scholarly journals Accounting for risk aversion, income distribution and social welfare in cost-benefit analysis for flood risk management

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarl Kind ◽  
W.J. Wouter Botzen ◽  
Jeroen C.J.H. Aerts
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
Risk Aversion ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Benefit Analysis

scholarly journals The Value of Citizen Science for Flood Risk Reduction: Cost-benefit Analysis of a Citizen Observatory in the Brenta-Bacchiglione Catchment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Ferri ◽  
Uta Wehn ◽  
Linda See ◽  
Martina Monego ◽  
Steffen Fritz
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Citizen Science ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Water Levels ◽  
Sensor Data ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Eu Directive

Abstract. Citizen observatories are a relatively recent form of citizen science. As part of the flood risk management strategy of the Brenta-Bacchiglione catchment, a citizen observatory for flood risk management has been proposed and is currently being implemented. Citizens are involved through monitoring water levels and obstructions and providing other relevant information through mobile apps, where the data are assimilated with other sensor data in a hydrological-hydraulic model used in early warning. A cost benefit analysis of the citizen observatory was undertaken to demonstrate the value of this approach in monetary terms. Although not yet fully operational, the citizen observatory is assumed to decrease the social vulnerability of the flood risk. By calculating the hazard, exposure and vulnerability of three flood scenarios (required for flood risk management planning by the EU Directive on Flood Risk Management) with and without the proposed citizen observatory, it is possible to evaluate the benefits in terms of the average annual avoided damage costs. Although currently a hypothetical exercise, the results showed a reduction in avoided damage of 45 % compared to a business as usual scenario. Thus, linking citizen science with hydrological modelling, and to raise awareness of flood hazards, has great potential in reducing future flood risk in the Brenta-Bacchiglione catchment. Moreover, such approaches are easily transferable to other catchments.

scholarly journals The value of citizen science for flood risk reduction: cost–benefit analysis of a citizen observatory in the Brenta-Bacchiglione catchment

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (12) ◽  
pp. 5781-5798
Author(s):  
Michele Ferri ◽  
Uta Wehn ◽  
Linda See ◽  
Martina Monego ◽  
Steffen Fritz
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Citizen Science ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Water Levels ◽  
Sensor Data ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Eu Directive

Abstract. Citizen observatories are a relatively recent form of citizen science. As part of the flood risk management strategy of the Brenta-Bacchiglione catchment, a citizen observatory for flood risk management has been proposed and is currently being implemented. Citizens are involved through monitoring water levels and obstructions and providing other relevant information through mobile apps, where the data are assimilated with other sensor data in a hydrological–hydraulic model used in early warning. A cost–benefit analysis of the citizen observatory was undertaken to demonstrate the value of this approach in monetary terms. Although not yet fully operational, the citizen observatory is assumed to decrease the social vulnerability of the flood risk. By calculating the hazard, exposure and vulnerability of three flood scenarios (required for flood risk management planning by the EU Directive on Flood Risk Management) with and without the proposed citizen observatory, it is possible to evaluate the benefits in terms of the average annual avoided damage costs. Although currently a hypothetical exercise, the results showed a reduction in avoided damage of 45 % compared to a business as usual scenario. Thus, linking citizen science and citizen observatories with hydrological modelling to raise awareness of flood hazards and to facilitate two-way communication between citizens and local authorities has great potential in reducing future flood risk in the Brenta-Bacchiglione catchment. Moreover, such approaches are easily transferable to other catchments.

scholarly journals POTENTIAL FLOOD IMPACT ON NATURAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT IN RIGA

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jelena MALAHOVA ◽  
Daina VASIĻEVSKA ◽  
Karlis KETNERS
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Continuous Process ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Risk Prevention ◽  
Prevention Measures ◽  
Socioeconomic Environment ◽  
The Right

