How to get there? Assessing motorists’ flash flood risk perception on daily itineraries

Flash floods are characterized by their suddenness, fast and violent movement, rarity, small scale but high level of damage. They are particularly difficult to forecast accurately and there is little lead time for warning. This makes motorists especially vulnerable. Assuming that these flash flood hazard specificities may be the significant factors leading to difficulties for drivers to perceive danger, we used cognitive mapping combined with GIS data processing to assess motorists’ flash flood risk perception on their daily itineraries. The analysis of 200 mental maps collected allows planners to have maps highlighting dangerous areas where risk perception is weak and to identify reasons for this.     

How to get there? Assessing motorists' flash flood risk perception on daily itineraries

Flash floods are characterized by their suddenness, fast and violent movement, rarity, small scale but high level of damage. They are particularly difficult to forecast accurately and there is little lead time for warning. This makes motorists especially vulnerable. Assuming that these flash flood hazard specificities may be the significant factors leading to difficulties for drivers to perceive danger, we used cognitive mapping combined with GIS data processing to assess motorists' flash flood risk perception on their daily itineraries. The analysis of 200 mental maps collected allows planners to have maps highlighting dangerous areas where risk perception is weak and to identify reasons for this.     

Community response to hazard information

The impact of flood hazard information on public acceptance of a selected flood mitigation strategy was assessed by an analysis of the content of newspaper reports of community reaction and letters to the editor. The impact of personal delivery of a flood hazard map on individual perception of risk and attitude to such information was assessed using personal interviews. The results indicated that media coverage of the flood hazard information reduced public criticism of the works. This result must be partially attributable to the dramatic style of media coverage and the fact that the media only emphasized the positive value of the works. The interview demonstrated that personal delivery of the information raised perception of risk, improved comprehension of flood risk, had no impact on acceptability of risk but discouraged some respondents from seeking such information in the future. Factors to explain the last negative change were identified to be the format of the map sheet and low salience of flood hazard. On the basis of all results, methods to improve community response to hazard information are provided.     

Inequalities in exposure and awareness of flood risk in England and Wales

This paper explores the environmental inequalities of living in the floodplains of England and Wales and the differences in flood awareness of those 'at risk'. An area comparison is made between an etic, objective flood risk exposure, and an emic, subjective perception of that risk by social class. In all areas except the Midlands, the working classes were more likely to reside in the floodplains; the greatest exposure inequality is seen in the North East and Anglian regions. Flood awareness in the Anglian regions was much lower than average, but there were no significant class differences. In the Thames region, despite equal flood risk exposure between classes, the most deprived displayed the least awareness of flood risk. In the North East, inequalities in the distribution of flood risk exposure accompanied inequalities in perception, resulting in the least aware and most deprived experiencing the greatest flood risk.     

How structural mitigation shapes risk perception and affects decision‐making

This paper reviews the relationships between risk perception and structural measures in an Australian context in three respects: (i) opinions about authorities’ ability to mitigate flood risks; (ii) the role of flood experience in shaping views on risk; and (iii) perspectives on the ways in which structural measures shape decision‐making pertaining to protective action. The main finding of this analysis is that the study participants do not suffer from the ‘levee paradox'. Most take precautionary steps to guard against residual flood risk. Such actions, however, do not mean that there is a lack of trust in structural measures to reduce significant flood risk. The majority of the respondents agreed about the necessity of engineering structures to mitigate inherent flood risk. This support, though, does not extend to their management. Losses during major flooding in southeast Queensland, Australia, in 2010–11 were attributed primarily by residents to operational decisions concerning dam water releases.     

Quantified scenarios analysis of drivers and impacts of changing flood risk in England and Wales: 2030–2100

Flood risk to the economy, society and the environment reflects the cumulative effects of environmental and socio-economic change over decades. Long-term scenarios are therefore required in order to develop robust and sustainable flood risk management policies. Quantified national-scale flood risk analysis and expert appraisal of the mechanisms causing change in flood risk have been used to assess flood risk in England and Wales over the period 2030–2100. The assessment involved the use of socio-economic and climate change scenarios. The analysis predicts increasing flood risk unless current flood management policies, practices and investment levels are changed—up to 20-fold increase in economic risk by the 2080s in the scenario with highest economic growth. The increase is attributable to a combination of climate change (in particular increasing precipitation and relative sea level rise in parts of the UK) and increasing socio-economic vulnerability, particularly in terms of household/industrial contents and infrastructure vulnerability. The policy implications of these findings are discussed.     

