Management and Safety of Flood Defense Systems

Tourment, Rémy; Beullac, Bruno; Poulain, Daniel

doi:10.1016/b978-1-78548-269-4.50003-2

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In some cases, this risk is chosen not to be addressed, due to, for example, the residual risk level being socially accepted or the costs of risk reduction being higher than the cost of the expected damage [42]. In flood-related research from developed economies, such debates mostly revolve around the implementation of structural control measures, their protection gaps and potential failure [43][44][45], as well as the coverage of such risks by insurance [46][47][48]. However, especially in the context of developing economies, efforts in flood risk reduction are not well developed, and the population is often exposed to a high level of risk, affecting their financial achievements, among other impacts [16].…”

Section: Risk Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovering from Financial Implications of Flood Impacts—The Role of Risk Transfer in the West African Context

Wagner

Thiam²,

Dossoumou

et al. 2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many West African river basins, households regularly experience floods and the associated impacts. In the absence of widely accessible formal risk transfer mechanisms (e.g., insurance), households often have to cope with financial impacts. Only a few studies have explored the financial effects of floods on agriculture-dependent households in the region and the role formal and informal risk transfer plays in their mitigation. This study addresses this gap, explores flood impacts with financial implications for households, and researches the existing strategies to mitigate them. Moreover, it aims to better understand how different measures influence the recovery process. The study draws on primary data from a household survey (n = 744) in the Lower Mono River basin, combined with stakeholder workshops and semi-structured interviews, and applies a generalized linear model to the survey data. The results reveal four flood impact types with financial implications: agricultural, material, health, and trade. Moreover, a shortened recovery time is significantly associated with assistance from savings groups and cooperatives—groups originally not formed to help during floods. In light of the severe and frequent flood impacts, effective and publicly accepted adaptation measures are needed to enable favorable conditions for creating sustainable and accessible risk transfer mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: Risk Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovering from Financial Implications of Flood Impacts—The Role of Risk Transfer in the West African Context

Wagner

Thiam²,

Dossoumou

et al. 2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These regulatory flood maps focus on the reduction of vulnerability, since they can discourage or forbid further development in the floodplain (reducing exposure in high hazard zones) or require building codes for existing and/or new developments located in the regulatory floodplain, which can increase the capacity to withstand a flood event. While management of flood risk through regulatory flood maps has been widely discussed in the literature (Barraqué, 2014; Burby, 2001; Tourment & Beullac, 2019; Tourment, Beullac, & Poulain, 2017), less has been published on the implications of these maps in managing residual risk behind levees (Deniaux et al, 2018; Hutton, Tobin, & Montz, 2019). Regulatory flood maps made today can create very different scenarios of exposure and vulnerability that local and national governing agencies will have to face when managing flood risks in the future.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing residual flood risk behind levees: Comparing USA, France, and Quebec (Canada)

Serra‐Llobet

Tourment

Montané

et al. 2022

J Flood Risk Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although hydraulic infrastructure such as levees remain important for flood risk management in the USA, France, and Quebec (Canada), there is increasing emphasis on nonstructural measures, such as regulatory flood maps, to reduce exposure and vulnerability, for example, preventing people from building in high hazard areas. One key concept related to areas protected by levees is that of “residual risk”, that is, the risk from floods greater than the design standard of the levees (levee overtopping) and from levee breach. In this article, we review the legislative framework for regulatory flood maps in the USA, France, and Quebec (Canada) and compare how residual risk behind protective structures is taken into account (or not) in regulatory flood maps. We find big differences in how the USA, France and Canada manage residual risk behind the levees. While in France the area behind levees is part of the regulatory flood prone area, and land use restrictions, building codes, emergency measures and risk communication are mandatory, in the USA the area behind levees is only shown as part of the regulatory flood prone area if the levee is not accredited. In Quebec, regulatory flood maps in general follow the French approach with a few exceptions.

show abstract

“…In fact, in case of breach on a dike system, the violence of the flood wave causes more damage than the natural gradual rise in water. In addition, this kind of failure is difficult to anticipate in terms of location and characteristics of the resulting floods, and thus, the management of flooded areas is much more difficult to organize than for floods which can be anticipated, e.g., areas without dikes or areas with dikes but without failure (Tourment et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flood risk assessment of the City of Calgary considering flood control barrier performance

Cocaign¹,

Picton²,

Khan³

et al. 2021

Science and Practice for an Uncertain Future

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2013 flood in southern Alberta was one of the worst natural disasters in Canadian history. Heavy rainfall and a melting snowpack in the upstream Rocky Mountains resulted in higher-than-normal runoff in several Alberta watersheds. As the runoff reached downstream to the City of Calgary, the Bow and Elbow rivers overtopped its banks (including at several flood control barriers along the Rivers), causing several deaths, large-scale evacuations and an estimated $6 billion in damages. Responding to this unprecedented flood event, the City of Calgary has implemented a Flood Resilience Plan to help reduce future flood risk. A key component of this plan is to analyze and improve existing flood control barriers (i.e., dike systems) along the rivers to improve performance and reduce the risk of riverine floods in the future. In this research, a probabilistic risk assessment process is developed and applied to assess the overall flood risk on existing dike systems along the Bow River in the City of Calgary. A steady-state hydraulic model of the Bow River is used to determine the water levels along the River for different return periods. The risk of failure of the dike systems (due to slope instability) is quantified using the Morgenstern-Price method and a Monte Carlo scheme that incorporates the uncertainty in the geotechnical properties of each barrier segment. The flood hazard is then quantified for each barrier segment considering each return period, risk of failure of the barrier, or overtopping due to high water levels. Following this, a multi-criteria approach that integrates the flood hazard with flood exposure and vulnerability is implemented to generate the overall flood risk map of the areas protected by the dike systems. The exposure (economic) and vulnerability (socio-demographic) are determined using geospatial data and an analytical hierarchical process. This process propagates the uncertainty from the data to the final probabilistic risk estimates. Results demonstrate the significance of including slope instability calculations when determining overall flood hazard. While dike systems may be designed to protect for a given return period (e.g. 100-year water level), there is a significant risk of failure of the barriers before reaching the designed water level. Additionally, certain protected areas face the compound hazard of overtopping and barrier failure -this hazard is not considered in existing analysis of the flood barriers along the Bow River. The overall risk assessment highlights those areas that have the highest combined risk and indicate the particular segments of the barriers that need design improvements to reach the City of Calgary's flood resilience goals.

show abstract

Management and Safety of Flood Defense Systems

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

Recovering from Financial Implications of Flood Impacts—The Role of Risk Transfer in the West African Context

Recovering from Financial Implications of Flood Impacts—The Role of Risk Transfer in the West African Context

Managing residual flood risk behind levees: Comparing USA, France, and Quebec (Canada)

Flood risk assessment of the City of Calgary considering flood control barrier performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About