There is something to it - of course the waterways need to be worked on. However, when investigating a problem in principle, it is always initially about uncovering the causes. Don’t worry, I don’t want to start a discussion about global warming, etc. - but it is indisputable that the rainwater runoff ends up too quickly in the sewage system and rivers - precisely because of the gigantic sealed surfaces that are constantly increasing on a large scale. If the water arrives with a time delay, it causes less damage, and as we have now learned again, it often comes down to a difference of a few centimeters in water level as to whether cities flood or not. Please also consider in this context heavy rain events caused by thunderstorms with corresponding heavy downpours, where 80, 100 or more liters per square meter fall within a few hours - with corresponding sewer backflow and floods, etc... all of this is connected. It simply makes no sense to build increasingly larger channels and retention facilities with gigantic effort before one has worked on the fundamental causes. The economic damages are immense - not only due to large floods - see the relevant RIMAX and URBAS studies already conducted by the Ministry of Environment or Ministry of Economy. Small de-sealing measures, etc., when applied on a large scale, have great effects - see studies by Prof. Sieker. It’s not as if there is no positive evidence for this approach - and here again the question arises as to which approach yields the greater benefit for how much investment - and the advantage is provenly clearly on the side of nature-oriented rainwater management.