A structured approach to enhance flood hazard assessment in mountain streams

An evidence-based flood hazard analysis in mountain streams requires the identification and the quantitative characterisation of multiple possible processes. These processes result from specific triggering mechanisms on the hillslopes (i.e. landslides, debris flows), in-channel morphodynamic processes associated with sudden bed changes and stochastic processes taking place at critical stream configurations (e.g. occlusion of bridges, failure of levees). From a hazard assessment perspective, such possible processes are related to considerable uncertainties underlying the hydrological cause-effect chains. Overcoming these uncertainties still remains a major challenge in hazard and risk assessment and represents a necessary condition for a reliable spatial representation of process intensities and the associated probabilities. As a result of an accurate analysis of the conceptual flaws present in the procedures currently employed for hazard mapping in South Tyrol (Italy) and Carinthia (Austria), we propose a structured approach as a means to enhance the integration of hillslope, morphodynamic and stochastic processes into conventional flood hazard prediction for mountain basins. To this aim, a functional distinction is introduced between prevailing one-dimensional and two-dimensional process propagation domains, i.e., between confined and semi- to unconfined stream segments. The former domains are mostly responsible for the generation of water, sediment and wood fluxes, and the latter are where flooding of inactive channel areas (i.e. alluvial fans, floodplains) can occur. For the 1D process propagation domain, we discuss how to carry out a process routing along the stream system and how to integrate numerical models output with expert judgement in order to derive consistent event scenarios, thus providing a consistent quantification of the input variables needed for the associated 2D domains. Within these latter domains, two main types of spatial sub-domains can be identified based on the predictability of their dynamics, i.e., stochastic and quasi-deterministic. Advantages and limitations offered by this methodology are finally discussed with respect to hazard and risk assessment in mountain basins.

[1]  Z. Kundzewicz,et al.  Summer Floods in Central Europe – Climate Change Track? , 2005 .

[2]  Andreas Paul Zischg,et al.  Modelling woody material transport and deposition in alpine rivers , 2011 .

[3]  José I. Barredo,et al.  Major flood disasters in Europe: 1950–2005 , 2007 .

[4]  Andreas Paul Zischg,et al.  Temporal variability of damage potential on roads as a conceptual contribution towards a short-term avalanche risk simulation , 2005 .

[5]  J. K. Mitchell,et al.  European River Floods in a Changing World , 2003, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[6]  M. Elisabeth Paté-Cornell,et al.  Uncertainties in risk analysis: Six levels of treatment , 1996 .

[7]  Peter A. Vanrolleghem,et al.  Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process - A framework and guidance , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[8]  Michael Schäfer,et al.  Computational Engineering - Introduction to Numerical Methods , 2006 .

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

[10]  F. O. Hoffman,et al.  Propagation of uncertainty in risk assessments: the need to distinguish between uncertainty due to lack of knowledge and uncertainty due to variability. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[11]  M. J. Kolkman,et al.  Mental model mapping as a new tool to analyse the use of information in decision-making in integrated water management , 2005 .

[12]  Armin Scholl,et al.  Planung und Entscheidung : Konzepte, Modelle und Methoden einer modernen betriebswirtschaftlichen Entscheidungsanalyse ; [unserem akademischen Lehrer Wolfgang Domschke zum 60. Geburtstag] , 2004 .

[13]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Improving risk assessment by defining consistent and reliable system scenarios , 2009 .

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

[15]  Jerome R. Ravetz,et al.  Uncertainty, complexity and post-normal science , 1994 .

[16]  HighWire Press Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[17]  J. Knight,et al.  Climate change and geomorphological hazards in the eastern European Alps , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[18]  I. Gilboa Theory Of Decision Under Uncertainty , 2009 .

[19]  J. Christensen,et al.  Climate modelling: Severe summertime flooding in Europe , 2003, Nature.

[20]  Lorenzo Marchi,et al.  Large Wood And Flash Floods: Evidence From The2007 Event In The Davča Basin (Slovenia) , 2008 .

[21]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  Fuzzy Formative Scenario Analysis for woody material transport related risks in mountain torrents , 2010, Environ. Model. Softw..

[22]  Bruno Merz,et al.  Influence of dike breaches on flood frequency estimation , 2009, Comput. Geosci..

[23]  Keith Beven,et al.  Uncertainty in flood estimation , 2009 .

[24]  F. Comiti,et al.  Determining flood hazard patterns through a combined stochastic–deterministic approach , 2011 .

[25]  Sven Fuchs,et al.  The net benefit of public expenditures on avalanche defence structures in the municipality of Davos , Switzerland , 2005 .

[26]  Roland W. Scholz,et al.  Embedded Case Study Methods , 2002 .

[27]  F. Comiti,et al.  Relationships Among Basin Area,Sediment Transport Mechanisms AndWood Storage In Mountain Basins Of TheDolomites (Italian Alps) , 2008 .

[28]  Andreas Kääb,et al.  Regional-scale GIS-models for assessment of hazards from glacier lake outbursts: evaluation and application in the Swiss Alps , 2003 .