Framework for assessing the performance of flood adaptation innovations using a risk‐based approach

The application of risk-based approaches for the design of flood infrastructure has become increasingly common in flood management. This approach, based on risk reduction and reliability, is used to assess the performance of conventional interventions (e.g., flood defences and dams) and to support decisions regarding their implementation. However, for more innovative solutions, performance has often not been quantified by means of these metrics and, therefore, end-users are hesitant to implement them in existing flood risk reduction systems. To overcome the gap between innovators and end-users, we present a framework based on four performance indicators, to ensure the required insights in risk and reliability are provided. The four indicators: effectiveness, durability, reliability and costs, allow end-users to evaluate, select, and implement flood adaptation innovations, and provide innovators with insight into the performance of the technology and the criteria and information necessary for successful market uptake of their innovation. The practical application of the framework is demonstrated for a (hypothetical) case of a hospital complex built in an area that has subsided below the surrounding area, which is subject to tropical rain showers. The following innovations are considered: an early flood warning system, a green roof, and a temporary flood barrier.

[1]  Daniel Straub,et al.  Quantifying the effectiveness of early warning systems for natural hazards , 2015 .

[2]  J. K. Vrijling,et al.  Probabilistic design of water defense systems in The Netherlands , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[3]  C. Field,et al.  Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability - Part B: regional aspects - Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2014 .

[4]  D. Dantzig Economic decision problems for flood prevention , 1956 .

[5]  A. Tarlock United States Flood Control Policy: The Incomplete Transition from the Illusion of Total Protection to Risk Management , 2012 .

[6]  R. Dawson,et al.  A methodology for national-scale flood risk assessment , 2003 .

[7]  Sebastiaan N. Jonkman,et al.  Storm Surge Barrier: Overview and Design Considerations , 2014 .

[8]  Sebastiaan N. Jonkman,et al.  RISK-BASED DESIGN OF FLOOD DEFENCE SYSTEMS - A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW ORLEANS METROPOLITAN AREA , 2008 .

[9]  John E. Costa,et al.  The dilemma of flood control in the United States , 1978 .

[10]  Stefan Margreth,et al.  Effectiveness of mitigation measures against natural hazards , 2010 .

[11]  Donald L. Ward,et al.  Evaluation of temporary flood-fighting structures , 2016 .

[12]  M. Pelling,et al.  Determinants of risk: Exposure and vulnerability , 2012 .

[13]  R. Nicholls,et al.  Future flood losses in major coastal cities , 2013 .

[14]  Robert G. Bea Human and organization factors: engineering operating safety into offshore structures , 1998 .

[15]  Jochen Schanze,et al.  FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT – A BASIC FRAMEWORK , 2006 .

[16]  Zheng Fang,et al.  Case Study of Flood Mitigation and Hazard Management at the Texas Medical Center in the Wake of Tropical Storm Allison in 2001 , 2014 .

[17]  T. Schweckendiek,et al.  Economic optimization of coastal flood defense systems , 2017, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[18]  Sebastiaan N. Jonkman,et al.  Effectiveness of emergency measures for flood prevention , 2016 .

[19]  H. Kreibich,et al.  Adaptive flood risk management planning based on a comprehensive flood risk conceptualisation , 2015, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

[20]  J. K. Vrijling,et al.  Optimal dike height under statistical -, construction-and damage uncertainty , .

[21]  Gildas Colleter,et al.  REMOTELY SENSED DATA FOR WAVE PROFILE ANALYSIS , 2012 .

[22]  Flood Risk Management: Call for a National Strategy , 2014 .

[23]  T. Schweckendiek,et al.  Developments in Levee Reliability and Flood Risk Analysis in the Netherlands , 2015 .

[24]  F. Klijn,et al.  Explaining differences in flood management approaches in Europe and in the USA – a comparative analysis , 2017 .

[25]  N. Nicholls Comments on "Have disaster losses increased due to anthropogenic climate change?" , 2011 .

[26]  Daniel Straub,et al.  Reliability and effectiveness of early warning systems for natural hazards: Concept and application to debris flow warning , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[27]  Jessica Ludy,et al.  Flood risk perception in lands “protected” by 100-year levees , 2012, Natural Hazards.

[28]  Iris F. A. Vis,et al.  Exploring Logistics Aspects of Flood Emergency Measures , 2012 .

[29]  J. K. Vrijling,et al.  Acceptable risk as a basis for design , 1998 .

[30]  Paul Sayers,et al.  Broad‐scale reliability analysis of the flood defence infrastructure within the Taihu Basin, China , 2013 .

[31]  Andreas Schumann,et al.  Flood Safety versus Remaining Risks - Options and Limitations of Probabilistic Concepts in Flood Management , 2017, Water Resources Management.

[32]  J. K. Vrijling,et al.  A framework for risk evaluation , 1995 .

[33]  M. Ha-Duong,et al.  Climate change 2014 - Mitigation of climate change , 2015 .

[34]  P. Hoeppe Trends in weather related disasters – Consequences for insurers and society , 2016 .

[35]  L. Bouwer Have disaster losses increased due to anthropogenic climate change , 2011 .

[36]  Henri de Corn,et al.  Method to Account for Human Intervention in Calculating the Probability of Failure , 2013 .

[37]  David R. Maidment,et al.  Handbook of Hydrology , 1993 .

[38]  Barbara Zanuttigh,et al.  THESEUS decision support system for coastal risk management , 2014 .