emergency agencies rely on data from the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI). There is a demand for more accurate forecasts given the high cost of mobilizing and deploying emergency resources. Specifically, the emergency services point towards a tendency to overestimate sea levels during events, which leads to unnecessary and costly measures in certain areas. 2. There is a desire for better models to assess the consequences of coupled events (high water levels in the Roskilde fjord in combination with heavy rainfall and increased river discharge). In this scenario, the duration of the high-water levels in the fjord becomes important, as well as the capacity of pumps to pump water from the river to the fjord in areas where costal defense mechanisms such as sluice gates are in place. Additionally, there is a desire for waves height to be incorporated into warning systems. 3. Free models (Klimaatlas, GEUS nationale hydrologiske model) and private consultant mapping solutions like SCALGO are available to municipalities. More detailed and accurate models provided by consulting firms are generally more expensive, and thus not always used in climate adaptation plans. Collaboration with utility companies can be an option for municipalities to access more advanced models and data. 4. An accessible overview of climate tools and models, with a description of what they can do, where the data can be accessed, and from which source the data is retrieved from, would also be beneficial. 5. There is a desire among municipalities for additional local measuring points and weather stations to supply forecast information as an event unfolds. A common system enabling real-time data sharing across municipalities could be beneficial. 21 Periodic Report 1 6. Not all the municipalities have designated GIS (Geographic Information System) employees. Some emergency agencies require pro-active maps sharing from municipalities. 7. Klimaatlas offers climate projections based on a low emissions scenario (RCP 2,6), a medium-high emissions scenario (RCP 4,5) and a high emissions scenario (RCP 8,5). It is not always clear which climate change scenario and time horizon should be considered for climate adaptation. There can be differences among municipalities. Organizational Needs: 1. Differing warning levels/systems among municipalities covered by the same emergency agency offer some potential for standardization. 2. Currently there’s no systematic coordination or communication mechanism in place between municipalities when formulating their emergency plans. Considering that storm surge and water course flooding impacts extend beyond administrative boundaries, it could make sense to promote dialogue and coordination among neighboring municipalities. 3. Roskilde fjord is covered by two police districts (Nordsjællands Politi og Midt-og Vestsjællands Politi), emphasizing the coordination needs during a storm surge event impacting the whole fjord. In each of the country's 12 police districts, a local emergency response team (LBS) has been established under the leadership of the chief of police to coordinate emergency preparedness tasks. The police assume thus, the coordinating leadership when several authorities are involved in specific emergency response operations. To strengthen coordination between defense, police and other civilian authorities in the event of major crises in Denmark a national operational staff (NOST) was established in 2005. At the municipal level, it’s not always clear how coordination mechanisms across municipalities operate. A simulation event could be a useful preparedness exercise, which could be coordinated under the DIRECTED efforts, if an interest among the Real-World Lab stakeholders exists. A preparedness exercise could help also mapping the resources required for such a simulation. 4. There can be to some extent a challenge when incidents occur on weekends and holidays when municipal employees may not be available. Some emergency agencies require pro-active information (updated contact lists, maps) sharing from municipalities during an emergency. 5. Some municipalities hope for new legislation addressing the distribution of protection responsibilities in vulnerable coastal areas highly exposed to storm surges. 6. To different extents municipalities carry out an evaluation after an emergency. There may be potential to develop a more systematic evaluation system among the actors involved in the recovery phase. Systematic data collection and analysis during the recovery phase can help guide future climate adaptation efforts. 7. A good dialogue between municipalities and emergency agencies is crucial. New climate adaptation interventions must be reported to the emergency services and reflected into emergency plans. Additionally, the experience on the ground from the emergency services should be capitalized in the municipality’s climate adaptation 22 Periodic Report 1 plans. Citizen involvement can also be used to gather experience and knowledge to guide climate adaptation measures at the municipal level. Communication Needs: 1. Since Bodil (2013) there have been training programs addressed to citizens on how to prepare themselves for the impacts of a storm (i.e., how to use sandbags to protect their homes). Additionally in June 2024, a water management center opened in the Roskilde Fire Department to test new solutions and offer training to emergency services and volunteers. 2. Communication with citizens and adequately managing citizens' expectations during an emergency are crucial. It is important to ensure citizens understand their own responsibility during a storm as well as how they can best protect themselves, their properties, and assist their neighbors. In this sense, some municipalities believe they can strengthen their current communication systems and citizen guidance materials. 3. Municipalities could benefit from sharing good practices when elaborating communication materials addressed to citizens. Some emergency agencies have also valuable communication experience. 4. A common communication platform could be useful to gather information during emergencies impacting the whole fjord, alternatively, current communication systems and coordination could be strengthened to make sure everyone has access to the same knowledge and information at the same time. 5. Emergency agencies have a good cooperation but there might be opportunities to strengthen communication and dialogue during emergencies. This would require cooperation with the police districts. Other remarks: 1. Events and collective memory are essential regarding the amount of attention towards Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) and Disaster Risk Management (DRM). It has been over ten years since the storm Bodil (2013), and hence people are starting to forget its impacts. Overall, there should be more political awareness and attention on Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Management. 2. There is a lack of focus on retreat as a climate adaptation strategy. The focus is currently set on protective hard and mobile measures. An increase in the frequency and intensity of storms might however require alternative climate adaptation approaches. 3. Given the goal of Danish emergency services to reduce the use of clean water by at least 50% by 2030 it could be relevant to explore synergies with municipal climate adaptation plans. A possibility could be to consider whether there are potential locations for collecting rainfall surface water in reservoirs to be used by emergency agencies during, for example firefighting efforts. 4. Political priorities and economical restraints on both Disaster Risk Management and Climate Change Adaptation are seen as factors restraining both municipalities and emergency services from addressing some of the needs described above. 23 Periodic Report 1 Workshops The outcome of the interviews will be used as basis for a series of workshops held with stakeholders with the first planned to be held on August the 20th 2024. To the local stakeholders the reference point for DRM and CCA in the Roskilde Fjord is the 2013 storm surge known as ‘Bodil’ in Denmark. For that reason, the workshop will be centred on the discussion of whether or not the area is prepared for a Bodil version 2.0. Meaning that DIRECTED at will present modelling of how a similar storm surge with the added climate change factors might play out in 2050. Together with the presentation of a mapping of the identified challenges to the stakeholders and outline how the project can help rectify these,the aim is to get a clearer picture of in what way a more direct collaboration between project and stakeholders can help solve specific needs in the Roskilde Fjord area. Through dialogue about the identified organisational challenges and needs combined with a better understanding of how future climatic events might play out, the aim is to have the workshop conclude on which specific areas within DRM and CCM DIRECTED should focus its resources in order to assist the stakeholders. RWL 2: The Emilia-Romagna Region Workshops The second workshop of the RWL 2 took place in Ferrara on 28 September 2023, it was organized by ARSTPC-ER and Geco sistema srl; ARPAE, was present as partners of the project, and the Municipalities of the test areas took part: Comacchio and Mesola (FE) for the risk of forest fires; Rimini and Riccione, on the Rimini coast, for coastal risk; the multi-services provider (Hera) and the Coordination of the voluntary civil protection associations of Ferrara and Rimini. Tshi and others Activities have been documented using Miro Board interactive tool (See ) to access minutes, presentations and discuss outcomes inside WP 1 as done with other labs (full Miro accessible here ) The activity in the morning focused on the discussion between the subjects involved on the following topics: territorial context, governance (actors) of the alert and emergency management processes, technical tools available and communication procedures in use. To optimize sharing between participants, the world café participation technique was used. The work of "Analysis of the governance process of the Disaster Risk Reduction - DDR - and Climate Change Adaption CCA" was carried out in two tables coordinated by the officials of the Regional Agency, one table on the risk of forest fires and table two on the coastal risk. Webinars A webinar was organised on the 20th of November 2023, with the Stakeholders previously involved in the second Workshop of Ferrara (28th September 2023). The webinar focused on data and tools for risk management and adaptation in the two pilots cases (Italian video record available here). Meetings ARSTPC-ER along with Gecosistema S.r.l. are organizing the Rimini event that will take place in Rimini in the date of 13-15 June 2024 during which there will be the General Assembly and a civil protection exercise with Stakeholders involved in the project. 