Articles | Volume 370
https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-370-193-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-370-193-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
11 Jun 2015
Integration of uncertainties in water and flood risk management
B. Höllermann
Department of Geography, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
M. Evers
Department of Geography, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
Related authors
Glenda García-Santos, Mariana Madruga de Brito, Britta Höllermann, Linda Taft, Adrian Almoradie, and Mariele Evers
Proc. IAHS, 379, 83–87, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-379-83-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-379-83-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Our study presents the utility of a system dynamics modelling approach for water management and decision-making for the case of a forest ecosystem under risk of wildfires. We use the pluralistic water research concept to explore different scenarios and simulate the emergent behaviour of water interception and net precipitation after a wildfire in a forest ecosystem. Through a case study, we illustrate the applicability of this new methodology.
Pınar Pamukçu Albers and Mariele Evers
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2534, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2534, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study addresses the uncertainty in defining and selecting flood risk indicators. Using a systematic literature review, we evaluated indicators across various flood risk factors. Our analysis revealed commonly used indicators for each factor and their complex relationships. The findings offer recommendations for selecting appropriate indicators and indices to enhance flood risk assessment, improve mitigation efforts, and inform better flood management strategies.
Glenda García-Santos, Mariana Madruga de Brito, Britta Höllermann, Linda Taft, Adrian Almoradie, and Mariele Evers
Proc. IAHS, 379, 83–87, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-379-83-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-379-83-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Our study presents the utility of a system dynamics modelling approach for water management and decision-making for the case of a forest ecosystem under risk of wildfires. We use the pluralistic water research concept to explore different scenarios and simulate the emergent behaviour of water interception and net precipitation after a wildfire in a forest ecosystem. Through a case study, we illustrate the applicability of this new methodology.
Mariana Madruga de Brito, Mariele Evers, and Adrian Delos Santos Almoradie
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 373–390, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-373-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-373-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This paper sheds light on the integration of interdisciplinary knowledge in the assessment of flood vulnerability in Taquari-Antas river basin, Brazil. It shows how stakeholder participation is crucial for increasing not only the acceptance of model results but also its quality.
Linda Taft and Mariele Evers
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 4913–4928, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-4913-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-4913-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The country of Myanmar and its abundant water resources are facing major challenges due to political and economic reforms, massive investments from neighbouring countries and climate change impacts. Publications on current and future impacts from human activities and climate change on Myanmar's river basins have been reviewed in order to gain an overview of the key drivers in these human–water dynamics. The review reveals the relevance of this information with regard to human–water interactions.
Mariana Madruga de Brito and Mariele Evers
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 1019–1033, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-1019-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-1019-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a systematic review of 128 papers that apply multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) tools to flood problems, aiming to provide an overall picture of what has motivated researchers in 37 different countries over the past 2 decades. A wide range of applications were identified, highlighting the utility of MCDM as a decision support tool in all stages of the flood management process.
Cited articles
Abbott, J.: Understanding and managing the unknown: The nature of uncertainty in planning, J. Plan. Educ. Res., 24, 237–251, 2005.
Aven, T.: Misconceptions of risk, Wiley, Chichester, UK, 252 pp., 2010.
Bakker, K.: Water Security: Research Challenges and Opportunities, Science, 337, 914–915, 2012.
Blöschl, G. and Montanari, A.: Climate change impacts-throwing the dice?, Hydrol. Process., 24, 374–381, 2010.
Brugnach, M., Tagg, A., Keil, F., and de Lange, W. J.: Uncertainty matters: Computer models at the science-policy interface, Water Resour. Manag., 21, 2007.
Brugnach, M., Dewulf, A., Pahl-Wostl, C., and Taillieu, T.: Toward a Relational Concept of Uncertainty: about Knowing Too Little, Knowing Too Differently, and Accepting Not to Know, Ecol. Soc., 13, 30, available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art30/, 2008.
Di Baldassarre, G., Viglione, A., Carr, G., Kuil, L., Salinas, J. L., and Blöschl, G.: Socio-hydrology: conceptualising human-flood interactions, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3295–3303, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3295-2013, 2013.
Faulkner, H., Parker, D., Green, C., and Beven, K.: Developing a translational discourse to communicate uncertainty in flood risk between science and the practitioner, Ambio, 36, 692–703, 2007.
Funtowicz, S. O. and Ravetz, J. R.: Science for the Post-Normal Age, Futures, 25, 739–755, 1993.
