scholarly journals The effects of river restoration on catchment scale flood risk and flood hydrology

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (7) ◽  
pp. 997-1008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon J. Dixon ◽  
David A. Sear ◽  
Nicholas A. Odoni ◽  
Tim Sykes ◽  
Stuart N. Lane
Keyword(s):  
Flood Risk ◽  
River Restoration ◽  
Catchment Scale ◽  
Flood Hydrology

Nature-Based Solutions: Dependency of Effectiveness on Spatial Configuration

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Pattison
Keyword(s):  
Flood Risk ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Spatial Configuration ◽  
Storm Track ◽  
Spatial Location ◽  
Flood Management ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Storm Events ◽  
Catchment Scale ◽  
The Impact

<p>Several recent large flood events have had severe economic and social impacts. The winter 2015-16 UK floods resulted in 16,000 properties flooding and damage to critical infrastructure. It is increasingly being recognised that traditional approaches of flood defence are not sustainable due to the pressures of climate change and economic constraints. The solution to the flood risk problem in cities is no longer seen as being just on-site, and thinking is shifting upstream and to the catchment/landscape scales, known as Nature-Based Solutions or Natural Flood Management (NFM). The approach consists of measures that “Work with Natural Processes”, such as storing water in ponds, and slowing the flow in rivers. The evidence for the impacts is strong at the local scale, but the larger spatial scale impact is highly uncertain due to the cumulative impacts resulting from amplifying/mitigating effects of different interventions, controlled by spatial location and storm-track interaction.</p><p>To date, Nature-Based Solution schemes have proceeded on an opportunistic basis, without a clear design strategy (which measure and where to implement it). However, if schemes are implemented without clear understanding of their impacts, they may, at best, fail to achieve the optimum flood reduction benefit downstream, or, at worst, make flooding more severe (if implemented in inappropriate locations, when tributaries’ flows are synchronised).  </p><p><span>Impacts of NFM measures are spatially and temporally dependent i.e. the same intervention in two locations will have different effects on flows, and the same intervention will have different impacts during different storm events. Therefore, it is essential that when strategically designing NFM schemes for catchments, that WHERE? and WHAT? are answered together to optimise the impact, as it is possible that whilst upstream NFM may be beneficial locally it may make tributary peaks coincide and make flood magnitudes worse downstream. Here we demonstrate the importance of the spatial configuration of Nature-Based Solutions on their catchment scale effectiveness in reducing flood risk.</span></p>

scholarly journals Exploring Options for Flood Risk Management with Special Focus on Retention Reservoirs

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (18) ◽  
pp. 10099
Author(s):  
Nejc Bezak ◽  
Martina Kovačević ◽  
Gregor Johnen ◽  
Klaudija Lebar ◽  
Vesna Zupanc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Peak Discharge ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Catchment Scale ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Urban Flood ◽  
A Minor

Floods are among the most frequent and deadliest natural disasters, and the magnitude and frequency of floods is expected to increase. Therefore, the effects of different flood risk management options need to be evaluated. In this study, afforestation, permeable concrete implementation, and the use of dry and wet retention reservoirs were tested as possible options for urban flood risk reduction in a case study involving the Glinščica river catchment (Slovenia). Additionally, the effect of dry and wet reservoirs was investigated at a larger (catchment) scale. Results showed that in the case of afforestation and permeable concrete, large areas are required to achieve notable peak discharge reduction (from a catchment scale point of view). The costs related to the implementation of such measures could be relatively high, and may become even higher than the potential benefits related to the multifunctionality and multi-purpose opportunities of such measures. On the other hand, dry and wet retention reservoirs could provide more significant peak discharge reductions; if appropriate locations are available, such reservoirs could be implemented at acceptable costs for decision makers. However, the results of this study show that reservoir effects quickly reduce with scale. This means that while these measures can have significant local effects, they may have only a minor impact at larger scales. We found that this was also the case for the afforestation and permeable concrete.

scholarly journals Issues of Natural Resources Law for Adopting Catchment-Based Measures for Flood Risk Management in Sweden

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 2072
Author(s):  
Susana Goytia
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Catchment Scale ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Hydropower Production ◽  
Integrated Flood Risk Management ◽  
Laws And Policies ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
The Eu

The EU Floods Directive calls for integrated flood risk management at a catchment scale. The potential of this directive to integrate relevant policy areas and deliver catchment-based measures may however be undermined by sectoral laws and policies in the Member States. This article focuses on the legal issues affecting the integration of catchment-based measures for managing flood risk in three relevant policy areas, namely, energy (in the form of hydropower production), agriculture, and forestry, in Sweden. The results show that that the present legal frameworks not only can restrict attempts to introduce catchment-based measures through compulsory means, but in some cases can also encumber collaborative and voluntary initiatives. It is therefore important to reinforce the catchment perspective in the processes leading to the adoption of flood risk management plans, in terms of assessing flood risks, evaluating measures and engaging stakeholders.

scholarly journals Invertebrate Responses to Restoration across Benthic and Hyporheic Stream Compartments

Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 996
Author(s):  
Anne L. Robertson ◽  
Daniel M. Perkins ◽  
Judy England ◽  
Tim Johns
Keyword(s):  
River Restoration ◽  
Hyporheic Zone ◽  
Biological Traits ◽  
Taxon Richness ◽  
Catchment Scale ◽  
Β Diversity ◽  
Monitoring Protocols ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Time Point

River restoration is a multi-billion-dollar business, yet it is unclear whether benthic community health, which is routinely monitored, can be used as a proxy for the health of the hyporheos. Applying a Before-After-Control-Impact approach to a UK case study, we compared the effects of removing an impoundment on the hyporheos with effects on the benthos. We compared invertebrate biological traits that we expected to respond to the restoration. We constructed sample-size based diversity curves and determined β-diversity between compartments and reaches. Two years post-restoration, hyporheic taxon richness was significantly lower in the restored reach compared to the control. However, three years post-restoration taxon richness was significantly higher in the impact reach. The composition of the control and impact reach hyporheos was most dissimilar at the first sampling time point post-restoration and at this time there was a universal decrease in the relative abundance of burrowing organisms respiring through gills. We did not detect a signal of restoration on benthic assemblage diversity and composition, perhaps because reach-scale restorations can be overwhelmed by catchment-scale disturbances. Thus, the hyporheos and the benthos responded differently to restoration. Given the importance of the hyporheic zone in the provision of ecosystem function and services, it is clear that it should be included in future monitoring protocols that aim to assess river restoration success.

River restoration: the fuzzy logic of repairing reaches to reverse catchment scale degradation

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 1926-1931 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily S. Bernhardt ◽  
Margaret A. Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Fuzzy Logic ◽  
River Restoration ◽  
Catchment Scale
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document