24 Periodic Report 1 Figure 4: Example of the interactive Miro Board used to collect ongoing progresses of RWLs including RWL 2 outcomes of September 2023 workshop. RWL 3: Danube Region Test site Vienna: For efficiency reasons, communication has predominantly taken place through video calls and phone conversations since October 2023. Occasionally, on-site meetings were arranged for the dissemination of the project with the aim of stakeholder engagement and the exchange of relevant information (e.g., November 27-29, 2023, in Vienna with Generali, Uniqa, JRC) and presentations at events (e.g., DAFF Budapest, October 9-11, 2023). In November and December 2023, questionnaires tailored to each stakeholder group were prepared, and these were filled out and returned in January and February. To facilitate the Stakeholder Workshop planned for May in Vienna, various stakeholders were contacted in January to ascertain preferences regarding the location and timing of the workshop. The BOKU Vienna has been identified as a more suitable venue than the training centre in Graz, although the exact date is yet to be confirmed. In addition to engaging with external stakeholders, video calls were conducted with project partners from various work packages to prepare and organize the workshop. Internal meetings were also held to finalize the design of the Interoperability and Taxonomy Survey. This has already been shared with the main stakeholder. The results are expected by the end of March 2024. We are invited to the 45th meeting of the expert group on flood protection of the ICPDR (International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River) on April 23-24, 2024 to present 25 Periodic Report 1 the current status of the DIRECTED Project, with a focus on the RWL Danube. We hope for a valuable professional exchange regarding flood protection in the Danube Region and the acquisition of further stakeholders for our test sites. Test site Zala Region: The Zala Special Rescue Association has initiated cooperation with the National Office of the National Directorate General for Disaster Management (OKF) in the framework of the DIRECTED Project in the areas related to the Project. Both the county organisation and the national Directorate General expressed their openness. Starting in October 2023, the representatives of both parties identified four areas of cooperation during the monthly regular meetings: • Educational cooperation - the results, contacts and research findings of the DIRECTED Project could be used in the training of firefighters • The preparation of a disaster risk map of one of the priority areas (TBD), West-Hungary, Zala county, or Budapest agglomeration, in the framework of the DIRECTED Project, using databases provided by the OKF • Cooperation in applying new proposals and development projects • Joint dissemination of DIRECTED Project results to the public and local communities, joint communication The first concrete result of this cooperation was that the Directorate (OKF) invited project manager Levente Huszti on a study visit to Germany. They jointly visited the Würzburg Firefighter's School, one of the most modern German schools, where first responders, rescuers, and firefighters are trained. On 21 February, a visit to the Bavarian Federal State Firefighter's School took place, where Michael Bräuer, the school director, Stephan Brust, deputy director, and Jürgen Schemmel, unit leader, received the Hungarian delegation. The heads of the school were personally available throughout the day; they explained the school's operations and activities and answered our questions in a very detailed and helpful manner. The fire school itself is a training centre adjacent to the residential area of the city of Würzburg. As a stand-alone campus, it consists of several separate buildings in which a variety of exercises and damage simulations can be carried out (Fire Drill House, Incident Training Hall, Incident Training Area, First and Second Fire Station, VR Training Area, condominium, highrise, railway situation area, gas station, workshop, fast food restaurant, farm buildings, lakeside, river flooding and underpass flooding with flash flood rescue simulations). In the Federal State of Bavaria, there are 7,700 volunteer fire brigades with approximately 320,000 volunteer firefighters and, in addition, seven professional fire brigades in significant cities. The annual number of incidents is around 240,000 in the province, which is increasingly challenging for fire and emergency response and rescue organisations due to the extreme weather conditions caused by climate change. In the long term, climate change will alter the composition of vegetation cover, which in the short term, coupled with dry summers, will result in new and more destructive types of bush and forest fires. Specific curricula for these should be developed in training schools. Climate change is increasingly mentioned in training courses and is now part of the curriculum. After the study trip, the Project Manager of ZKM and the leading experts of the OKF assessed that there is a need to launch a joint training programme in Zala County, in which professional and volunteer disaster managers and fire brigades can participate. The curriculum should respond to the challenges posed by climate change at the local (Zala County) level. The planned production of local and regional disaster risk maps in the DIRECTED Project could greatly help in this respect in the future. ZKM and OKF will continue the cooperation and request ZKM 32 Periodic Report 1 1.2.3 Work Package 3 – Governance 1.2.3.1 Introduction To improve governance interoperability, WP 3 will provide an innovative and empirically tested risk governance framework that facilitates the application of risk models to support DRR and CCA planning and decision-making processes and build long-term governance capacity for information and knowledge integration. Thus, the work carried out by WP 3 serves two overarching purposes. First, WP 3 contributes to the understanding and analysis of the existing governance structures, processes and actor constellations within the RWLs. This entails applying the Risk-Tandem Framework (Figure 56) to various practical situations, examining the, structures, actor networks and constellations, formal and informal rules, modelling data, and other kinds of information that together form the baseline for the existing risk governance mechanisms. This work is mainly carried out in Task 3.1 and Task 3.2, i.e. the conceptual development phase of the Risk-Tandem Framework as well as its first application. Figure 8: A schematic representation of the Risk-Tandem Framework. Second, WP 3 works towards identifying and utilising governance leverage points within each RWL and in risk management settings for DRR and CCA more generally. Applying the Risk- 33 Periodic Report 1 Tandem Framework in the RWLs will support identifying tailored governance mechanisms to guide and sustain the knowledge exchange between targeted users in the RWLs. Based on the conceptual and empirical work carried out in Tasks 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 1.3, the further development of the Risk-Tandem Framework through application, reflection, and reiteration allows the beneficiaries and the RWLs to understand and more successfully work with the existing risk governance structures, and -where necessary and possible - improve the existing risk governance structures. The lessons learned from the application of the initial and the further developed Risk-Tandem Framework in the four RWLs allows for the identification of crosscutting issues and mechanism for improved governance and interoperability to support DRR and CCA in general. WP 3’s focus on the governance of DRR and CCA in the RWLs means that it is methodologically situated within social sciences and economics, both qualitative and quantitative, as well the humanities more generally. These disciplines provide the necessary frameworks, methods, and tools for gathering and processing research data, e.g. through surveys, interactive workshops, serious games, etc. as well as the theoretical groundwork to contextualize and meaningfully interpret the gathered information. The close collaboration with the modellers within the DIRECTED Project and the RWL has consequently produced an interdisciplinary framework for the assessment, management, and governance of DRR and CCA that is founded on a conceptual understanding of risk governance, institutional development and science, technology, and society discourses surrounding co-creative knowledge production. In the following stages of the project, this conceptual understanding will be informed by empirical and modelling data through the close collaboration with IIASA and PIK. In sum, through the Risk-Tandem Framework and the constant engagement with the RWLs, WP 3 seeks • to understand how risk governance is currently executed in the RWLs, • to systematically assess risk governance in the RWLs by means of criteria and indicators derived from the Risk-Tandem Framework, • to reflect on and improve the Risk-Tandem Framework, and • to help improve risk governance in the RWLs and beyond though knowledge integration and co-production. 34 Periodic Report 1 1.2.3.2 Progress per task The following table lists the WP 3’s objectives, gives a description and update on their status: Table 4: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 3. Deliverables, Milestones, and Tasks Status report M12 – Scoping consultations with RWLs Status: Met Scoping consultations with the RWLs and mapping of the RWL’s governance context (for detailed information, see below under “RWL Engagement Meetings” D3.1 – Risk-Tandem Framework Status: Submitted, under external review Developing an innovative and integrated risk governance framework for DRR and CCA (Risk-Tandem Framework) WP 3 has complied with the workplan and produced Risk-Tandem (D3.1), a risk governance framework for DRR and CCA that rests on conceptually sound and empirically validated approaches towards risk governance, stakeholder engagement, and knowledge co-production. The close collaboration with both the RWLs as well as the modelling partners from the project assured that the Risk-Tandem Framework does not only make a valuable contribution to risk governance and risk management scholarship, but that the framework can also be directly applied and be of use in the RWLs. D3.2 – Updated RiskTandem Framework for governance processes and interoperability Status: Work in Progress Applying and testing the Risk-Tandem Framework empirically in Real World Labs (RWL) to facilitate the co-development and sustained application of risk models and tools via the interoperable platform. The central objective of WP 3 is to develop, apply, and adapt an integrative risk governance framework for the respective needs of the RWLs and beyond. With the first Task (3.1) being achieved, the focus for the beneficiaries now lies with the application and real-world/practical testing of the Risk-Tandem Framework (Task 3.2). While collaboration with the RWLs and other WPs has been central throughout Task 3.1 already, further close interaction with the RWLs will be crucial to achieve the objectives set out in Task 3.2 and beyond. The co-creative aspects of T3.2 will be achieved through qualitative data collection processes, such as a Q-Survey and a Capacity Needs Assessment, interactive workshops, and serious games initiated and developed by colleagues from WP 4 in collaboration with WP 3. These engagement tools will on the one hand allow for a testing of the Risk-Tandem Framework, and on the other hand give space for feedback, reiterations, and improvements. D3.3 – Policy brief on risk governance in the context of DRR and CCA Status: Planned Publishing and sharing of tested and improved Risk-Tandem Framework that supports coherent and integrated DRR and CCA planning