Recent Papers on Sustainable Flood Risk Management
Content Table
- Flood vulnerability indices at varying spatial scales
- Attribution of flood risk in urban areas
- Exploring local knowledge of the flooding risk of the Scheldt Estuary
- Application of scenario technique in flood risk management
- Flood risk mapping at European scale
- Transboundary flood management in the Rhine basin: challenges for improved cooperation
- Integrated flood management
- Decision support system for urban flood management
- A spatial multi-objective decision-making under uncertainty for water resources management
- Resilience and flood risk management
Flood vulnerability indices at varying spatial scales
Water Science & Technology—WST Vol 60 No 10 pp 2571–2580 © IWA Publishing 2009 doi:10.2166/wst.2009.183
S. F. Balica, N. Douben and N. G. Wright
UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, Delft, The Netherlands E-mail: s.balica@unesco-ihe.org; n.wright@unesco-ihe.org
Waterboard Brabantse Delta, Breda, The Netherlands E-mail: k.douben@brabantsedelta.nl
Abstract
Populations around the world are vulnerable to natural disasters. Such disasters are occurring with increased frequency as a consequence of socio-economic and land-use developments and due to increased climate variability. This paper describes a methodology for using indicators to compute a Flood Vulnerability Index which is aimed at assessing the conditions which influence flood damage at various spatial scales: river basin, sub-catchment and urban area. The methodology developed distinguishes different characteristics at each identified spatial scale, thus allowing a more in-depth analysis and interpretation of local indicators. This also pinpoints local hotspots of flood vulnerability. The final results are presented by means of a standardised number, ranging from 0 to 1, which symbolises comparatively low or high flood vulnerability between the various spatial scales. The Flood Vulnerability Index can be used by international river basin organisations to identify and develop action plans to deal with floods and flooding or on smaller scales to improve local decision-making processes by selecting measures to reduce vulnerability at local and regional levels. In this work the methodology has been applied to various case studies at different spatial scales. This leads to some interesting observations on how flood vulnerability can be reflected by quantifiable indicators across scales, e.g. the relationship between the flood vulnerability of a sub-catchment with its river basin or the weak relation between the flood vulnerability of an urban area with the sub-catchment or river basin which it belongs to.
Attribution of flood risk in urban areas
Journal of Hydroinformatics Vol 10 No 4 pp 275–288 © IWA Publishing 2008 doi:10.2166/hydro.2008.054
R. J. Dawson, L. Speight, J. W. Hall, S. Djordjevic, D. Savic and J. Leandro
School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, University of Newcastle, Cassie Building, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK E-mail: richard.dawson@newcastle.ac.uk
Centre for Water Systems, University of Exeter, North Park Road, Exeter EX4 4QF, UK
Abstract
Flooding in urban areas represents a particular challenge to modellers and flood risk managers because of the complex interactions of surface and sewer flows. Quantified flood risk estimates provide a common metric that can be used to compare risks from different sources. In situations where there are several organisations responsible for flood risk management we wish to be able to disaggregate the total risk and attribute it to different components in the system and/or agents with responsibility for risk reduction in order to target management actions. Two approaches to risk attribution are discussed: Standards-based attribution, which is a deterministic approach, based upon the performance of different engineering components in the system at their “design standard”. Sensitivity-based attribution, which apportions risk between the variables that influence the total flood risk.
Whilst both these approaches are feasible for the small system considered here, in practice urban flooding systems involve tens of thousands of variables. The only feasible approach to tackling this problem for large urban systems is therefore by hierarchical simplification of the system, with the attribution analysis being applied in several tiers of detail. In this paper, the applicability of a hierarchical approach is demonstrated in the context of sewer pipe blockages. The results demonstrate the potential of attribution methods to support the development of integrated urban flood risk management strategies, as they can identify the forcing variables and infrastructure components that have the most influence upon flood risk.
Exploring local knowledge of the flooding risk of the Scheldt Estuary
Water Science & Technology Vol 56 No 4 pp 79–86 © IWA Publishing 2007 doi:10.2166/wst.2007.539
J. Slinger*, M. Muller** and M. Hendriks***
*Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, PO Box 5015, 2600 BX , Delft, Netherlands (E-mail: j.h.slinger@tbm.tudelft.nl)
**Delta, Independent weekly paper of Delft University of Technology, PO Box 139, 2600 AC , Delft, Netherlands (E-mail: m.muller@tudelft.nl)
***Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, PO Box 20904, 2500 EX The Haag, Netherlands (E-mail: michelle.hendriks@minvenw.nl)
Abstract
‘The public should be involved in the decision making process’ is an oft heard statement, but the practice of public participation remains a worrisome issue for policy makers and planners. In this paper we describe local knowledge of flooding risk in the vicinity of the Scheldt Estuary derived through in-depth, semi-structured interviews with fourteen inhabitants. We compare and contrast this knowledge with that of scientists involved in the assessment of the flooding hazard posed by the tidal Scheldt and with that of Dutch and Flemish policy advisors. We identify areas of common knowledge, confirm the accuracy of much local knowledge and recognize the percipience of a number of the questions posed by local inhabitants. This exploratory study serves to confirm that background local knowledge can be a valuable tool in designing responsible policy processes for flood risk management.
