Integrated assessment of changes in flooding probabilities due to climate change

Kleinen, Thomas; Petschel‐Held, Gerhard

doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9159-6

Cited by 115 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This indicator is similar in principle to that used by Kleinen and Petschel-Held (2007), but they calculated flood frequency curves at the outlet of major river basins and assumed that everybody within that basin was affected by a change in flood frequency. The current analysis operates at a far finer spatial resolution.…”

Section: Population Exposed To Change In River Flood Hazardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Very few studies have considered indicators of the human impact of changes in the flood hazard. Kleinen and Petschel-Held (2007) summed the numbers of people living in river basins where the return period of the current 50-year return period event reduces due to climate change. Hirabayashi and Kanae (2009) and Hirabayashi et al (2013) counted each year the number of people living in 1×1°grid cells and flood-prone areas respectively where the simulated flood peak exceeded the current 100-year flood.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an assessment of the implications of climate change for global river flood risk. It is based on the estimation of flood frequency relationships at a grid resolution of 0.5×0.5°, using a global hydrological model with climate scenarios derived from 21 climate models, together with projections of future population. Four indicators of the flood hazard are calculated; change in the magnitude and return period of flood peaks, flood-prone population and cropland exposed to substantial change in flood frequency, and a generalised measure of regional flood risk based on combining frequency curves with generic flood damage functions. Under one climate model, emissions and socioeconomic scenario (HadCM3 and SRES A1b), in 2050 the current 100-year flood would occur at least twice as frequently across 40 % of the globe, approximately 450 million flood-prone people and 430 thousand km 2 of flood-prone cropland would be exposed to a doubling of flood frequency, and global flood risk would increase by approximately 187 % over the risk in 2050 in the absence of climate change. There is strong regional variability (most adverse impacts would be in Asia), and considerable variability between climate models. In 2050, the range in increased exposure across 21 climate models under SRES A1b is 31-450 million people and 59 to 430 thousand km 2 of cropland, and the change in risk varies between −9 and +376 %. The paper presents impacts by region, and also presents relationships between change in global mean surface temperature and impacts on the global flood hazard. There are a number of caveats with the analysis; it is based on one global hydrological model only, the climate scenarios are constructed using pattern-scaling, and the precise impacts are sensitive to some of the assumptions in the definition and application.

show abstract

Section: Population Exposed To Change In River Flood Hazardmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even if human impacts are small at present, unless the river is within a fully protected basin, impacts associated with human activities are likely to become issues in the future and thus, climate change and other potential stressors must be considered simultaneously (Kleinen and Pedschel-Held 2007). In many areas, the ecological impacts from human activities will far exceed the impacts from climate change (Scholze and others 2006) but there is also evidence that factors such as urbanization will interact with climate change in ways that may determine the impacts to aquatic biota (Nelson and others 2009).…”

Section: River Futures and Multiple Sources Of Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate Change and River Ecosystems: Protection and Adaptation Options

Palmer

Lettenmaier

Poff

et al. 2009

Environmental Management

348

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rivers provide a special suite of goods and services valued highly by the public that are inextricably linked to their flow dynamics and the interaction of flow with the landscape. Yet most rivers are within watersheds that are stressed to some extent by human activities including development, dams, or extractive uses. Climate change will add to and magnify risks that are already present through its potential to alter rainfall, temperature, runoff patterns, and to disrupt biological communities and sever ecological linkages. We provide an overview of the predicted impacts based on published studies to date, discuss both reactive and proactive management responses, and outline six categories of management actions that will contribute substantially to the protection of valuable river assets. To be effective, management must be place-based focusing on local watershed scales that are most relevant to management scales. The first priority should be enhancing environmental monitoring of changes and river responses coupled with the development of local scenario-building exercises that take land use and water use into account. Protection of a greater number of rivers and riparian corridors is essential, as is conjunctive groundwater/surface water management. This will require collaborations among multiple partners in the respective river basins and wise land use planning to minimize additional development in watersheds with valued rivers. Ensuring environmental flows by purchasing or leasing water rights and/or altering reservoir release patterns will be needed for many rivers. Implementing restoration projects proactively can be used to protect existing resources so that expensive reactive restoration to repair damage associated with a changing climate is minimized. Special attention should be given to diversifying and replicating habitats of special importance and to monitoring populations at high risk or of special value so that management interventions can occur if the risks to habitats or species increase significantly over time.

show abstract

“…Climate change not only increases the atmospheric temperature but also changes precipitation conditions and patterns, which can lead to an increase in the frequency of natural disasters, such as flooding and drought [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. Centered around the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [8,9], climate change scenarios related to various greenhouse gases are being reported.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Water Environment Policy of Europe and South Korea in Response to Climate Change

Kim

Lee

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change not only increases the atmospheric temperature, but also changes the precipitation conditions and patterns, which can lead to an increase in the frequency of occurrence of natural disasters, such as flooding and drought. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has reported fluctuations in the precipitation levels for each country from 1900 to 2005, based on global climate change, suggesting that environmental changes due to climate change manifest very differently based on the region. According to the results of studies that have been carried out recently, changes in the precipitation patterns based on climate change result in changes in the water environment, including alterations to the vegetation, land use, and river flow, while considerably influencing the rate of development of groundwater as well. In this study, the 3Is, which are the important variables of Ideas, Institutions, and Interests that are universal to the international field of political science, were used to comparatively analyze the water environment policies of South Korea and Europe. The first variable, Ideas, examined the influence of awareness on establishing the water environment policy in response to climate change. In particular, differences in the conceptual awareness of the water environment with regard to hyporheic zones were studied. The second variable, Institutions, examined the differences in the water environment policy within the national administration in response to climate change. The South Korean administration's Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport and the Ministry of Environment were used in a case study. Finally, the results drawn from the third variable, i.e., Interests, for South Korea appear to differ from those of Europe, in terms of water environment policy. In this study, the water environment policy of South Korea was analyzed and compared to that of Europe in order to identify problems in South Korea's water environment policy in response to climate change, while seeking a sole solution for a comprehensive water environment policy direction for South Korea.

show abstract

Integrated assessment of changes in flooding probabilities due to climate change

Cited by 115 publications

References 53 publications

The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale

The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale

Climate Change and River Ecosystems: Protection and Adaptation Options

A Comparison of the Water Environment Policy of Europe and South Korea in Response to Climate Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About