and decision-making processes and builds long-term 35 Periodic Report 1 governance capacity for information and knowledge integration Throughout the process of achieving the objectives set out in both T3.1 and T3.2, concurrent steps are being taken to meet the requirements of T3.3. With regard to the publication and sharing of a refined Risk-Tandem Framework, a number of academic articles are currently in production throughout beneficiaries involved in WP 3. Furthermore, a number of the beneficiaries are planning to present and disseminate the framework in various salient conferences in their respective research areas. D3.4 – Guidance on good practices regarding interoperability of governance mechanisms and recommendations for institutionalising project outcomes and the interoperable platform into existing systems Status: Planned Identifying a tailored governance mechanism based on the RiskTandem Framework’s application to guide and sustain the knowledge exchange between targeted users beyond the project and enable co-ownership with targeted users Similarly, the objective of guiding and sustaining the knowledge exchange between researchers and practitioners set out by Task 3.4, while still in early development, is being slowly worked towards through close and active engagement with the RWLs and their local stakeholders. Task 3.1 Framework Development (Month 1 – 16) (Lead: RIFS (GFZ), co-lead SEI, contributors: IIASA and UCC) Regarding the state-of-the-art scholarship on risk governance, the increasing complexities and interdependencies of current risk landscapes demand integrated approaches towards risk governance that surpass current practice which rests to a large extend on siloed and fragmented approaches towards risk governance and risk management. Indeed, there is a need to strive towards adaptive and transformative governance that can, on one hand, manage systemic issues through knowledge integration, and on the other hand, cope with uncertainty (Hochrainer-Stigler, et al., 2023 1 ; Sillmann, et al., 2022 2 ; Berkes, 2017 3 ; Renn and Schweizer, 2009 4 ). Yet it is still a contested issue how these aspirations translate into policies and concrete action (Deubelli and Mechler, 2021 5 ). To address these questions, the Risk-Tandem Framework (D3.1) integrates various methods and approaches for the management of complexity and systemic risks, all the while relying on qualitative and quantitative data. The RiskTandem Framework therefore builds on state-of-the-art risk governance and management tools, while also serving as an integrated approach wherein the synthesized sum of its various methods is greater than the individual approaches that make up the framework. Task 3.2 also requires that the Risk-Tandem Framework actively include solutions for data interoperability. This requirement will be fulfilled through collaboration with WP 2, drawing on 1 Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Deubelli-Hwang, T. M., Mechler, R., Dieckmann, U., Lauerien, F. and Handmer, J. (2023) ‘Closing the ‘Operationalisation Gap’: Insights from Systemic Risk Research to Inform Transformational Adaptation and Risk Management’, Climate Risk Management 2 Sillmann, J., Christensen, I., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Huang-Lachman, J-T., Juhola, S., Kornhuber, K., Mahecha, M. D., Mechler, R., Reichstein, M., Ruane, A. C., Schweizer, P-J., and Williams, S. (2022) Briefing Note on Systemic Risk: Review and Opportunities for Research, Policy and Practice from the Perspective of Climate, Environmental and Disaster Risk Science and Management, Geneva: UNDRR 3 Berkes, F. (2017) ‘Environmental Governance for the Anthropocene? Social-Ecological Systems, Resilience and Collaborative Learning’, Sustainability, 9(7) 4 Renn, O. and Schweizer, P.-J. (2009) ‘Inclusive Risk Governance: Concepts and Application to Environmental Policy Making’, Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(3), pp. 174-185 5 Deubelli, T. M. and Mechler, R. (2021) ‘Perspectives on Transformational Change in Climate Risk Management and Adaptation’, Environmental Research Letters, 16(5), pp. 53002 36 Periodic Report 1 the expertise gathered through the creation of a robust Data Fabric by that Work Package. The methodological link to combine the Data Fabric and quantitative risk assessments with the Risk-Tandem Framework will be built on the Risk Layering approach laid out in, among others, D3.1. A direct application of the concepts from the Institutional Analysis and Development framework will further help evaluate and improve the theoretical assumptions that play a central role for the assessment, management, and governance of disaster risks and climate change adaption. The development and implementation of a set of indicators will allow the Risk-Tandem Framework to handle questions such as, how are vulnerabilities defined in the respective RWLs, what values and norms play a role in the various institutional set-ups, and what kinds of structures increase or reduce disaster risks. For this reason, and the further development of the Risk-Tandem Framework, meetings between WP 3, WP 4, and the RWL leads are taking place: Coordination Meetings between WP 3 and WP 4: WP 3 meetings have enabled the conceptual development of the Risk-Tandem Framework and supported initial risk governance analysis in the RWLs. To support overall coordination between WP 3 and WP 4, weekly meetings were established since January 2023, allowing for the smooth alignment of tasks, activities and deliverables. The initial framework and supporting visualisations for the Risk-Tandem Framework emerged from a week-long research visit of SEI in-person (20-24th January 2023) to UCC in Cork, Ireland and supported by RIFS joining online. RWL Engagement Meetings: The Risk-Tandem Framework will ultimately act as an approach for the Real World Labs to use to support an integrated DRR/CCA governance assessment through methods of co-production. As such, Task 3.1 Risk-Tandem Framework development and 3.2 Risk-Tandem Framework implementation are intertwined and strong efforts to actively interact with RWL around Risk-Tandem before the start of Task 3.2. Furthermore, given the integral nature of WP 4 tasks on knowledge co-production and capacity development to the Risk-Tandem Framework, researchers in WP 3 and WP 4 worked in parallel to introduce and guide the RWLs around the Risk-Tandem Framework to support the RWLs to understand the risk governance context (focus of WP 3) and implementing knowledge co-production (focus WP 4). Consultation meetings took place with Capital Region of Denmark (17th Feb 2023) and RhineErft (13th March 2023) RWLs, a jour-fix presentation was made to other RWLs to introduce the initial framework and answer related questions (16 March 2023). RWLs were provided with resources on the Risk-Tandem Framework including a recorded video, presentation, briefing note, risk governance assessment guiding questions (focus for WP 3) and facilitation guide (focus WP 4) to inform their RWL stakeholder engagement and initial workshop activities. WP 3 again in collaboration with WP 4, continued engagement with RWL hosts by offering workshop debriefing meetings to reflect on their workshops and offer guidance and support going forward to advance risk governance and knowledge co-production in their RWLs. These took place with Capital Region of Denmark (9th March 2023 and 25th August 2023), Emilia-Romagna Region (30th March, during Jour Fixe and 16th October 2023) and Rhine-Erft Region (21st April 2023) and the Danube Region (12th June 2023). 37 Periodic Report 1 Figure 9: Impressions from the stakeholder workshops and training the trainers. To support integration of Risk-Tandem into the WP 4 task on knowledge co-production training, between June and September 2023, UCC and SEI met weekly to develop Risk-Tandem related training activities for the Directed General Assembly in Cologne (18th - 21st September 2023). These events focused on helping the RWLs to unravel the risk governance barriers and enables through needs and opportunity mapping (focus WP 3) and skills development around knowledge co-production using serious games, creative play and world cafes (focus of WP 4). WP 3 supported scoping interviews for capacity development with RWLs, led by WP 4, with the specific WP 3 aim to capture recent insights on their risk governance context, level of stakeholder engagement, and understand their needs for support around Risk-Tandem (e.g. further explaining the Risk-Tandem Framework to new RWL colleagues). These scoping interviews took place with the Capital Region of Denmark (13th December 2023), Rhine-Erft Region (22nd Jan 2024), Emilia-Romagna Region (23rd Jan 2024) and Danube Region (14th Dec 2023). Task 3.2 Applying a merged framework (RISK-TANDEM) to Real World Labs (Month 1236) (lead: RIFS, co-lead: UCC, contributors: IIASA, SEI, GFZ, PIK, DTU, GECO, OASIS, 52N, G&C) In terms of partially completed tasks, Task 3.2 is currently being worked on by the project partners involved in WP 3. As per the description in the grant agreement, Task 3.2 involves applying and refining the Risk-Tandem Framework for the governance processes and interoperability, focusing on its application within the RWLs. This entails applying and testing the framework empirically in the RWLs to facilitate the co-development and sustained application of risk models and tools via the interoperable platform. All the interactions with the RWL as described in Task 3.1 provided the groundwork for the implementation of the Risk-Tandem Framework with the RWLs. On the 30th of January UCC researcher visited Copenhagen for a day-long planning meeting with their RWL to support their RWL stakeholder engagement and risk governance analysis. The implementation of Risk-Tandem requires connectivity with the risk-related data, models and tools being explored in WP 2 and the Data Fabric being developed in WP 5 to ensure integration between the governance, communication and data/modelling systems. To facilitate alignment, researchers from WP 3 attend WP 2 meetings related to interoperability, e.g. the meeting on 16th October 2023. Various meetings with individual project partners and other WPs have been held, and collaboration will continue to achieve the interoperability side of the objective set out in 3.2. Specifically, the Risk Layering approach will play a central role to bridge the gap between quantitative modelling approaches and qualitative assessment processes, ensuring that information and data retrieved by either side can be used meaningfully for the integrated assessment of both DRR and CCA. Further, future meetings with the individual RWLs are planned to apply the Risk-Tandem Framework to the various problem situations that the regions face. This will help tailor the framework more precisely to the needs of each RWL. 38 Periodic Report 1 Task 3.3 Evaluating RISK-TANDEM and Lessons Learnt (Month 33-48) (lead: GFZ (RIFS), co-lead: UCC, contributors: SEI, IIASA) This task has not yet begun but will involve evaluating the effectiveness of the risk governance mechanisms identified in Task 3.2 for strengthening multi-stakeholder engagement, interoperability and knowledge exchange. The task will also involve improving the Risk-Tandem Framework based on evidence and learning from RWLs. The activities in this task are closely aligned to Task 1.3 focusing on the evaluation and outcomes/ impact monitoring