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 ◽  
...  

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.

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 136-151
Author(s):  
Nkwunonwo Ugonna Chimnonyerem ◽  
Chiemelu Emmanuel Ndukwe ◽  
Nkwunonwo Ugochi Adannaya

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Adriana Cardoso ◽  
Maria Céu Almeida ◽  
Rita S. Brito ◽  
João L. Gomes ◽  
Paula Beceiro ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. 15-35
Author(s):  
Emily O’Donnell ◽  
Shaun Maskrey ◽  
Maggie Skenderian ◽  
Helen O’Brien ◽  
Jonathan Vann

10.1596/25112 ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salman Anees Soz ◽  
Jolanta Kryspin-Watson ◽  
Zuzana Stanton-Geddes

2019 ◽  
Vol 239 ◽  
pp. 244-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alida Alves ◽  
Berry Gersonius ◽  
Zoran Kapelan ◽  
Zoran Vojinovic ◽  
Arlex Sanchez

Author(s):  
Chris Zevenbergen ◽  
Berry Gersonius ◽  
Mohan Radhakrishan

Three different conceptual frameworks of resilience, including engineering, ecological and social–ecological have been presented and framed within the context of flood risk management. Engineering resilience has demonstrated its value in the design and operation of technological systems in general and in flood resilient technologies in particular. Although limited to the technical domain, it has broadened the objectives of flood resilient technologies and provided guidance in improving their effectiveness. Socio-ecological resilience is conceived as a broader system characteristic that involves the interaction between human and natural systems. It acknowledges that these systems change over time and that these interactions are of complex nature and associated with uncertainties. Building (socio-ecological) resilience in flood risk management strategies calls for an adaptive approach with short-term measures and a set of monitoring criteria for keeping track of developments that might require adaptation in the long-term (adaptation pathways) and thus built-in adaptive capacity as opposed to building engineering resilience which involves a static approach with a fixed time horizon a set of robust measures designed for specific future conditions or scenarios. The two case studies, from a developing and a developed country, indicate that the concepts of ecological and socio-ecological resilience provide guidance for building more resilient flood risk management systems resulting in an approach that embraces flood protection, prevention and preparedness. The case studies also reveal that the translation of resilience concepts into practice remains a challenge. One plausible explanation for this is our inability to arrive at a quantification of socio-ecological resilience taking into account the various attributes of the concept. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Urban flood resilience’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document