Search

This paper reviews the sources of uncertainty in physical climate impact assessments. It draws on examples from related fields such as climate modelling and numerical weather prediction in discussing how to interpret the results of multi-model ensembles and the role of model evaluation. Using large-scale, multi-model simulations of hydrological extremes as an example, we demonstrate how large uncertainty at the local scale does not preclude more robust conclusions at the global scale. Finally, some recommendations are made: climate impact studies should be clear about the questions they want to address, transparent about the uncertainties involved, and honest about the assumptions being made.

Flooding is the most common of all natural disasters and accounts for large numbers of casualties and a high amount of economic damage worldwide. To be ‘flood resilient’, countries should have sufficient capacity to resist, the capacity to absorb and recover, and the capacity to transform and adapt. Based on international comparative research, we conclude that six key governance strategies will enhance ‘flood resilience’ and will secure the necessary capacities. These strategies pertain to: (i) the diversification of flood risk management approaches; (ii) the alignment of flood risk management approaches to overcome fragmentation; (iii) the involvement, cooperation, and alignment of both public and private actors in flood risk management; (iv) the presence of adequate formal rules that balance legal certainty and flexibility; (v) the assurance of sufficient financial and other types of resources; (vi) the adoption of normative principles that adequately deal with distributional effects. These governance strategies appear to be relevant across different physical and institutional contexts. The findings may also hold valuable lessons for the governance of climate adaptation more generally.

Contains fulltext : 199475pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)

This paper interprets differences in flood hazard projections over Europe and identifies likely sources of discrepancy. Further, it discusses potential implications of these differences for flood risk reduction and adaptation to climate change. The discrepancy in flood hazard projections raises caution, especially among decision makers in charge of water resources management, flood risk reduction, and climate change adaptation at regional to local scales. Because it is naïve to expect availability of trustworthy quantitative projections of future flood hazard, in order to reduce flood risk one should focus attention on mapping of current and future risks and vulnerability hotspots and improve the situation there. Although an intercomparison of flood hazard projections is done in this paper and differences are identified and interpreted, it does not seems possible to recommend which large-scale studies may be considered most credible in particular areas of Europe.EDITOR D. KoutsoyiannisASSOCIATE EDITOR not assigned

As flood impacts are increasing in large parts of the world, understanding the primary drivers of changes in risk is essential for effective adaptation. To gain more knowledge on the basis of empirical case studies, we analyze eight paired floods, that is, consecutive flood events that occurred in the same region, with the second flood causing significantly lower damage. These success stories of risk reduction were selected across different socioeconomic and hydro-climatic contexts. The potential of societies to adapt is uncovered by describing triggered societal changes, as well as formal measures and spontaneous processes that reduced flood risk. This novel approach has the potential to build the basis for an international data collection and analysis effort to better understand and attribute changes in risk due to hydrological extremes in the framework of the IAHSs Panta Rhei initiative. Across all case studies, we find that lower damage caused by the second event was mainly due to significant reductions in vulnerability, for example, via raised risk awareness, preparedness, and improvements of organizational emergency management. Thus, vulnerability reduction plays an essential role for successful adaptation. Our work shows that there is a high potential to adapt, but there remains the challenge to stimulate measures that reduce vulnerability and risk in periods in which extreme events do not occur.

Diversity in flood risk management approaches is often considered to be a strength. However, in some national settings, and especially for transboundary rivers, variability and incompatibility of approaches can reduce the effectiveness of flood risk management. Placed in the context of increasing flood risks, as well as the potential for flooding to undermine the European Union’s sustainable development goals, a desire to increase societal resilience to flooding has prompted the introduction of a common European Framework. We provide a legal and policy analysis of the implementation of the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC) in six countries: Belgium (Flemish region), England, France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden. Evaluation criteria from existing legal and policy literature frame the study of the Directive and its effect on enhancing or constraining societal resilience by using an adaptive governance approach. These criteria are initially used to analyze the key components of the EU approach, before providing insight of the implementation of the Directive at a national level. Similarities and differences in the legal translation of European goals into existing flood risk management are analyzed alongside their relative influence on policy and practice. The research highlights that the effect of the Floods Directive on increasing societal resilience has been nationally variable, in part because of its focus on procedural obligations, rather than on more substantive requirements. Analysis shows that despite a focus on transboundary river basin management, existing traditions of flood risk management have overridden objectives to harmonize flood risk management in some cases. The Directive could be strengthened by requiring more stringent cooperation and providing the competent authorities in international river basin districts with more power. Despite some shortcomings in directly affecting flood risk outcomes, the Directive has positively stimulated discuss