防洪工程信赖对公众洪灾风险认知的影响——以开封沿黄地区与岳阳洞庭湖区为例

防洪工程作为人类抵御洪灾的首选手段,为人们提供了保障,但人们对其风险认知还存在一定的偏差。本文从公众层面入手,在我国历史上洪灾最严重的两大流域—长江流域和黄河流域,分别选取岳阳沿洞庭湖区和开封沿黄河地区为研究区,调查公众对当地防洪工程的信赖状况和水灾风险认知情况,回收有效样本831份。据此分析影响防洪工程信赖的因素和工程信赖对公众风险认知的影响。研究发现,公众对防洪工程的信赖度较高,区域趋同性明显;公众对工程信赖的程度,因居住地与风险源的距离、性别、年龄和家庭劳动力结构的不同而存在差异;同时,对防洪工程的过于信赖,会降低公众对洪灾的恐惧心理和警惕性,并使得公众产生消极和积极并存的应对灾害的行为倾向。洪灾多发地区应建立大型洪灾、巨灾的风险防范和洪水保险机制,完善我国的再保险制度;政府在高风险区的分区域管理过程中,应以大局为重;构建"文化自觉"的科学防灾文化观,正确引导公众认识到工程措施能力的限度,扭转在工程信赖基础上的风险认知偏差。     

People's risk perception of glacial lake outburst flooding: a case of Tsho Rolpa Lake,Nepal

Previous research indicates that people's perception of risk from a particular hazard positively influences their adoption of effective mitigation strategies and responses. This research investigates the risk perceptions of people living downstream from Tsho Rolpa Glacial Lake of Nepal. Field surveys revealed that people living beneath the Tsho Rolpa glacial lake possess a low risk perception despite the probability of a glacial lake outburst at their location. Further investigation reveals that many individuals have made no adjustments in response to the potential disaster. The low risk perception on the part of the riverine population is chiefly attributed to the cry-wolf effect of the 1997 evacuation that followed an inaccurate prediction of a Tsho Rolpa outburst. Previous remediation structures were kept in place, but appear to have created a false sense of security among those at risk. This overconfidence in the rudimentary efforts employed thus far is illustrated by the fact that many residents have moved their infrastructure even closer to the river channel in recent years. Partial mitigation efforts have muted people's perceptions of the environmental risk and have therefore increased the vulnerability of the communities to a probable outburst flood.     

基于GIS/AHP集成的洪水灾害综合风险评价——以淮河流域为例

根据影响洪水灾害风险的致灾因子危险性、孕灾环境稳定性与承灾体易损性,以淮河流域为示范研究区,以县为行政单元,综合考虑降雨、径流量、河流、地形、人口、经济等指标,基于GIS与AHP集成方法得到了淮河流域洪水灾害危险性评价图和淮河流域洪水灾害脆弱性评价图,并采用"加"模型计算公式得到了洪水灾害综合风险评价图,进行了相应的结果分析。     

中国洪水灾害风险区划及其成因分析

洪水灾害风险区划是洪水风险管理的基本依据.长期以来,受数据收集以及分辨率的影响,中国一直缺乏可以指导相关部门进行洪水风险控制及洪水保险的洪灾风险区划.本文利用地理信息系统软件的空间分析模块,基于高分辨率（90m）的全国降雨、地形坡度、河流湖泊缓冲区、人均GDP、人口密度、道路密度和耕地密度等影响水灾发生的风险因子图,采用水灾成因分析法和经验系数法,得到洪水的潜在危险区和经济易损区,进而得到中国洪水灾害风险区划.在此基础上,采用逐步回归法,逐步剔除各影响因子后,对引发洪灾的主要外在驱动力进行了分析.     

Local perception of infrequent,extreme upland flash flooding: prisoners of experience?