Flood risk management is the process of data and information gathering, risk analysis and evaluation, appraisal of options, and making, implementing and reviewing decisions to reduce, control, accept or redistribute the flood risks. It is a continuous process of analysis, adjustment and adaptation of policies and actions taken to reduce the flood risk. Preventive measures and timely, reasonable flood risk prevention measures can help reduce the risk of floods and caused damages. In addition, protection against floods is primarily necessary for populated areas, especially when it comes to densely populated areas, since floods may affect a large number of citizens and their property thereby causing enormous material damage not only to the inhabitants of these territories but also to business infrastructure, respectively, it can result in significant material and socioeconomic losses. The aim of the paper is to evaluate the flood risk management theoretical and practical aspects, identify the potential impact of floods on natural and socioeconomic environment, as well as to show the usefulness of flood risk reduction measures. To reach this aim, the following tasks must be fulfilled: to give the definitions of flooding and flood risk and briefly characterise the flooding and flood risk in Latvia; to study and characterize the flood risk management legal and institutional aspects; to carry out an analytical overview of the flood risk assessment on right bank of the Daugava River in Riga; to carry out a cost-benefit analysis of flood risk prevention measures on the right bank of the Daugava in Riga.

scholarly journals A cost-benefit analysis model for the retrofit of sustainable urban drainage systems towards improved flood risk mitigation

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-439
Author(s):  
Oluwayemi A. Oladunjoye ◽  
David G. Proverbs ◽  
Beck Collins ◽  
Hong Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Flood Risk ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Urban Drainage ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Uk

Purpose The Environment Agency estimates that one in six homes in England (approximately 5.2m properties) are at risk from flooding and 185,000 commercial properties are located in flood-prone areas. Further, an estimate of 10,000 new homes are built on flood plains yearly. The UK has witnessed a significant increase in flood events over the past 10 years. During this period, there has been growing research attention into measures to mitigate the effects of flooding, including the benefits of deploying sustainable urban drainage systems (SuDs) in new developments or as a retrofit. The purpose of this paper is to present the development of a cost-benefit analysis model for the retrofit of SuDs focusing on the potential for improved flood risk mitigation in the context of commercial properties. Design/methodology/approach A synthesis of flood risk management and SuDs literature is used to inform the development of a conceptual cost-benefit analysis model for the retrofit of SuDs and focusing on the potential for improved flood risk mitigation in the context of commercial properties. Findings SuDs have been applied successfully in different parts of the world; however, the uptake of SuDs, in particular, the retrofit of SuDs, has been restricted by a number of issues including a lack of experience and trust in their performance and a lack of understanding in their true benefits. In particular, there is the limited experience of retrofitting SuDs and there are no well-established procedures for evaluating the feasibility, value or cost effectiveness of doing this. Social implications This offers the potential to support the UK government’s flood risk management policy by helping to increase the resilience of properties, whilst offering other benefits to communities such as improvements in air quality and biodiversity and also presenting a clearer understanding of the monetary and non-monetary implication to owners of commercial properties for a more informed and acceptable uptake of SuDs retrofit. Originality/value The proposed model will allow a more comprehensive understanding of the costs and associated benefits associated with SuDs retrofit, highlighting the flood risk mitigation benefits that might accrue over a period of time for commercial property.

scholarly journals A micro-scale cost-benefit analysis of building-level flood risk adaptation measures in Los Angeles

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 100147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars T. de Ruig ◽  
Toon Haer ◽  
Hans de Moel ◽  
W.J.Wouter Botzen ◽  
Jeroen C.J.H. Aerts
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Adaptation Measures ◽  
Micro Scale ◽  
Building Level

Cost-Benefit Analysis and Social Welfare Functions

2019 ◽  
pp. 397-422
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Adler
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Social Welfare Function ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Important Policy ◽  
The Social

This chapter describes and compares the two most important policy-analysis methodologies in economics: cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and the social-welfare-function (SWF) framework. Both approaches are consequentialist and welfarist; both are typically combined with a preference-based view of well-being. Despite these similarities, the two methodologies differ in significant ways. CBA translates well-being impacts into monetary equivalents, and ranks outcomes according to the sum total of monetary equivalents. By contrast, the SWF framework relies upon an interpersonally comparable measure of well-being. Each possible outcome is mapped onto a list (vector) of these well-being numbers, one for each person in the population; the ranking of outcomes, then, is driven by some rule (the SWF) for ranking these well-being vectors. The utilitarian SWF and the prioritarian family of SWFs (each corresponding to well-developed positions in moral philosophy) are especially plausible. The case for using CBA rather than one of these SWFs is weak—or so the chapter argues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document