Recommendations for the user-specific enhancement of flood maps

Abstract. The European Union Floods Directive requires the establishment of flood maps for high risk areas in all European member states by 2013. However, the current practice of flood mapping in Europe still shows some deficits. Firstly, flood maps are frequently seen as an information tool rather than a communication tool. This means that, for example, local stocks of knowledge are not incorporated. Secondly, the contents of flood maps often do not match the requirements of the end-users. Finally, flood maps are often designed and visualised in a way that cannot be easily understood by residents at risk and/or that is not suitable for the respective needs of public authorities in risk and event management. The RISK MAP project examined how end-user participation in the mapping process may be used to overcome these barriers and enhance the communicative power of flood maps, fundamentally increasing their effectiveness. Based on empirical findings from a participatory approach that incorporated interviews, workshops and eye-tracking tests, conducted in five European case studies, this paper outlines recommendations for user-specific enhancements of flood maps. More specific, recommendations are given with regard to (1) appropriate stakeholder participation processes, which allow incorporating local knowledge and preferences, (2) the improvement of the contents of flood maps by considering user-specific needs and (3) the improvement of the visualisation of risk maps in order to produce user-friendly and understandable risk maps for the user groups concerned. Furthermore, "idealised" maps for different user groups are presented: for strategic planning, emergency management and the public.

[1]  C. Lavalle,et al.  Flood risk mapping at European scale. , 2007, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[2]  Frans Klijn,et al.  Risky places in the Netherlands: a first approximation for floods , 2009 .

[3]  MARY W. DOWNTON,et al.  How Accurate are Disaster Loss Data? The Case of U.S. Flood Damage , 2005 .

[4]  Dirk Heinrichs,et al.  SOCIO-ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE AND FLOOD RISKS: THE CASE OF SANTIAGO DE CHILE , 2010 .

[5]  Peter Zeisler.  Hochwassergefahrenkarten aus Sicht der Praxis , 2010 .

[6]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Evaluating cartographic design in flood risk mapping , 2009 .

[7]  Jean-Stéphane Bailly,et al.  Analyse de sensibilité globale d'un modèle spatialisé pour l'évaluation économique du risque d'inondation , 2011 .

[8]  Volker Meyer,et al.  Flood Risk Assessment in European River Basins—Concept, Methods, and Challenges Exemplified at the Mulde River , 2009, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[9]  Klaus J. Wagner,et al.  Evaluation of flood hazard maps in print and web mapping services as information tools in flood risk communication. , 2009 .

[10]  Markus Holub,et al.  Mitigating mountain hazards in Austria – legislation, risk transfer, and awareness building , 2009 .

[11]  Graham A. Tobin,et al.  Efficient and effective? The 100-year flood in the communication and perception of flood risk , 2007 .

[12]  Anna Scolobig,et al.  Towards flood risk management with the people at risk: From scientific analysis to practice recommendations (and back) , 2009 .

[13]  H. Moel,et al.  Flood maps in Europe – methods, availability and use , 2009 .

[14]  Bruno Merz,et al.  Hochwasserrisiken : Grenzen und Möglichkeiten der Risikoabschätzung , 2006 .

[15]  B. Merz,et al.  Flood-risk mapping: contributions towards an enhanced assessment of extreme events and associated risks , 2006 .

[16]  S. Cronin,et al.  Participatory methods of incorporating scientific with traditional knowledge for volcanic hazard management on Ambae Island, Vanuatu , 2004 .

[17]  Stefan Lang,et al.  Spatial vulnerability units – expert-based spatial modelling of socio-economic vulnerability in the Salzach catchment, Austria , 2009 .

[18]  Frédéric Leone,et al.  The interest of cartography for a better perception and management of volcanic risk: From scientific to social representations: The case of Mt. Pelée volcano, Martinique (Lesser Antilles) , 2009 .

[19]  G. Rowe,et al.  Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation , 2000 .

[20]  Herwig Unnerstall.  Legal Framework for Public Participation in Flood Risk Mapping – A Comparative Study of the Responses of Different European Member States to Some Requirements of the Floods Directive , 2010 .

[21]  Nick Hanley,et al.  Citizens' Juries: An Aid to Environmental Valuation? , 2001 .

[22]  A. Stirling.  Analysis, participation and power: justification and closure in participatory multi-criteria analysis , 2006 .

[23]  John Handmer,et al.  The Chimera of Precision: Inherent Uncertainties in Disaster Loss Assessment , 2002, International Journal of Mass Emergencies & Disasters.

[24]  Christophe Viavattene,et al.  Narrowing the focus: public understanding of flood maps in the River Thames catchment , 2011 .

[25]  Nicholas Frank Pidgeon,et al.  Volcanic hazard communication using maps: an evaluation of their effectiveness , 2007 .

[26]  Kurt Hans Rudolf Hollenstein,et al.  Analyse, Bewertung und Management von Naturrisiken , 1996 .

[27]  B. Merz,et al.  Flood Risk Mapping At The Local Scale: Concepts and Challenges , 2007 .

[28]  Michael Bründl,et al.  Avalanche Hazard Mitigation Strategies Assessed by Cost Effectiveness Analyses and Cost Benefit Analyses—evidence from Davos, Switzerland , 2007 .

[29]  Kate Burningham,et al.  'It'll never happen to me': understanding public awareness of local flood risk. , 2008, Disasters.

[30]  H. M. Collins,et al.  The Third Wave of Science Studies , 2002, Science, Technology, and Society.