of the RWLs, also led by RIFS. 39 Periodic Report 1 1.2.4 Work Package 4 – Knowledge co-production 1.2.4.1 Introduction WP 4 focuses on bridging connections between different disciplines and knowledge systems toward integrated DRR, CCA and systemic risk management with the support of iterative knowledge co-production and associated capacity development. Methodologically, this work has built upon SEI’s expertise in capacity development and knowledge co-production, informed by the SEI-developed Tandem Framework (Daniels et al., 2020, Bharwani et al., 2024) 6 . WP 4 continues to expand the discourse on knowledge co-production and its application in sustainability sciences with the support of contemporary literature and state-of-the-art knowledge on risk governance, DRR, CCA and systemic risk management (WP 3). Despite the theoretical complexity (necessary for addressing complex socio-ecological risks), WP 4 remains committed to practice, providing tools, activities, capacity development, and workshops that can support the RWLs in producing “useful” and actionable knowledge through transdisciplinary collaboration, to increase the capacity of actors to create shared understanding, solutions and commitments to risk management. WP 4s approaches are also leveraged to assess, understand and translate user needs through taxonomy development (WP 2) resulting in a planned glossary for the Data Fabric (WP 5) to create a shared understanding of the models, their uses and results. Finally, these tasks contribute to developing a scienceinformed knowledge base for operationalizing knowledge co-production in integrated risk management, disseminated in collaboration with WP 6 (as discussed in D6.3 Gaps and Opportunities Assessment for Knowledge Transfer). The work carried out by WP 4 is manifold and contributes to SO3 and SO4. It cuts across different work streams and deliverables to support capacities in enabling knowledge co-production. In terms of RWL engagements (WP 1), WP 4 identifies and supports the hosts of each lab through a Training of Trainers programme (D1.2. Capacity Development Strategy for DIRECTED), seeking to mainstream knowledge co-production in existing working arrangements in a locally led manner. In other words, capacity development informs the integration of co-production into existing governance arrangements (WP 3). This supports RWL hosts to create and strengthen relationships, networks and to develop a shared understanding of challenges and solutions through transdisciplinary engagement. Efforts to deliver DIRECTED ambitions on integrated DRR, CCA, and systemic risk management in their social and technical dimensions are part of this process. Tasks in WP 4 are highly integrated with WP 3 and within the Risk-Tandem Framework (D3.1), in efforts to continuously and iteratively align knowledge co-production with the risk governance context and emerging needs. Co-production approaches are also applied to identify and map user needs, and build connections between modellers (WP 2) and end users of risk/climate data to inform the development of the Data Fabric (WP 5). Consistent efforts have been made throughout this period to compliment the work of partners in WPs 1, - 6, including RIFS (providing insights to risk governance and management), UCC (stakeholder engagement, knowledge transfer and participatory governance), and IIASA (integrated Risk Layering for the quantitative analysis of hazards and decision making processes). 6 Daniels, Elizabeth, et al. "Refocusing the climate services lens: Introducing a framework for co-designing “transdisciplinary knowledge integration processes” to build climate resilience." Climate Services 19 (2020): 100181. 40 Periodic Report 1 1.2.4.2 Progress per task WP 4 and SEI have worked closely with WP 1 and the RWLs A good relationship with RWL hosts and stakeholders and deep understanding of the RWL context is required to enable the integration of co-production mechanisms into existing risk governance arrangements (and to understand where they could be complemented with the provision of new ones). Consultations, interviews, surveys and other scoping exercises have also been conducted to ensure that the work of partners is informed by RWL needs, and that the capacity development training aligns with the ambitions of Risk-Tandem (WP 3). The following table describes WP 4 objectives, including its description and an update on current status: Table 5: Summary of deliverables, milestones, and tasks status in WP 4. Deliverables, Milestones and Tasks Status report D4.1. Capacity Development Modules for Training of Trainers (month 36) Status: In progress Aligning with D1.2. and Risk-Tandem, D4.1 seeks to develop the capacities of RWL hosts in enabling and designing knowledge co-production processes in their risk governance contexts. One module is already developed and delivered, and webinars linking to capacity development are planned to take place in Q1 of 2024. Modules that are developed will be made available online on weADAPT by M32. Milestone 15 Lays the foundation for further periodic reporting (M16-18) and D4.3 (M48) by: 1) explaining the conceptual framework and underpinning the design of co-production process; 2) collating experiences and challenges regarding co-production; 3) reviewing progress from the RWLs; 4) documenting the methodology that will be used to analyze and update the Tandem framework (M1618); and, 5) providing recommendations for strengthening the Tandem cycle. Task 4.2 Status: In progress Capacity development individual engagements, training, and workshops developed in parallel with T1.2. D4.2. Framework for Distilling Different Assumptions in Different Modelling Approaches with Recommendations for Replication (month 42) Status: Planned Developed based on discussions around trade-offs and assumptions in the models, for improved interoperability and iterative development based on user needs. Seeks to support further replication. Milestone 19 - Scoping consultation with RWL and mapping of capacity development needs begins Status: In progress Meeting minutes from scoping consultations for mapping capacity development needs. These were supposed to begin formally by month 9, but the first semi-structured interviews took place in month 15-16. D4.3 Updated (tested and refined) Tandem Cycle for Transdisciplinary Knowledge co-production (month 48) Status: In progress Improving and refining the Tandem co-production cycle based on emerging evidence from the RWLs, in efforts to support the further application of Tandem in risk governance contexts. 41 Periodic Report 1 Task 4.1 Apply the Tandem knowledge co-production cycle to the RWL (Month 6-45) (lead: SEI, co-lead: GECO, contributors: RIFS, UCC, GFZ, PIK, DTU, IIASA) SEI has led the delivery of D1.2. (Capacity Building Strategy for DIRECTED), and contributed to the D3.1. describing the Risk-Tandem (integrative and iterative risk governance framework for holistic DRR, CCA and systemic risk management). These two deliverables were designed closely together and through continuous consultation with partners, to ensure that capacity development also supports the practical implementation of the Risk-Tandem by the RWL partners. In more detail, SEI’s role is to examine and translate the tools and approaches provided by WP 3 in practice by delivering and refining them through the lens of co-production and codesign (structuring their application via Tandem), in efforts to make sure they are fit for purpose in the RWL context. Building on this context, WP 4 delivered its first module for D4.1 on 'Complex risk and Knowledge co-production' that acted as an introduction to the Risk-Tandem Framework. Although it preceded the submission of Deliverable D3.1 (Risk-Tandem), WPs 3 and 4 collaborated closely to ensure that they remain conceptually and practically aligned by informing D4.1 with literature reviews. Modules on facilitation skills and research skills including monitoring and evaluation are in progress. Other consultations and scoping exercises are planned for later in 2024, to further inform capacity development modules based on emerging RWL needs. WP 4 has also closely engaged with the RWLs and WP 1 throughout this process to support their operationalization and set-up (M2/M3/D1.1.), and build upon this collaboration to inform the conceptual development of the strategies and frameworks with emerging needs and evidence. Further, WP 4 continued to support WP 3 in launching the Risk-Tandem Framework (including delivering its first module on understanding and co-exploring complex risks in a multi-hazard setting, and how this could be implemented in the RWLs). Tools for co-exploring risks as introduced in the module were later taken up by RWL 2 in their workshop with positive results; the debriefing described the co-productive mode as vastly more efficient way of working than more ‘traditional’ presentations and exchanges. Having complied with the delivery of D1.2. in 2023, WP 4 activities related to capacity development have focussed on: M15 (applying knowledge co-production and training of trainers in alignment with Risk-Tandem, phased according to the Tandem cycle steps) and continuing M15. (scoping consultations to support capacity development modules, and activities). WP 1/RWL Coordination meetings: As described under WP 3 regarding meetings, the integrated nature of tasks associated with the application of Risk-Tandem and knowledge coproduction in RWLs necessitates close coordination between RWLs and researchers from WPs 3/4. As such most consultation meetings are shared to minimize stakeholder fatigue and to maximize benefits for both WPs (although meeting focus is decided beforehand to identify which partner it will benefit the most). See joint meeting and description in table in Fehler! Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden. for WP 4 reference (detailing work pertaining to capacity development, knowledge co-production, and engagement with the RWLs in relation to Risk-Tandem). Task 4.2 RWL comparison and assessment of needs through learning, capacity development and knowledge exchange (Month 9-36) (lead: SEI, co-lead: 52N, contributors: RIFS, GECO, UCC, GFZ, PIK, DTU, IIASA, GC) Task 4.2 is advancing novel innovation related to capacity development, especially in terms of responding to the capacity needs assessment (D1.2) with practical guidance and impact monitoring. In addition, the first progress report under M15 will lay the foundation for monitoring and evaluating knowledge co-production processes across the RWLs (e.g. contributing to D1.3). 