Financial compensation and legal restrictions for using land for flood retention

Kis, András

doi:10.4337/9781800379534.00014

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Challenges still remain on how best to compensate private landowners where needed, and how to deliver long‐term catchment‐based flood risk management. Compensation for flood storage depends on the likelihood of flooding and damage within the retention area (Kis et al, 2022). In Europe, large scale flood alleviation projects have required considerable land take (3–250 km 2 ) (Glavan et al, 2020; Kis et al, 2022; Natural Water Retention Measures (NWRM), 2013; Ungvári & Kis, 2020).…”

Section: Future Considerations and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Compensation for flood storage depends on the likelihood of flooding and damage within the retention area (Kis et al, 2022). In Europe, large scale flood alleviation projects have required considerable land take (3–250 km 2 ) (Glavan et al, 2020; Kis et al, 2022; Natural Water Retention Measures (NWRM), 2013; Ungvári & Kis, 2020). From a policy perspective, the cost of one‐off payments to landowners to compensate lost land or flood events from such large‐scale projects (Fenn et al, 2015; Kis et al, 2022) could be reduced by small TSAs that should incur less costs and provide additional benefits.…”

Section: Future Considerations and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Europe, large scale flood alleviation projects have required considerable land take (3–250 km 2 ) (Glavan et al, 2020; Kis et al, 2022; Natural Water Retention Measures (NWRM), 2013; Ungvári & Kis, 2020). From a policy perspective, the cost of one‐off payments to landowners to compensate lost land or flood events from such large‐scale projects (Fenn et al, 2015; Kis et al, 2022) could be reduced by small TSAs that should incur less costs and provide additional benefits. However, maintenance costs should be considered and there also needs to be clarity on ownership of TSAs post‐installation to avoid issues regarding upkeep and the responsibility of adjustable TSA designs for temporal variations (Bark et al, 2021).…”

Section: Future Considerations and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mitigating floods and attenuating surface runoff with temporary storage areas in headwaters

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Temporary storage areas (TSAs) represent a category of soft-engineered naturebased solutions that can provide dispersed, small-scale storage throughout a catchment. TSAs store and attenuate surface runoff, providing new additional storage during flood events. The need for such additional catchment storage will become more urgent as the frequency and magnitude of extreme hydrological events increases due to climate change. Implementation of TSAs in headwater catchments is slowly gaining momentum, but practitioners still require further evidence on how such measures function during flood events. This review focuses on the role of relatively small-scale (<10,000 m 3 ) TSAs in headwater catchments for flood risk management. It also explores the potential wider benefits for implementing these as part of an integrated catchment management approach. TSA flood mitigation effectiveness is primarily determined by the TSA's available storage prior to the event. At the local scale, this can be represented by the relationship between TSA inputs, outputs and total storage. Factors influencing the local functioning and effectiveness of TSAs are discussed, with potential considerations for optimizing future TSA design and management. Hydrological models have suggested that TSAs could be used to effectively attenuate high magnitude events. However, future considerations should involve addressing the lack of empirical evidence showing TSA catchment scale effectiveness and how local TSA functioning might change in time. Small-scale headwater TSAs offer a holistic and sustainable approach to catchment management that can deliver both local benefits to landowners and wider flood risk mitigation for society.

show abstract

Section: Future Considerations and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Considerations and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Considerations and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mitigating floods and attenuating surface runoff with temporary storage areas in headwaters

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Multi-, inter-, and transdisciplinary approaches to nature-based flood risk management

Davids,

Hartmann,

Ferreira

et al. 2024

Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combining Flood Risk Mitigation and Carbon Sequestration to Optimize Sustainable Land Management Schemes: Experiences from the Middle-Section of Hungary’s Tisza River

Ungvári

2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The record floods experienced along the Tisza River between 1998 and 2001 brought a paradigm shift in infrastructural solutions for flood protection. A flood peak polder system was built for transient water storage without any substantial change in land use in the polders, despite the potential to do so under the new scheme. The recent improvement of quantified flood risk assessment methodologies and stronger foundations for the valuation of carbon sequestration benefits now provide more information on the magnitude of missed opportunities and the potential for comprehensive land use and flood risk management solutions. This paper evaluates and combines the results of three cost-benefit type analyses on the conflicting relations of pursuing flood risk mitigation and land management goals. Although the studies were conducted at different locations of the same river stretch, they are all inspected using the same flood waves. Results assert that as EU-CAP agricultural subsidies stabilize individual benefits from arable land use in the short-run, public benefits and long-term individual benefits fail to reach their potential value. The combined analysis of flood risk change and CO2 sequestration provides the economic rationale for the ecological revitalization along rivers with flood peak polders, helping to solve the conflict between hydrological and ecological objectives in floodplains. Capitalizing the value of the community benefits of forests in terms of CO2 sequestration is limited by the unresolved property rights allocation of this natural capacity between landowners and the state, the latter being responsible for fulfilling international CO2 reduction agreements; this uncertain legal background is an obstacle to the creation of sustainable economic conditions for the development and expansion of beneficial land management processes along rivers.

show abstract

Financial compensation and legal restrictions for using land for flood retention

Cited by 3 publications

References 19 publications

Mitigating floods and attenuating surface runoff with temporary storage areas in headwaters

Mitigating floods and attenuating surface runoff with temporary storage areas in headwaters

Multi-, inter-, and transdisciplinary approaches to nature-based flood risk management

Combining Flood Risk Mitigation and Carbon Sequestration to Optimize Sustainable Land Management Schemes: Experiences from the Middle-Section of Hungary’s Tisza River

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About