The United Kingdom has experienced several exceptional summer flash floods in recent years and there is growing concern about the frequency of such events and the preparedness of the population. This paper uses a case study of the upper Ryedale flash flood (2005) and questionnaire and interview data to assess local perceptions of upland flash flooding. Experience of a major flash flood may not be associated with increased flood risk perception. Despite local residents’ awareness of a trend towards wetter summers and more frequent heavy rainfall, the poor maintenance of rivers was more frequently thought to be a more significant factor influencing local flood risk than climate change. Such findings have important implications for the potential success of contemporary national flood policies, which have put greater emphasis on public responsibility for responding to flooding. This study recommends, therefore, the use of fresh participatory approaches to redistribute and raise awareness of locally‐held flood knowledge.     

基于GIS多准则评价与BP神经网络的暴雨洪涝灾害风险辨识--以闽三角地区为例

灾害风险辨识是灾害有效防控的重要环节之一,辨识体系与风险水平之间的非线性复杂关系使研究方法向精细化、智能化转型。闽三角地区是我国重要的沿海经济开放区,独特的“山-海”自然地理格局、起伏破碎的地形、高发的台风暴潮和极端短时降雨特征使其常遭受洪涝灾害侵扰。以闽三角为例,将生态服务价值纳入风险评价体系,构建基于GIS多准则评价与BP神经网络模型的风险辨识方法,旨在完善评价体系的同时,弥补传统评价方法存在的非线性缺陷和主观依赖,并以此为基础,进一步探究该地区风险空间分布规律和空间格局,为灾害风险防控提供思路。结果表明:①基于GIS多准则评价与BP神经网络模型的风险辨识方法能够系统准确的认知暴雨洪涝灾害风险水平与空间分布;②高风险区主要分布在河流沿岸、河口处、湾区,且人口、经济活动较活跃地区,城市化发展快速区与缓慢区相比,更容易遭受洪涝灾害威胁;③洪涝风险以高-高和低-低集聚为主,风险根据空间自相关性特征分为“整体随机”“局部随机-邻域集聚”和“整体集聚”三种类型。最后根据风险特征将闽三角地区高风险分为“厦门集美版块”“泉州湾区版块”“漳州县区版块”,分别提出灾害治理建议。     

基于GIS的长江中下游地区洪灾风险分区及评价

国内外近几年的发展表明,在所有可能避免和减轻自然灾害的措施中,最简单有效的方法就是通过在科学研究基础上进行风险区划,将自然灾害管理提高到风险管理的水平.在长江流域数字化地图的基础上,选取不同重复期(20,50,100年),及包括1870年历史洪水和1931,1935,1954,1991,1995,1996,1998,1999和2002年共10次洪水,借助Arcview地理信息系统的空间分析和叠加功能,对长江中下游地区的洪水灾害危险性进行了初步评价.首先参考洪水灾害淹没图和相关历史文献记录资料,构建10次洪水受灾县(市)分布图;其次对这10次洪水受灾县(市)分布图进行叠加,得到长江中下游地区洪涝灾害风险性评价图.分析表明:长江中下游地区洪水风险的分布是有规律的,而且具有明显的地理意义.有4个明显的高危风险区,分别是洞庭湖、鄱阳湖两湖平原的湖滨地区和公安以下的长江中游河段的沿江一带,尤其是荆江河段以及两江相夹地势低洼的江汉平原;沿高危风险区外侧为高风险地区,重点在汉江下游、资、沅、澧水、清江流域、皖沿江地区以及太湖流域的部分地区;沿长江于高危风险和高风险地区两侧分别为风险较小地区;其他地区对于洪水灾害而言则为安全地区.评价结果与长江中下游的实际情况基本吻合.     

Models of best practice in flood risk communication and management

Risk communication plays an increasingly central role in flood risk management, but there is a variety of conflicting advice about what does – and should – get transmitted, why, how, and to whom. The aim of this paper is to elucidate the underlying normative and conceptual models on which those competing assessments of ‘good’ risk communication depend. To that end, the paper identifies four broad models, or approaches, to risk communication: a risk message model of information transfer; a risk instrument model of behavioural change; a risk dialogue model of participatory deliberation; and a risk government model of self-regulation and normalization. These models differ in their theoretical and disciplinary origins and associated philosophical and political commitments, and consequently they define the basic purpose, practice, and future prospects of flood risk communication in quite different ways. Unless these different models of ‘good’ risk communication are acknowledged and understood, efforts to identify best practice for flood risk management are likely to produce inconsistent, if not contradictory, recommendations.     