Application of scenario technique in flood risk management
Water Science & Technology Vol 56 No 4 pp 87–95 © IWA Publishing 2007 doi:10.2166/wst.2007.540
A. Winterscheid
Darmstadt University of Technology, Institute of Hydraulic and Water Resources Engineering, Petersenstr. 13, 64287 , Darmstadt, Germany (E-mail: winterscheid@ihwb.tu-darmstadt.de)
Abstract
It is now commonly accepted that the management of flood risks has to be fulfilled within an integrated framework. About two decades ago flood risk was managed from a limited perspective predominantly by means of structural measures aimed at flood control. In contrast integrated flood risk management incorporates the complete management cycle consisting of the phases prevention, protection and preparedness. In theory it is a well described concept. In the stage of implementation, however, there is often a lack of support although a consistent policy framework exists. Consequently, the degree of implementation must be rated as inadequate in many cases. In particular this refers to the elements which focus on preparedness and prevention. The study to which this paper refers emphasises the means and potentials of scenario technique to foster the implementation of potentially appropriate measures and new societal arrangements when applied in the framework of integrated flood risk management. A literature review is carried out to reveal the state-of-the-art and the specific problem framework within which scenario technique is generally being applied. Subsequently, it is demonstrated that scenario technique is transferable to a policy making process in flood risk management that is integrated, sustainable and interactive. The study concludes with a recommendation for three applications in which the implementation of measures of flood damage prevention and preparedness is supported by scenario technique.
Flood risk mapping at European scale
Water Science & Technology Vol 56 No 4 pp 11–17 © IWA Publishing 2007 doi:10.2166/wst.2007.531
J.I. Barredo, A. de Roo and C. Lavalle
European Commission – DG Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Land Management & Natural Hazards Unit TP 261, 21020 , Ispra, (VA), Italy (E-mail: jose.barredo@jrc.it)
Abstract
The aim of this article is to illustrate a framework for flood risk mapping at pan-European scale produced by the Weather-Driven Natural Hazards (WDNH) action of the EC-JRC-IES. Early results are presented in the form of flood risk index maps. We assess several flood risk factors that contribute to the occurrence of flood disasters. Among the causal factors of a flood disaster one is triggering a natural event in the form of extreme precipitation and consequently extreme river discharge and extreme flood water levels. The threatening natural event represents the hazard component in our assessment. Furthermore exposure and vulnerability are anthropogenic factors that contribute also to flood risk. In the proposed approach, flood risk is considered on the light of exposure, vulnerability and hazard. We use a methodology with a marked territorial approach for the assessment of the flood risk. Hence, based on mathematical calculations, risk is the product of hazard, exposure and vulnerability. Improvements on datasets availability and spatial scale are foreseen in the next phases of this study. This study is also a contribution to the discussion about the need for communication tools between the natural hazard scientific community and the political and decision making players in this field.
Transboundary flood management in the Rhine basin: challenges for improved cooperation
Water Science & Technology Vol 56 No 4 pp 125–135 © IWA Publishing 2007 doi:10.2166/wst.2007.544
G. Becker, J. Aerts and D. Huitema
Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands (E-mail: gert.becker@ivm.falw.vu.nl)
Abstract
An appropriate institutional set up is essential for efficient transboundary flood management in the Rhine basin, particularly in view of future uncertainties like climate change. Flood management factors are identified based on a historical comparison in the Netherlands and Germany. They include differences in the perception of the problem and how to solve it; in the understanding of key items and how to address them; in administrative responsibilities and the political will to act. Suggestions are made to improve cooperation, in particular to generate a common problem perception and problem analysis, to develop a common vision for future flood strategies and to create a network of discussion platforms to promote social learning and to prepare, decide and implement flood management issues.