48 Periodic Report 1 Task 6.2 The report outlines the work conducted during the first year of the project which relates to setting up specific communications venues including branding, development of branded assets (logos and project branded reporting and poster templates), social media channel set-up and introductory project film. It also outlines work completed under each communications and dissemination channel by all beneficiaries and links to evidence of work where possible. In addition, we have also developed a DIRECTED Storyboard to assist DIRECTED partners in building communications targeting specific target groups using methodologies that they most respond to. For instance MPs are more likely to engage with direct letters, academia and scientists through academic papers and conferences, disaster professionals through LinkedIn etc. The Storyboard can be found here: https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVNcLaYD8=/ Deliverable D6.3. Gaps and Opportunities assessment Task 6.3 Status: Submitted Task 6.3 involved outlining the Gaps and Opportunities for Knowledge Transfer within the Directed project and D6.3 puts forward a Knowledge Transfer Plan including 1) Key exploitable results, 2) Knowledge transfer mechanisms, 3) Target groups, and 4) Impact pathway. Deliverable D6.4 e Learning Portal Milestone 27 Task 6.4 Status: Planned (due month 45) An on-line repository containing all the learning materials co-designed and developed with stakeholders for training and educational related programmes (developed as part of Task 6.4, in progress) will be hosted on an established, appropriate website. D6.3 outlines possible options for such portals and the types of resources that can be made available. Deliverable D6.5 Business Development Plan Task 6.6 Status: Planned (due month 48) This plan will act as the main exploitation road-map and strategy. Deliverable D6.6 Communications report 2 Task 6.2 Status: Underway A Project Level Communications Plan for the current year (October, 2023 to September, 2024) can be found here and guides the work for this year. See planning tool here: https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVMMvAd8w=/ Good progress is underway as planned in the DIRECTED Communication and Dissemination Report 1. Deliverable D6.7 Communications report 3 Not due. Deliverable D6.8 Communications report 4 Not due D6.9 Legacy document on the capacity/ skills for risk and adaptation management Task 6.5 Status: Planned (due month 36) Recommendations on how capacity/ skills related evolving pathways in the development of governance and technological frameworks (Risk-Tandem and Data Fabric) can address challenges of risk and adaptation management. This learning will be generated from Task 6.5 (tracking and evaluation of learning programmes) and in collaboration with WP 4 implementing the capacity 49 Periodic Report 1 development strategy and learning modules for RWLs. 50 Periodic Report 1 Task 6.1 - Develop a communication strategy for the directed project and thereafter communication updates for relevant reporting cycles (Month 1-4) (Lead: OASIS, Contributors: All) The D6.1 Communications and Dissemination Strategy was developed to ensure a detailed plan of communications and dissemination for both the DIRECTED Project overall and beneficiary communications planning related to the project was completed. A comprehensive communications and dissemination programme, that engages, informs and influences our target audiences and enables us to move towards our outcomes and longer term impacts was developed. Specifically, our target audiences include: 1. First and second responders 2. Regional and municipal civil authorities - including disaster management, planning authorities and cross regional municipalities 3. Physical and social scientific organisations - those who work in climate change, natural disaster sciences and damage and loss, governance and innovation 4. The general public - will be represented by municipalities The programme and tasks are based around the stages of the Project as per Table 8 below. Table 8: DIRECTED communications timeline. The report includes our plans on the Project including under Communications - Launch, Project Branding & Website development, Real World Labs and Case Study Development, visualisations, Social Media, Video, Podcasts and Webinars, a Quarterly Blog, Mass Media and Media Pack Creation. Dissemination plans include - Tool demonstrations, Stakeholder 51 Periodic Report 1 Engagement – co-design and co-development, Policy briefs and Policy-Maker meetings, DIRECTED e-Learning Portal, Published Papers, Conference Attendance and use of EU Communications and Dissemination Platforms. Each section included specific targets and indicators and the Outcomes aided by the communication or dissemination action. This report also states our monitoring and evaluation strategy linked to communications and dissemination and therefore the document can be used to track the success of individual actions. Task 6.2 Deliver a full communication programme (Month 3-48) (Lead OASIS, Contributors: All) At the end of each project year a Communications and Dissemination Report is developed to track the communications and dissemination actions and to plan for the next year. As the Project is four years long, four reports will be due by the end of the Project. As we are still relatively early in the Project, we have completed one report D6.2 Communications and Dissemination Report Yr1. This report tracks and evidences the communications and dissemination work, and as far as possible, tracks the M&E parameters outlined in the D6.1 Communications and Dissemination Strategy, as well as tracks progress to Project Outcomes and longer term Impacts. At this point we have completed detailed tracking of communications and dissemination activities for the Period Oct 2022 to Sept 2023 – as per grant agreement. This can be seen in the submitted report for Year 1 (which can be accessed through the EU Grants Portal) and therefore we have not replicated that for the purpose of this report. We are part way through Yr 2 and plans can be found both in the D6.2 Yr 1 report and here. Highlights for the period between October 2022 to End of Jan 2024 include: Website development and analytics Max Steinhausen (TUBS) and Tracy Irvine (OASIS) designed and developed our Project website found here: https://directedproject.eu/. The website was built by SpitzBub, selected after a formal tender process by TUBS. We have designed it to be visually simple and easy to follow and locate information about the project. We are now able to track detailed activity on the website as we have implemented google analytics as follows which gives an indication on how well we are growing our online traffic. We refer to Figure 12 and Figure 96 for detailed statistics. 52 Periodic Report 1 Figure 12: Most popular content on the project website. Figure 13: Referrers from other websites to directedproject.eu. 53 Periodic Report 1 Examples of Website pages of partners SEI - https://www.sei.org/projects/directed-climate-resilience/ RIFS-Potsdam – https://www.rifs-potsdam.de/en/research/disaster-resilience-extremeclimate-events-directed IIASA - https://iiasa.ac.at/projects/directed PIK – https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/output/projects/all/958 UCC/ MaREI - https://www.marei.ie/project/directed/ Genillard & Co - https://www.genillard-co.com/our-projects/ Branding and Templates – we have developed DIRECTED Branding and template reports, briefs, PowerPoint slide and posters and have used strong, but simple and clear branding. Figure 14: Logo designs for the DIRECTED project. Use of Videos We developed an Introduction video for the Project aimed to inform people about the Project using the scientist, technologists and public authorities who talk about their excitement about the Project. https://studio.youtube.com/video/Y3PuY3k1Q7o/edit We have also used video to track activities we are working on; Extracts from Breaking the Silos, Serious Game : https://youtu.be/EBrxTQmQnQM Recordings of webinars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6zlYe9HM-g Blogs We have developed a range of blogs found here: https://directedproject.eu/blog/ . The blogs are posted on the website but also posted on our social media channels and posted as articles on Linkedin. Media Pack and Articles Real World Lab informational leaflets can be found here: https://directedproject.eu/media/#press-information These leaflets will be used to accompany press releases. Although we are in the early part of the Project media coverage has been gained: Reimagining Europe’s Disaster Risk Reduction to cope with the climate crisis – by Janne Parviainen 54 Periodic Report 1 Found here: https://www.euractiv.com/section/climate-environment/opinion/reimagining-europes-disaster-risk-reduction-to-cope-with-the-climate-crisis/ More articles with high profile media will be developed as we move forward in the Project. Tool presentations We have developed a product solutions section on our website to highlight most of the tools we are making interoperable. Find here: https://directedproject.eu/product-solutions/. Some tools have also be presented at conferences e.g. The Future Danube Model at the DAFF Conference, Budapest. Conferences We have attended a range of conferences. The details can be seen in D6.2 Communications and Dissemination Report Yr1. Conferences can be tracked in the Dissemination record as recorded on the Horizon Europe Portal. Community of European Research and Innovation for Security (CERIS) DIRECTED participated in two CERIS events in Brussels in June and December 2023. During the first event “Projects to Policy Seminar” we presented the DIRECTED project with our focus on the concept of interoperability to other Horizon Europe projects and EC representatives in the session for “Disaster Resilient Societies” (DRS). Many connections with Horizon Europe partner projects were made, common focus areas identified, and potential cross project synergies discussed. We attended the Secure Societies ‘Projects to Policy Seminar’ jointly organised by DG Home and REA in Brussels in June 2023 where we have received guidance on the various communications, dissemination and exploitations tools available to us, as well as met our sister projects under the call of this grant. We have since been involved with discussions with our sister projects, and continued cooperation have been agreed. DIRECTED was part of a fruitful exchange with fellow CERIS members on Panel 4 - Towards an all-society approach to disaster resilience: from research to policy recommendations - CERIS Disaster Resilient Societies: Annual event in December 2023. Video found here: https://directedproject.eu/media/#videos-podcasts As a direct result from the CERIS meetings the DIRECTED project joined the CMINE Societal Resilience Cluster (SRC) and has been engaged with the group since October 2023. Storyboard to assist content creation. Other communications and dissemination tools developed for use by the project is the Directed Storyboard to help partners to create compelling stories and target specific audiences. Found here. 55 Periodic Report 1 Summary of social media coverage Table 9: Summary Project Social Media Coverage for YR1 (excludes individual beneficiary engagement) found here. Platform Impression over 365 days Engagement over 365 days Likes, comments & reposts LinkedIn – DIRECTED Project Group 3776 77 LinkedIn – Oasis 22,332 334 X 7187 202 Instagram Accounts reached not specified as not a professional account – we have now switched to a professional account 70 YouTube 213 views on you tube – does not include views from content placed elsewhere e.g. website 9.7 hours watching It is clear from the figures that LinkedIn engages more with our material than the other platforms, which would be entirely logical as it is a place for disaster and climate adaptation professionals and therefore for 2024 we will focus on this platform for increasing our communications via social media. There have been many highly publicised changes on X that have decreased our reach, with more focus on celebrity over content. Nonetheless, our followers focus tends to be other European projects/ organisations linked to disaster management and climate change and therefore we will focus X communications on inter-project information communications. YouTube is used as storage for video that can be posted elsewhere. Instagram has gained a small following as would be expected for the type of content we produce. Finally, our Mastodon account has not taken off at all and therefore it would seem sensible to reduce content on here as it is not reaching our target audience. Overall, including our website and social media content for Directed specific has reached in the region of 41,500 people. This figure should increase as our following grows over the next three years. These figures also do not include individual project partners figures. 