European countries face increasing flood risks because of urbanization, increase of exposure and damage potential, and the effects of climate change. In literature and in practice, it is argued that a diversification of strategies for flood risk management (FRM), including flood risk prevention (through proactive spatial planning), flood defense, flood risk mitigation, flood preparation, and flood recovery, makes countries more flood resilient. Although this thesis is plausible, it should still be empirically scrutinized. We aim to do this. Drawing on existing literature we operationalize the notion of “flood resilience” into three capacities: capacity to resist; capacity to absorb and recover; and capacity to transform and adapt. Based on findings from the EU FP7 project STAR-FLOOD, we explore the degree of diversification of FRM strategies and related flood risk governance arrangements at the national level in Belgium, England, France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden, as well as these countries’ achievement in terms of the three capacities. We found that the Netherlands and to a lesser extent Belgium have a strong capacity to resist, France a strong capacity to absorb and recover, and especially England a high capacity to transform and adapt. Having a diverse portfolio of FRM strategies in place may be conducive to high achievements related to the capacities to absorb/recover and to transform and adapt. Hence, we conclude that diversification of FRM strategies contributes to resilience. However, the diversification thesis should be nuanced in the sense that there are different ways to be resilient. First, the three capacities imply different rationales and normative starting points for flood risk governance, the choice between which is inherently political. Second, we found trade-offs between the three capacities, e.g., being resistant seems to lower the possibility to be absorbent. Third, to explain countries’ achievements in terms of resilience, the strategi

In Europe increasing flood risks challenge societies to diversify their Flood Risk Management Strategies (FRMSs). Such a diversification implies that actors not only focus on flood defence, but also and simultaneously on flood risk prevention, mitigation, preparation and recovery. There is much literature on the implementation of specific strategies and measures as well as on flood risk governance more generally. What is lacking, though, is a clear overview of the complex set of governance challenges which may result from a diversification and alignment of FRM strategies. This paper aims to address this knowledge gap. It elaborates on potential processes and mechanisms for coordinating the activities and capacities of actors that are involved on different levels and in different sectors of flood risk governance, both concerning the implementation of individual strategies and the coordination of the overall set of strategies. It identifies eight overall coordination mechanisms that have proven to be useful in this respect.

Flusshochwasser werden in lokale und plotzliche Sturzfluten und in Hochwasser an groseren Flussen unterschieden. Fur verschiedene Hochwasserindikatoren und Flusseinzugsgebiete ergeben sich erhebliche Unterschiede, wobei sowohl uberwiegend aus Regen als auch uberwiegend aus Schmelzwasser gespeiste Hochwasserereignisse betrachtet werden. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit finden Hochwasserereignisse an Rhein, Elbe, Weser und Ems sowie die Entwicklung von Sturzfluten infolge von Extremniederschlagen kurzer Dauer, wobei die Beobachtungen und Trends zu Modellierungsergebnissen in Beziehung gesetzt werden. Auch die Notwendigkeit von Anpassungsmasnahmen aufgrund uberwiegend positiver Trends wird diskutiert.

Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, pp.231-290; 2012

[EN] Historical hydrology can be defined as a research field occupying the interface between hydrology and history, with the objectives: to reconstruct temporal and spatial patterns of river flow and, in particular, extreme events (floods, ice phenomena, hydrological droughts) mainly for the period prior to the creation of national hydrological networks; and to investigate the vulnerability of past societies and economies to extreme hydrological events. It is a significant tool for the study of flood risk. Basic sources of documentary data on floods and methods of data collection and analysis are discussed. Research progress achieved in Europe in reconstructing past runoff conditions, hydrological and hydraulic analyses of historical floods, their meteorological causes, impacts and relation to climate change, as well as use of combined series of palaeofloods, instrumental and historical floods for reconstructing long-term flood records, is reviewed. Finally, the future research needs of historical hydrology are discussed., [FR] L'hydrologie historique peut être définie comme un champ de recherche positionné à la rencontre de l'hydrologie et de l'histoire. Ses objectifs visent, d'une part, la reconstitution dans le temps et l'espace de séries de crues fluviales, avec en particulier le repérage d'événements extrêmes (inondations, débâcles glaciaires, sécheresses et étiages sévères) et ce principalement pour la période antérieure à la mise en place des réseaux d'observations hydrologiques nationaux; sans oublier, d'autre part, la connaissance de la vulnérabilité des sociétés et économies anciennes face à ces événements hydrologiques extrêmes. L'hydrologie historique constitue par là même un outil essentiel pour la connaissance du risque inondation. Les principales sources de données documentaires sur les inondations et les méthodes de collecte et d'analyse des données sont décrites ici. Nous exposerons également les principales avancées de la recherche européenne en matière de reconstitution des conditions d'écoulement fluviales passées, d'analyse hydrologique et hydraulique des crues historiques avec leur contexte météorologique, leurs impacts et leurs relations avec le changement climatique. Nous présenterons enfin des démarches permettant la constitution de longues séries de crues à partir d'analyses associant les données sur les paléocrues, celles issues des recherches sur la période historique, et les données instrumentales pour la période contemporaine. En conclusion nous discuterons des besoins nécessaires au développement de la recherche en hydrologie historique.

In Central Europe, river flooding has been recently recognized as a major hazard, in particular after the 1997 Odra /Oder flood, the 2001 Vistula flood, and the most destructive 2002 deluge on the Labe/Elbe. Major recent floods in central Europe are put in perspective and their common elements are identified. Having observed that flood risk and vulnerability are likely to have grown in many areas, one is curious to understand the reasons for growth. These can be sought in socio-economic domain (humans encroaching into floodplain areas), terrestrial systems (land-cover changes – urbanization, deforestation, reduction of wetlands, river regulation), and climate system. The atmospheric capacity to absorb moisture, its potential water content, and thus potential for intense precipitation, are likely to increase in a warmer climate. The changes in intense precipitation and high flows are examined, based on observations and projections. Study of projected changes in intense precipitation, using climate models, for several areas of central Europe, and in particular, for drainage basins of the upper Labe/Elbe, Odra/Oder, and Vistula is reported. Significant changes have been identified between future projections and the reference period, of relevance to flood hazard in areas, which have experienced severe recent floodings

Changes in land use in semiarid savannas to intensive cattle ranching have been widely equated with changes in vegetation communities, notably bush encroachment. Increased availability of soil water in the subsoil has been assigned as both a cause and a consequence of this ecological change. Here we investigate the applicability of this association in an intensively grazed area of the Kalahari sandveld, Botswana. Studies show that no significant differences exist between profile patterns of soil water availability, or hydraulic conductivity and field capacity, between bush dominant compared to grass-dominant sites. Vegetation changes are determined predominantly by interactions of grazing levels, fire occurrence and natural rainfall variability. Pastoral management strategies should therefore account for the interactions between these variables to prevent convergence of bush dominant areas. Soil water movement in Kalahari soils remains largely restricted to the upper 2-3 m of the soil implying that groundwater recharge is negligible and that important consideration of the extent of groundwater resources is required

Changes in land use in semiarid savannas to intensive cattle ranching have been widely equated with changes in vegetation communities, notably bush encroachment. Increased availability of soil water in the subsoil has been assigned as both a cause and a consequence of this ecological change. Here we investigate the applicability of this association in an intensively grazed area of the Kalahari sandveld, Botswana. Studies show that no significant differences exist between profile patterns of soil water availability, or hydraulic conductivity and field capacity, between bush dominant compared to grass-dominant sites. Vegetation changes are determined predominantly by interactions of grazing levels, fire occurrence and natural rainfall variability. Pastoral management strategies should therefore account for the interactions between these variables to prevent convergence of bush dominant areas. Soil water movement in Kalahari soils remains largely restricted to the upper 2-3 m of the soil implying that groundwater recharge is negligible and that important consideration of the extent of groundwater resources is required