Integrated flood management
Water Science & Technology Vol 56 No 4 pp 97–103 © IWA Publishing 2007 doi:10.2166/wst.2007.541
W. Grabs, A.C. Tyagi and M. Hyodo
World Meteorological Organization, 7bis avenue de la Paix, Case postale No. 2300, CH-1211, Geneva 2, Switzerland (E-mail: atyagi@wmo.int; mhyodo@wmo.int)
Abstract
While there have been a number of international initiatives centred around hydrological sciences and technical approaches, the social, economic, environmental, and legal and institutional aspects of flood management have been dealt with sporadically and in a limited manner. WMO and the Global Water Partnership have established the Associated Programme on Flood Management (APFM) to address these issues and developed a concept of Integrated Flood Management (IFM) in 2002. This article is the result of the integrated flood management approaches through pilot projects and multi-disciplinary approaches launched by the initiative since the establishment of the IFM concept. This approach seeks to integrate land- and water-resources development in a river basin, within the context of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and aims at maximizing the benefits from floodplains and at the same time reducing loss of life from flooding. This approach identified the key elements of IFM and recommended that these can be put in place by: adopting a basin approach to flood management; adopting a multi-disciplinary approach in flood management; reducing vulnerability to and risks from flooding; enabling community participation; and preserving ecosystems; and addressing climate change and variability, supported by enabling mechanism through appropriate legislation and regulations.
Decision support system for urban flood management
Journal of Hydroinformatics 7 (2005) 3-15
A. J. Abebe and R. K. Price
Hydroinformatics & Knowledge Management, UNESCO-IHE, PO Box 3015, 2601DA Delft, The Netherlands Tel.: +31 15 215 1839 Fax: +31 15 212 2921 E-mail: abebe@ihe.nl
Hydroinformatics & Knowledge Management, UNESCO-IHE, PO Box 3015, 2601DA Delft, The Netherlands Tel.: +31 15 215 1839 Fax: +31 15 212 2921 E-mail: rkp@ihe.nl
Abstract
This paper presents the development of a decision support system (DSS) for flood warning and instantiation of restoration activities in two urban areas, the Liguria Region in Italy and the Greater Athens catchment in Greece, with the potential of extension to other locations with similar flooding problems. The tool is designed to work at the centre of a set of meteorological and hydrologic/hydraulic forecast models together with telemetric data acquisition networks. The study reveals the complexity and uncertainty involved in managing flooding in the study areas. Issues about the validity and extended benefits of the system are also discussed.
A spatial multi-objective decision-making under uncertainty for water resources management
Journal of Hydroinformatics 7 (2005) 117-133
Slobodan P. Simonovic and Nirupama
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada, E-mail: ssimonovic@eng.uwo.ca
Applied Disaster and Emergency Studies, Brandon University, Brandon, Canada
Abstract
Water resources decision-making is a spatial problem. Topographical features of the region, location of water resources management infrastructure, interaction between the water resources system and other social and ecological systems and impact of different water resources regulation measures are all variables with considerable spatial variability. In this paper a new technique called Spatial Fuzzy Compromise Programming (SFCP) is developed to enhance our ability to address different uncertainties in spatial water resources decision-making. A general fuzzy compromise programming technique, when made spatially distributed, proved to be a powerful and flexible addition to the list of techniques available for decision-making where multiple criteria are used to evaluate multiple alternatives. All uncertain variables (subjective and objective) are modeled by way of fuzzy sets. Through a case study of the Red River floodplain near the City of St. Adolphe in Manitoba, Canada, it has been illustrated that the new technique provides measurable improvement in the management of floods.
Resilience and flood risk management
Water Policy 6 Number 1 (2004) 53-66
K.M. de Bruijn
Delft University of Technology, Department of Land and Water Management, PO Box 5048, NL-2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands. Fax: +31 15 278 5559; E-mail: Karin.debruijn@wldelft.nl
Abstract
Since flood disasters still occur and even increase in frequency and severity, flood risk management must be reconsidered. This paper describes a new way of looking at flood risk management by applying a systems approach. This approach may result in flood risk management that is better suited to the socio-economic context in which this flood risk management occurs. The systems approach allows the definition of resilience and resistance strategies for flood risk management. Resistance strategies aim at flood prevention, while resilience strategies aim at minimising flood impacts and enhancing the recovery from those impacts. A resilience strategy is supposed to be able to better cope with uncertainties than a resistance strategy. To enable the evaluation of resilience and resistance strategies under different conditions the concepts of resilience and resistance must first be sufficiently understood. This paper discusses the meaning of resilience and resistance and applies the concepts to flood risk management systems. This discussion is exemplified by The Netherlands' flood risk management.