56 Periodic Report 1 Task 6.3. Identify current institutional capacity for integrated multi-hazard risk and Climate Change Adaptation (Month 2-9) (Lead: UCC) Task 6.3 was led by UCC and resulted in Deliverable 6.3 Gaps and Needs Opportunities Assessment: knowledge transfer through training and education and puts forward a Knowledge Transfer Plan. As part of the task, a survey was completed within Directed consortium partners including the Real World Lab hosts (N=22), as well as a desktop review and key informant discussions with other projects and potential collaborators. The findings provided insights into partners’ institutional knowledge, skills and attitudes around DRR/ CCA, existing and preferred training and educational activities, and collaboration opportunities with other projects, networks and platforms. Based on findings, the initial knowledge transfer mechanisms selected include the development of learning materials/ resources and delivery, in-person intensive learning activity (e.g. summer school), online learning programme (e.g. webinar or e-course), mentoring (e.g. students, interns) and cross-project collaboration (e.g. joint webinars). The Risk-Tandem Framework and the Data Fabric were identified as the key exploitable results to embed within knowledge transfer activities, through professional training, university teaching and e-Learning platforms. The target groups identified included: students/ researchers (e.g. university students, early career researchers); DRR/ CCA professionals, industry (e.g. insurance, private sector); and EU actors (e.g. other consortiums, professional bodies, networks/ forums). The Knowledge Transfer Plan is designed to complement the Capacity Development Strategy (D1.2), amplify the activities in the Communication and Dissemination Plan (D6.1) and support the Business Development Plan (D6.5). Task 6.4 Develop programmes to support integrated responses to multi-hazard risk and Climate Change Adaptation (Month 10-45) (Lead UCC)) involves developing of learning and educational programmes scoping phase has begun picking up actions identified in the Knowledge Transfer Plan (D6.3). Currently, this involves organising a Knowledge Exchange Webinar Series to facilitate learning and exchange between other stakeholders and the RWLs (planned Spring 2024), 2) mapping exercise of educational and training collaborators and potential entry points including mentoring and supervision, 3) delivering guest lectures to build relationships with educators and 4) facilitating knowledge exchange with other EU projects (e.g. facilitating Danish RWL collaboration with City of Malmo via UNIC project workshop) . Once a core group of educators/trainers are identified a more intense co-design process (including workshops) will begin to ensure they are actively involved in the development and testing of learning resources for different target groups (Task 6.3) and identification of an eLearning portal (D6.4) to collate and make available the resources for future use. Task 6.6 Exploitation - Business planning with public and private sector for scaling outputs (Month 36-48) (Lead Oasis) Not due. However, we are considering bringing the start date forward to month 30 to allow for longer IP consideration by partners, market research and competition analysis and to understand how the longer term exploitation of an open source platform and tools could work. 57 Periodic Report 1 1.2.7 Work Package 7 – Project Management 1.2.7.1 Introduction Work Package 7 is concerned with the management of the project to ensure efficient cooperation between all partners and successful completion of project objectives. Efforts in WP 7 are led by TU-Braunschweig with all project partners contributing to fulfil the tasks in this Work Package. The tasks in WP 7 run from the beginning of the project in month 1 until the end in month 48 with the stated goal to ensure exploitation and legacy beyond the projects completion. The Grant Agreement states that tasks in Work Package 7 include project coordination and administration (Task 7.1), project implementation, work planning, monitoring, reporting, and quality control (Task 7.2), as well as data management, exploitation, and impacts beyond the project's lifetime (Task 7.3). These tasks involve responsibilities such as ensuring timely submission of deliverables, financial and risk management, communication between consortium members and the EC, implementation of contractual changes, transparent overview of project activities, data management following FAIR principles, and maintenance of project outreach platforms and outputs. Figure 15: Overview of the project governance structure. Figure 15 depicts the projects governance structure created to ensure its successful operation. The DIRECTED consortium forms the project’s foundation, with the general assembly as the central body of control and the grant and consortium agreements as formalizing documents. Management of the project relies on the agreed working plan and collaboration of partners set out in these documents. The management team consists of the project coordinator, the steering committee, and the management support team. To receive independent advice an external innovation advisory board and an ethics advisor are installed. For day to day operations and coordination in the project clear communication and regular exchange are paramount. Therefore, we make use of a number of project internal email lists, instant messaging via slack and video calls with Zoom. The bi-weekly “Jour Fixe” meetings have become the central point of exchange between all project partners. 64 Periodic Report 1 1.3 Impact This section outlines our progress towards the planned impacts through highlighting some of the important impacts that have been achieved during the lifetime of the Project to this point. More detail of the Outcomes/ Outputs and Indicators and the main objectives can be found within the Grant Agreement. It should be remembered that we are early in the Project, but despite this we have begun to show good indications that we are moving towards our longer term impacts at a good rate. Therefore, at this time, we are confident that there is no need to update our proposed impacts. Table 12: DIRECTED Project Impacts. Impacts Type Impact Outcomes/ Outputs Linked Objectives Evidence Indicators Scientific impacts The Tandem Process (SEI) has improved scientific workflows for stakeholder engagement and knowledge accumulation from stakeholders, by combining important tools to engage stakeholders in co-production and codesign. This has been achieved by using the Risk-Tandem Framework with stakeholder organisations in the Real World Lab. Outcome 1 Output 1 SO3 SO4 Meeting minutes from RWL meetings D 3.1 RiskTandem Framework Scientific impact Improved capacity for the scientific community to couple data sets and models from multiple sources through the developed interoperability framework. A framework that outlines different pathways for interoperability has been developed that can be used long-term by scientists to increase interoperability of data and tools. Outcome 4 Output 4 SO2 Report produced leading to Deliverable 2.1 Scientific impact Improvements to the RIM2D model allowed faster GPU based hydraulic simulations used to in Denmark and Braunschweig, Erft Outcome 4 Output 4 SO2 Model availability and feedback from RWL’s Societal Impact In May 2023 major floods occurred in the Emilia-Romagna Regions, one of the Real World Labs, that resulted in loss of life, the displacement of thousands of people and 8.8 billion in damages. Between 16-18 May 2023, 350 million cubic metres of water, equivalent to six months’ worth of rain, fell within 36 hours across Emilia-Romagna, one of Outcome 4 Output 4 Indicator 4 Scale of contribution – Implemented in large-scale SO7 Technical reports available 65 Periodic Report 1 Italy’s most important agricultural regions. The heavy rain led to the overflow of 23 rivers across the region, affecting 100 municipalities and triggering more than 400 landslides, which in turn damaged and closed off hundreds of roads. The floods were preceded by a drought that dried out the land, reducing its capacity to absorb water. The SaferPlaces Platform, was utilised by the Civil Protection of the Emilia-Romagna Region to generate flood water and depth maps to take crucial decisions after the disaster and support the assessment of the damages of the affected areas. The platform utilised satellite, climate data and AI-based models combined into a cloud computing environment to provide insights into areas prone to floods across the globe. Information on the flooded areas and the affected buildings conducted by local municipalities and data provided by the Emilia-Romagna Civil Protection were also integrated to fill the gaps and increase the accuracy of urban flooded areas when not captured by satellites. Maps portraying the extent of the flooded areas in the most affected municipalities, Faenza, Cesena, Forlì and Conselice, were generated with information on the depth and volume of the water. These maps provided crucial information for a preliminary Flood Damage Assessment to support the local and central authorities to estimate the damages as soon as possible. Specifically, the satellite-based water depth maps were used as input to assess the economic losses of affected buildings. Claudia Vezzani, Technical Manager of the Hydraulic Risk Area of the Civil Protection Agency of Emilia-Romagna Region, highlighted: "SaferPlaces technology and Earth observation data allow us to usefully support the disaster analyses and the computation of economic losses.’ regional flood event in EmiliaRomagna 66 Periodic Report 1 Societal impact The Risk-Tandem Framework has been actively used in stakeholder engagement in the Danish, German and Italian RWLs successfully bringing together actors that traditionally do not exchange information in the field of DRR and CCA Outcome 2 Output 2 SO3 SO4 Meeting minutes D 3.1 RiskTandem Framework Societal impact Highlighting New Opportunities. The co-production process in RWLs opens new avenues for collaboration between stakeholders, researchers, and practitioners. This approach started in most of the Labs identifying innovative applicable solutions for DRM, DRR, and CCA, showcasing how transdisciplinary collaboration can lead to more effective and adaptable resilience strategies. For example, debriefing meetings where coproduction tools were first utilized as a result of capacity development processes (WP 4) revealed that the coproduction approach was considered effective in exploring complex information in a multi-stakeholder setting, compared to more traditional methods. Importance of Communication: RWL activities emphasized the importance of clear communication channels within RWLs and towards the external actors in DRR and CAA operation chains to reduce losses and effectively manage emergencies. Outcome 1 Output 1 Indicator 1 SO3 SO4 Summary reports of meetings available Further evidence monitoring the impact and effectiveness of these approaches are planned in the coming months (WP 3 and 4). Societal impact The progress so far has revealed valuable insights that will shape the high level architecture of the Data Fabric. Impact has already been achieved through the meetings with the RWL leads raising awareness for already available solutions but also connecting stakeholders. The Dissemination of the results of DIRECTED has been started through sharing the ambitions of DIRECTED in conferences. Scientifically, the Data Fabric developed along with the rest of the DIRECTED consortium will contribute to open-source solutions to DRR and CCA strategies, and provide a framework for communication between diverse regions and climate change needs. Outcome 3 Output 3a SO3 SO2 SO5 Meeting minutes 67 Periodic Report 1 Societal impact The (current) Danish version of the DamageCost model developed by DTU was adopted by the OS2 community, which is an open-source community for digital tools offered by and for public authorities in Denmark, completing the science to practice cycle. Outcome 4 Output 4 SO2 Code and documentation available: https://www .os2.eu/os2 skadesokonomi (in Danish) Economic impact Increasing Awareness on Silos in Data Interoperability and Governance. WP 1 has spotlighted the fragmentation in data interoperability and governance practices. Through RWLs activities the project outlined the potential for cohesive data sharing and governance structures, emphasizing the need for a unified approach to data management across different sectors involved in disaster resilience. Outcome 6 SO4 Meeting reports and outputs 68 Periodic Report 1 1.4 Publications Publications are listed on the Funding and Tenders Portal. A more detailed list of all including non-scientific publications can be found in the Communications and Disseminations Report (D6.2) 1.5 Update of the plan for exploitation and dissemination of results Update for Dissemination An update on plans for dissemination for Year 2 can be found in the deliverable D6.2 Communications and Dissemination Report Yr 1 at both project and beneficiary level. The report contains information of both a report of the previous years work and plans for Year 2 communication and dissemination. As we have now been working on the Year 2 Strategy for a few months, work has progressed and some of the predicted work within D6.2 has been completed. These include: • e-Learning - A series of four webinars for internal stakeholders to share information within Real World Labs with a range of guest speakers has been planned and are currently being advertised with internal participants. • An additional two papers are being worked on for the International Journal of DRR - focusing on topics around the co-creation, co-design, and co-validation of strategies and tools – bringing the total of papers planned for Yr 2 up from– one to three papers. • Two further blog posts have been completed as planned. Update for Exploitation As can be noted above under Task 6.3 Gaps and Opportunities report, work has been completed understanding some of the knowledge gaps and opportunities within stakeholders in the Project, to ensure stakeholders are better able to use the knowledge and product outputs of the Project more effectively. Because of the strong stakeholder engagement programmes within DIRECTED outlined in WP 1, WP 3 and WP 4, foreground work is being conducted in understanding our stakeholders, their challenges and needs that are then being integrated into our Key Exploitable Results, in particular the Data Fabric and how that can solve some of the informational and organisational issues of cross organisational and cross boundary challenges that are being faced by stakeholders in our Real World Labs and developing the Risk-Tandem Framework into a tool that has use beyond the Project at hand, providing tools and methodologies that can better assist co-production and design of tools that will ultimately be used by those stakeholders for better Disaster and Climate Adaptation Management. Therefore, as stakeholder engagement is a fundamental part of the Project – market readiness is likely to occur more quickly, with tools designed and already utilised in real world environments, with real world stakeholders – thus moving both of DIRECTED’s main Key Exploitable Results into TRL 8 position by the end of the Project (see also ). 69 Periodic Report 1 As we are early in the DIRECTED Project, and the Data Fabric and the Risk-Tandem Framework are not in a finished form and thus not enabled to be shown to potential markets at this point in the Project, our D6.5 Exploitation Roadmap/ Business Plan has not yet begun and is due for completion in month 48. However, we are planning to bring the start date for this work forward to month 30 to enable longer IP consideration and arrangements by partners, market research and competition analysis and to understand how the longer term exploitation of Data Fabric and tools could work. Our plans for engagement from M30 are as follows; Intellectual Property – assess intellectual property arrangements required for future use of the tools developed (beyond the Project period) Market Research – including demonstrations of tools to both RWL and external future potential users – targeting specific potential markets municipalities and local government, central government departments, first responder organisations, private sector e.g. relevant consultancies, insurance, recovery organisations. Competitive Analysis – examining potential competitive tools and learning from them, where the tools we have developed sit within the target markets, as well as defining our USP within the existing market Business Model Canvas Planning – defining the business models for each KER SWOT Analysis Market Targeting Analysis Go-to-Market/ Exploitation Road Map development Marketing Strategy + Investment material development Exploitation/ Business Modelling e.g. income/ cost planning/ modelling – type of organisation who will host and assist long-term exploitation of the tools Delivery Mechanism - (e.g. SaaS, external platform, licenses, subscription etc.) P&L Modelling Potential for Investment Continuity of tools (remain in-house, development or exploitation by external partners) Full use will be made of EU exploitation assistance where appropriate beginning in month 30 and we are currently in the process of understanding what is available to the Project. 70 Periodic Report 1 Table 13: Progress on Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) levels. Tool or model TRL Progress on innovations for interoperability TRL (a) SaferPLACES Digital Twin Solution for flood risk intelligence (GFZ, GECO) 7 [Web platform][Python code] Developing compliancy (API,REST) with RWLs input flood hazard/damage data (forecast and real-time). Output compliancy with Data Fabric and (b), (d), (e). 8 (b) RIMurban pluvial flood risk modelling and forecasting (GFZ) 6 [Numerical model] Added functionality for using additional input data sources, e.g. (c), and for merging model outputs (inundation maps) with data from other sources (remote sensing, VGI), and combining them with vulnerability models. 8 (c) Danube Model (PIK) 3 [Numerical Model] The Danube Model was reactivated with a new CaMa-Flood component, and the spatial discretization was streamlined from irregular subbasins to raster outputs with about four times higher resolution (~5 km with downscaling option to ~90 m). 5 (c) Seamless Forecasting Tool (PIK) 1 [Web platform] The fully implemented Danube Model shall be extended with seamless forecasting capability in a co-design mode with regional end users. For that purpose, a near real-time application has been tested with the Danube model so far. 2 (d) CLIMADA (ETH) 6 [Python code] (probabilistic risk assessment and adaptation option appraisal tool) Adding functionality for multicriteria inputs and analyses. 8 (e) Damage Cost and Adaptation Model – DCAM (DTU) 6 [QGIS tool] Added input compliancy with hazard data from (a), (b), and (c). Output compliancy with Data Fabric. Alignment with damage cost functions used in CLIMADA. Within the reporting period, the original Danish version of this tool was further mainstreamed and operationalized via the OS2 community of public authorities in Denmark (TRL8). Explorative work and prototyping, implementing DamageCost damage cost functions into CLIMADA is being carried out at DTU for Central Copenhagen (TRL5-6). Collection of data from e.g. CLIMADA and SaferPlaces for making the model available at a European level is ongoing. 8 (f) Connectivity Hub (SEI) 1 taxonomy 6 Connectivity Hub Development of an open-source taxonomy enabling external platforms to share qualitative data (e.g. lessons learned) seamlessly with the Hub (and other platforms/models potentially), to enhance 'search and discovery', and to maximise connections between the content. (g) Oasis-CAIMAN app (OASIS)* 6 Add flood hazard warnings (c), information on how to prepare for a disaster and links to, e.g. (a) and Data 8-9 71 Periodic Report 1 Fabric to ensure the wider exploitation of results. 2 Follow-up of recommendations and comments from previous review Nothing to report from previous reviews for reporting period 1. 3 Exploitation primarily in non-associated third countries At present the entire project is working within the EU and therefore innovation work is being targeted here and at present there are no concrete plans for exploitation in non-associated third countries. However, this may change with progress in the business and exploitation plan. 4 Open Science In relation to open science practices, numerous aspects can be highlighted. Many models and tools within the project are provided either as open-source and freely accessible (e.g. CLIMADA), or access can be granted upon request (e.g. RIM2D). Additionally, the codes for many of these tools (e.g. RIM2D, CLIMADA DamageCost Tool) are accessible on Git platforms, significantly enhancing their availability. Software developments of the components of the Data Fabric have also been made under open-source licences and have mostly been published freely accessible on GitHub. Technical models which are to be integrated into the Data Fabric are also mainly open source, such as the DTU cost damage model and CLIMADA, thus enabling the platform to be scalable and replicable. The open-source implementation therefore additionally supports further dissemination of the project infrastructure and practices to the broader EU. Efforts have also been made to ensure that all publications related to this Work Package during the project are published as open-source. Some examples of these practices can be found in section 1.2.2.2. Further on, in WP 2, as part of the open-science and interoperability strategy, all partners will focus on ensuring that the results of this Work Package are produced in a manner that allows for consistent outcomes using the same data and/or methodologies. All deliverables and project-related material intended for the public will be published on DIRECTED’s website, and disseminated according to the communication plan (WP 6). First research papers (currently being drafted) will be published in open access journals to support open science practices. First results have already been shared and discussed on conferences and within bodies of the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC). 