Integrated assessment of urban flood risk, coping capacity and vulnerability

Transcription

1 IAPS 00 Integrated assessment of urban flood risk, coping capacity and vulnerability Sebastian Scheuer Dagmar Haase Volker Meyer Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Institute for Geography, Department of Landscape Ecology Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research UFZ, Department of Economics

2 Contents. Introduction. Starting-Point View. End-Point View. Discussion. Conclusion 7 0 IAPS 00

3 (All pictures: UFZ) IAPS 00

4 Introduction Flood risk management is increasingly in the focus of decisionmakers (Meyer, 007; Schanze, 006; Vetere Arellano et al., 007): Flood risk assessment Flood risk mitigation Many catastrophic floods in the last decade: : worldwide damages from $0- billion each year (Munich Re Group, 00, 006, 007, 008, 009) 99-00: worldwide in average 889. people /00,000 inhabitants killed or otherwise affected each year (Guha-Sapir et al., 00). IAPS 00

5 Introduction Risk as a function of the characteristics of elements at risk and flood hazard Vulnerability: integrative aspect of the analysis Starting-Point/End-Point concept (Kelly & Adger, 000): Starting-Point Risk: R S = D x P (Fuchs, 009; Knight, 9) = Starting-Point View End-Point Risk: R E = R S - C = End-Point View IAPS 00

6 Introduction Intensity Flood Hazard Probability (P) Elements at risk Exposition Susceptibility Type Means to cope Damage (D) Coping Capacity (C) Risk (R S ) AACC End-Point Risk (R E ) 0 ) Huntingdon & MacDougall, 00; ) Merz et al., 007; Meyer et al., 007 IAPS 00 6

7 Starting-Point View Leipzig was chosen as an urban test site due to its dense and ramified Economy river network Society Environment Land Value Children Biotopes and forests sensitive to inundation Transport Infrastructure Senior citizens Residential Buildings, Industry & Business Remaining population Areas with erosion pontential Recreation (e.g. Allotments) Social community facilities Contaminated sites (brownfields) 0 Kubal et al., 009. IAPS 00 7

8 Starting-Point View Data Evaluation of Damages (Stage-Damage functions) Determination of Risk Standardization Application of Weights Multicriteria Risk Map IAPS 00 8

9 Starting-Point View Kubal et al., 009 IAPS 00 9

10 Starting-Point View Kubal et al., 009 IAPS 00 0

11 End-Point View Requires the assessment of means to cope with disaster Coping Capacity (Kienberger, 009) Estimates R E, given the starting-point risk R S This is not a static measure, but depends on (Lebel et al., 006): Preparedness Functionality during a hazard depending (critical infrastructure) Reconstruction, Adaptation IAPS 00

12 End-Point View Economy Society Environment Household income Nr. of doctors Young people share Ecosystem Resilience Unemployment share Provisioning facilities Nr. of Hospital beds Accesibility to public transport Criteria set used to assess the coping capacity for the city of Leipzig: Solid lines indicate criteria which are independent from hazard impact. Dotted lines indicate criteria which resemble elements at risk themselves and are assessed hazard-dependently. Environmental coping criteria have not been included in the case study. IAPS 00

13 End-Point View Hazard-independent Coping Capacity Hazard-dependent Coping Capacity (Critical Infastructure) Annual Average Coping Capacity AACC (analogous to risk) For each flood hazard 0 IAPS 00

14 End-Point View Overlay of R s and AACC Identify combinations qualitatively estimate End-Point Risk End-Point Risk Estimate AACC Starting-Point Risk AACC End-Point Risk Estimate Low Low Moderate Low High Low High Low High High High Moderate Starting-Point Risk IAPS 00

15 End-Point View IAPS 00

16 Discussion Open Questions: How can coping capacity be best related to risk to create an end-point view? Is the spatial reference area for coping capacity different from risk? How to deal with uncertainties? Uncertainties: Criteria set (which are suitable to create a complete but minimal set) Stage-Damage Functions Weights IAPS 00 6

17 Conclusion Integrative, participatory multicriteria approach Risk assessment Coping capacity assessment Application of methods originating from both natural and scoial sciences IAPS 00 7

18 Thank you for your attention! 8

19 References Fuchs, S., 009. Susceptibility versus resilience to mountain hazards in Austria - paradigms of vulnerability revisited, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 9, pp. 7-. Guha-Sapir, D., Hargitt, D., Hoyois, P., 00. Thirty years of natural disasters 97-00: The numbers. Louvain-la-Neuve. Huntingdon, S., MacDougall, K., 00. Flood risk, in: Fleming, G., FloodRisk Management, London, pp Kaplan, S., Garrick, B. J., 98. On The Quantitative Definition of Risk. Risk Analysis, pp. -7. Kelly P M, Adger W N (000) Theory and practice in assessing vulnerability to climate change and facilitating adaptation. Climate Change 7, -. Kienberger, S., Lang, S., Zeil, P., 009. Spatial vulnerability units - expert-based spatial modelling of socio-economic vulnerability in the Salzach catchment, Austria. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 9, pp Knight, F. H., 9. Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. Boston. Kubal T, Haase D, Meyer V, Scheuer S 009. Integrated urban flood risk assessment transplanting a multicriteria approach developed for a river basin to a city. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 9, Lebel, L, Nikitina, E., Kotov, V. u. Manuta, J (006): Assessing institutionalised capacities and practivces to reduce the risks of flood disaster. In: Birkmann, J. [Hrsg.](006): Measuring Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies. Tokyo, S Merz, B., Thieken, A. H., Gocht, M., 007. Flood risk mapping at the local scale: concepts and challenges, in: Begum, S., Stive, M. J. F., Hall, J. W. (Eds.), Flood Risk Management in Europe. Innovation in Policy and Practice, Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, Dordrecht, pp. -. Meyer, V., 007. GIS-based Multicriteria Analysis as Decision Support in Flood Risk Management. UFZ- Diskussionspapiere 6/007, Leipzig. Munich Re Group (Ed.), 00. Annual Review: Natural catastrophes 00. Knowledge series Topics Geo. URL: [Accessed ]. IAPS 00 9

20 References Munich Re Group (Ed.), 006. Annual Review: Natural catastrophes 00. Knowledge series Topics Geo. URL: [Accessed ]. Munich Re Group (Ed.), 007. Natural catastrophes 006. Knowledge series Topics Geo. URL: [Accessed ]. Munich Re Group (Ed.), 008. Natural catastrophes 007. Knowledge series Topics Geo. URL: [Accessed ]. Munich Re Group (Ed.), 009. Natural catastrophes 008. Knowledge series Topics Geo. URL: [Accessed ]. Schanze, J., 006. Flood risk management a basic framework, in: Schanze, J., Zehman, E., Marsalek, J. (Eds.), 006, Flood Risk Management: Hazards, Vulnerability and Mitigation Measures, pp. -0. Vetere Arellano, A. L., De Roo, A., Nordvik, J.-P., 007. Reflections on the challenges of EU policy-making with view to flood risk management, in: Begum, S., Stive, M. J. F., Hall, J. W. (Eds.), Flood Risk Management in Europe. Innovation in Policy and Practice, Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, Dordrecht, pp IAPS 00 0