Gabbert, S., van Ittersum, M., Kroeze, C., Stalpers, S., Ewert, F., and Olsson, J. A.: Uncertainty analysis in integrated assessment: the users' perspective, Reg. Environ. Change, 2010.
Hooijer, A., Klijn, F., Pedroli, G. B. M., and Van Os, A. G.: Towards sustainable flood risk management in the Rhine and Meuse river basins: Synopsis of the findings of IRMA-SPONGE, River Res. Appl., 20, 343–357, 2004.
IRGC: Risk Governance – Towards an Integrative Approach, IRGC White Paper, Geneva, 157 pp., 2005.
IRGC: An introduction to the IRGC Risk Governance Framework, Geneva, 24 pp., 2008.
Janssen, P. H. M., Petersen, A. C., van der Sluijs, J. P., Risbey, J. S., and Ravetz, J. R.: A guidance for assessing and communicating uncertainties, Water Sci. Technol., 52, 125–131, 2005.
Kinzig, A., Starrett, D., Arrow, K., Aniyar, S., Bolin, B., Dasgupta, P., Ehrlich, P., Folke, C., Hanemann, M., Heal, G., Hoel, M., Jansson, A., Jansson, B.-O., Kautsky, N., Levin, S., Lubchenco, J., Mäler, K.-G., Pacala, S. W., Schneider, S. H., Siniscalco, D., and Walker, B.: Coping with uncertainty: a call for a new science-policy forum, Ambio, 32, 330–335, 2003.
Maxim, L. and van der Sluijs, J. P.: Quality in environmental science for policy: Assessing uncertainty as a component of policy analysis, Environ. Sci. Policy, 14, 482–492, 2011.
Pappenberger, F. and Beven, K. J.: Ignorance is bliss: Or seven reasons not to use uncertainty analysis, Water Resour. Res., 42, W05302, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004820, 2006.
Refsgaard, J. C., van der Sluijs, J. P., Højberg, A. L., and Vanrolleghem, P. A.: Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process – A framework and guidance, Environ. Model. Softw., 22, 1543–1556, 2007.
Reichert, P., Borsuk, M., Hostmann, M., Schweizer, S., Sporri, C., Tockner, K., and Truffer, B.: Concepts of decision support for river rehabilitation, Environ. Model. Softw., 22, 188–201, 2007.
Renn, O.: Risk governance: coping with uncertainty in a complex world, Earthscan, London, 455 pp., 2008.
Sigel, K., Klauer, B., and Pahl-Wostl, C.: Conceptualising uncertainty in environmental decision-making: The example of the EU water framework directive, Ecol. Econ., 69, 502–510, 2010.
Smith, L. A. and Stern, N.: Uncertainty in science and its role in climate policy, Philos. Trans. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci., 369, 4818–4841, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2011.0149, 2011.
Stirling, A.: Keep it complex, Nature, 468, 1029–1031, 2010.
van Asselt, M. B., and Rotmans, J.: Uncertainty in integrated assessment modelling – from positivism to plurality, Clim. Change, 54, 75–105, 2002.
van den Hoek, R. E., Brugnach, M., Mulder, J. P. M., and Hoekstra, A. Y.: Analysing the cascades of uncertainty in flood defence projects: How "not knowing enough" is related to "knowing differently", Global Environ Chang, 24, 373–388, 2014.
Walker, W. E., Harremoës, P., Rotmans, J., van der Sluijs, J. P., van Asselt, M. B., Janssen, P., and Krayer von Krauss, M. P.: Defining uncertainty: a conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support, Int. Assess., 4, 5–17, 2003.
Weichselgartner, J. and Kasperson, R.: Barriers in the science-policy-practice interface: Toward a knowledge-action-system in global environmental change research, Global Environ. Change, 20, 266–277, 2010.
Willows, R., Reynard, N., Meadowcroft, I., and Connell, R.: Climate adaptation: Risk, uncertainty and decision-making. UKCIP Technical Report, UK Climate Impacts Programme, Oxford, 41–88, 2003.
Short summary
Water management is challenged by socio-hydrological change and forced to make decisions under uncertainty. E.g. reservoir management aiming at flood mitigation copes with various aspects of uncertainty. The proposed framework condenses these aspects under a risk based approach and provides an overview of neuralgic points of uncertainty and fields of action and uncertainty reduction. The framework enables practitioners to consistently integrate uncertainties in their decision-making processes.
Water management is challenged by socio-hydrological change and forced to make decisions under...