72 Periodic Report 1 5 Deviations from the project plan 5.1 Work Packages 5.1.1 Work Package 1 Below we outline and clarify the deviations from the Description of Action (DoA) encountered in some Real World Labs (RWLs) by the end of the reporting period. The inherent complexities of RWLs and the dynamic landscape of stakeholders, along with their evolving priorities, can naturally lead to unforeseen deviations or minor adjustments from the original plans, which are detailed below. RWL 1: The Capital Region of Denmark In our Real World Lab, after the intensive work carried out with stakeholders around the Roskilde Fjord until summer 2023, we have not engaged that actively with them during the period of October 2023 to January 2024. This relative slowdown of activities in the fall-winter period was decided to use the time planning activities for 2024. The strategy follows the availability and the wishes of stakeholders, going through a three step plan ranging from interviews with stakeholders over workshops to end up with a plan for a scenario play, enacting a potential disaster in the Roskilde Fjord area involving all relevant stakeholders in DRM and CC. RWL 2: The Emilia-Romagna Region As anticipated in the Real World Labs description and setup (D 1.1) after the first meeting an extreme flood occurred in the Region (in May 2023) stopping de facto for months all the activities of the lab as most participants were involved in emergency and post event recovery actions. This led to an initial delay of planned activities for the summer period, with the need to reschedule the second meeting (initially planned before summer) to the end of September. This contingency has already been addressed as the meeting took place in late September 2023 and the subsequent activities with stakeholders were effectively resumed in fall 2023. RWL 3: Danube Region In October 2023, we received indications from stakeholders from the research and insurance industry, who had actually shown interest in the project and a willingness to support us with information over the course of the year, that human resources were too scarce to regularly attend meetings and properly support the project. Despite intensive efforts in all key areas of civil and disaster protection, as well as the insurance industry, to encourage potential stakeholders to actively participate in the project, the support was insufficient to proceed with the Belgrade test site. As we were already able to acquire enough stakeholders from all key groups for the Vienna test site in Austria and the Zala region in Hungary to activate the RWL Danube Region, we decided to concentrate the main focus on these two test sites. However, for our RWL to be still well representative of the complexities faced in DRM, DRR and CCA in the Danube Region, we are not limiting ourselves to these two countries when acquiring further stakeholders. Stakeholder recruitment in the Vienna test site on the part of civil protection agencies proved to be more challenging than anticipated. Although during meeting (video/phone calls) with stakeholders presenting the DIRECTED project or the Vienna test site, the necessity to pay more attention to climate change in order to better align disaster protection was emphasized, the perceived value of participating in the project as an information provider was generally 73 Periodic Report 1 considered low. The reason for this could be related to the fact that the Vienna disaster protection system is perceived by stakeholders themselves as highly advanced and state of the art, already. Despite initial optimism, several attempts to win over crisis and disaster management as a stakeholder for our Vienna test site failed. However, as the disaster control offices of all Austrian provinces work closely together and we have the support of the disaster control of the province of Salzburg, this setback can be partially compensated for. RWL 4: Rhine-Erft Region The focus of RWL 4 is at the moment on the extreme event of flooding. As the region of the Rhine-Erft RWL was at least partially affected by the flood in July 2021, the extreme event of flooding is still very present in the minds of people and decision makers. Also, even after over two and a half years, the revision of the event is not yet finished, as shown by previous discussions with the stakeholders. That is why the focus of RWL 4 in DIRECTED has been on the extreme event of flooding so far. In the second half of the project, the focus will be shifted towards other extreme climatic events and CCA in the Rhine-Erft Region. 5.1.2 Work Package 2 There are no deviations from the planned schedule to report. 5.1.3 Work Package 3 There are no deviations from the planned schedule to report. 5.1.4 Work Package 4 Due to delays faced in setting up and operationalizing the RWLs, two milestones have been delayed. These include M19 (meeting minutes from scoping consultations for mapping capacity development needs) that were supposed to begin formally by month 9, but the first semistructured interviews took place in month 15-16. Given that most of the RWLs were setting up their operations during 2023, needs for capacity development for co-production were low. However, WPs 3 and 4 have provided continuous support to RWLs through other engagements, including providing guidance for stakeholder identification and mapping (WP 3) which integrated Tandem guidance questions for enabling transdisciplinary spaces for collaboration (WP 4). Needs and opportunities were also scoped through knowledge co-production activities during the General Assembly in September 2023 in Cologne (evidence of which is now used to inform programming well beyond the context as described in D1.1). These (and the contributions to T2.1) therefore keep WP 4 on track to achieve its commitments as described under T4.2. Linking to this delay, the first update report under M15 was submitted in August 2024 (annual report refining and updating the Tandem cycle based on emerging evidence, working toward M20 and D4.3). Although the application of the Tandem framework has begun within the RiskTandem process, empirical evidence that could support its refinement and further development have been sparse until Q4 of 2023 due to delays as described above. Now that the RWLs are fully operational, it is expected that the availability of data enabling the achievement of M20 will rapidly increase. In addition, researchers from WP 3 and WP 4 have co-authored a journal paper reviewing and assessing the barriers and enablers to facilitating co-production based on lessons learned, which will further compliment WP 4s efforts to achieve these objectives. 80 Periodic Report 1 Coordination of task 6.3. Online 24/03/23 RIFS, GFZ, OASIS, SEI, TUBS, UCC RWL 2 workshop debriefs and further support Online 30/03/23 SEI, UCC, RIFS, RWLs 1-4 RWL 4 Online 21/04/23 EV, SEI, UCC Support and exchange RWL Online 21/04/23 EV, SEI, UCC RWL 4 workshop debriefs and further support Online 21/04/23 SEI, UCC, RIFS, RWLs 1-4 RWL 2 operative Online 10/05/23 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE Coordination of task 6.3. Online 22/05/23 RIFS, GFZ, OASIS, SEI, TUBS, UCC Preparation for the GA in Cologne Online 07/06/23 UCC, SEI, RWL 4 Coordination of task 6.3. Online 07/06/23 RIFS, GFZ, OASIS, SEI, TUBS, UCC RWL 3 workshop debriefs and further support Online 12/06/23 SEI, UCC, RIFS, RWLs 1-4 1st capacity development module Online 15/06/23 RWLs 1-4 RWL 4 Online 06/07/23 EV, GECO, Oasis Hub dissemination and case study Online 06/07/23 EV, GECO, Oasis Hub RWL 2 operative Online 03/08/23 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE RWL 4 Online 11/08/23 EV, Oasis Hub, SEI, TUB, 52°North Support and needs RWL Online 11/08/23 EV, Oasis Hub, SEI, TUB, 52°North Scoping consultations and needs analysis for the Data Fabric (WP 5) Online 11/08/23 RWLs 1, 3 and 4, 52North, SEI, DTU, GECO WP 5 Rhine-Erft RWL Online 11/08/23 52N, GECO, RWL Erftverband T2.2 Online 12/08/23 WP 5 Danube RWL Online 17/08/23 52N, GECO, RWL Danube Scoping consultations and needs analysis for the Data Fabric (WP 5) Online 17/08/23 RWLs 1, 3 and 4, 52North, SEI, DTU, GECO WP 5 Denmark RWL Online 18/08/23 52N, GECO, DTU, RWL Denmark Scoping consultations and needs analysis for the Data Fabric (WP 5) Online 18/08/23 RWLs 1, 3 and 4, 52North, SEI, DTU, GECO 81 Periodic Report 1 Coordination of task 6.3. Online 24/08/23 RIFS, GFZ, OASIS, SEI, TUBS, UCC Steering Committee meeting 2 Online 05/09/23 Work Package leads, RWLs 1-4., TUBS RWL 2 operative Online 12/09/23 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE Preparation for the GA in Cologne Online 13/09/23 UCC, SEI, RWL 4 General Assembly in Cologne Online 18/09/23 All project partners RWL 2 2nd Stakeholders Meeting Ferrara 28/09/23 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE, Stakeholders DAFF Event Budapest 09/10/23 Christopher G. & present consortium RWL 2 Debrief Online 16/10/23 RWL 2, SEI, UCC RWL 2 operative Online 17/10/23 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE, WP 3/WP 4 discussions to integrate Institutional Analysis Framework into Risk Tandem Online 17/10/23 UCC; RIFS; SEI T2.2 Online 15/11/23 WP 5 modellers Online 15/11/23 52N, GECO, GFZ, PIK, DTU, TUB, ETH, SEI RWL 2 Webinar Data and Tools Online 20/11/23 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE, EmiliaRomagna Region Third stakeholder meeting Bergheim 20/11/23 Representatives of EV, district of Euskrichen, district of Rhine-Erft, district of Rhein-Sieg, fire department Eftstadt, VdS Schadenverhutung GmbH, department of hydraulic engineering and water management University of Kaiserslautern-Landau (RPTU) Insurance Stakeholder engagement Vienna 26/11/23 Christopher G., representatives from Uniqa, Austrian Insurance Association and Generali RWL 2 operative Online 05/12/23 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE RWL 3 Technical Meeting Online 05/12/23 Stefano, Martin, Dominik RWL 3 Lead & WP 4 Online 06/12/23 Janne, Christopher, Dominik RWL 3 Testsite Update Online 08/12/23 Levente, Dominik WP 5 modellers Online 08/12/23 52N, GECO, GFZ, PIK, DTU, TUB, ETH, SEI 82 Periodic Report 1 Scoping consultations with RWL 1 begin (M4.2). Online 13/12/23 SEI, RWLs 1-4, UCC Scoping consultations with RWL 3 begin (M4.2). Online 14/12/23 SEI, RWLs 1-4, UCC RWL 3 & BMI Österreich Online 04/01/24 Nieves Kautny, Dominik Hedderich RWL 3 & EUSDR Online 15/01/24 Laszlo Balatonyi RWL 2 operative Online 16/01/24 RWL lead, GECO, ARPAE T2.1 Online 16/01/24 RWL 4 Online 22/01/24 EV, RIFS, Lena Hellfors RWL 4 Online 22/01/24 EV, SEI, UCC, RIFS master thesis Lena Hellfors in WP 3 Online 22/01/24 EV, RIFS serious game/table top exercise RWL 4 Online 22/01/24 EV, RIFS, SEI, UCC RWL 4 Online 08/02/24 EV, GFZ RWL 4 Online 05/03/24 EV, GECO, Oasis Hub, RIFS, SEI, UCC RWL 4 Online 06/03/24 EV, 52°North, TUB, Stakeholder Steering Committee meeting 3 Online 12/03/24 Work Package leads, RWLs 1-4., TUBS WP 3/WP 4 coordination meeting Online Every Monday SEI, UCC, RIFS, IIASA, TUBS, OASIS DIRECTED Jour-Fixe Online Every other Thursday All project partners and RWLs WP 5 internal meeting Online Frequent (slack) 52N, GECO, 83 Periodic Report 1 Partners