风暴潮洪水风险图制作研究

在对洪水灾害风险图进行研究和归纳的基础上,根据上海市的地形、沿海提防、洪涝灾害等特点,分析了上海市风暴潮洪水灾害的成因,以及这些因素与洪灾危险程度间的相关关系。借助模糊数学方法,求出危险程度隶属度。在地理信息系统平台上,采用多边形叠置分析和聚类分析等手段,研究洪水灾害危险程度区划的方法,进而绘制成洪水风险图。风险的评估采用了多指标综合评估方法,不仅计算了洪水的自然风险,同时考虑了防洪工程风险的影响。     

基于GIS的乡镇洪涝灾害风险评估与区划技术——以山东省淄博市临淄区为例

基于乡镇气象资料历史序列的构建,利用AHP决策分析法和加权综合评价法,结合GIS空间分析技术,对山东省淄博市临淄区洪涝风险进行评估与区划。结果表明,临淄区洪涝危险性主要受洪涝频率影响,总体趋势是东北部高于西南部;洪涝灾害暴露性风险分布区域性较强,西部明显高于东部;脆弱性风险分布相对较分散,总体上北部地区脆弱性高于南部地区;防灾减灾能力北部地区强于南部。临淄区洪涝风险综合指数普遍较高,高值集中在人口、经济密度较高的临淄市区以及危险性较高的西北地区;风险指数受危险性影响较大;全区中、高风险的面积占总面积的69.2%。     

台风等重大灾害性事件的风险认知及预警机制

通过调查受灾民众及未受灾民众对台风等重大灾害性事件的风险认知及预警情况,比较两者的差异,为政府对重大灾害性事件建立预警管理模式提供依据。研究结果表明:①受灾民众和未受灾民众对重大灾害性事件的风险认知水平低,受灾民众对台风的风险认知明显高于未受灾民众(P<0.01);②两者对提升防灾意识的意愿强烈但对防灾资讯关心程度不够,且受灾民众明显更关心防灾资讯(P<0.01);③两者在通过某项预防措施可以避免灾害所造成的损失和撤离危险地区的问题上意见基本一致,但未受灾民众对政府辅助撤离更具有依赖性(P<0.01,P<0.05);④受灾民众比未受灾民众更相信科学家对灾害的预警能力(P<0.01),但均对目前的灾害预警系统满意度一般。     

拦河闸工程设计和施工中的风险分析和管理

水利工程的风险分析和风险管理正日益受到工程界的重视。渭河宝鸡市区段拦河闸工程的规划、设计和施工过程中的各项关键决策，都应用了风险分析与管理的方法，包括闸址及蓄水区地质条件的风险分析与管理、泄洪能力及运行风险分析与管理、工程施工过程风险分析与管理、拦河闸工程环境影响风险分析与管理以及拦河闸工程投资风险分析与管理。工程的按时完工、运行的可靠性和安全性，在很大程度上都得益于项目的风险分析与管理工作的贯彻和实施。实践证明，在水利工程决策过程中引进风险分析和风险管理是必要和有益的。     

Interactions between scientific uncertainty and flood management decisions: Two case studies in Colorado

Flood management policies in the United States rely on scientific information about the frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation and runoff. Yet, the available information is inherently uncertain because of the complexity of meteorological and hydrological processes. In mountainous areas, flood risk can vary greatly even within short distances depending on local climate, topography, soil characteristics, and land use. This paper describes two Colorado cases in which policy makers were presented with conflicting scientific estimates: revision of the Fort Collins floodplain map and modification of the Cherry Creek Dam. The case studies demonstrate that uncertainty can have substantial impacts on regulatory processes, public safety, and costs. The analysis considers the differing perspectives of various participants in the flood management processes, illustrating the interplay between uncertainties attributable to scientific issues and values issues. It suggests that attempts to provide a single “best” estimate do not necessarily meet the decision needs of all stakeholders. Conclusions indicate a need to improve communication about uncertainty when scientific estimates areprovided to decision makers. Furthermore, in highly controversial decisions, it may be necessary to reframe the discussion to consider the values issues raised by scientific uncertainty.