journal article·2021-07-19Open access

Probabilistic Flood Hazard Maps from Monte Carlo Derived Peak Flow Values—An Application to Flood Risk Management in Zamora City (Spain)

Julio Garrote, Evelyng Peña, Andrés Díez-Herrero

Applied Sciences· Volume 11· Issue 14

Abstract

All flood hazard and risk assessment suffer from a certain degree of uncertainty due to multiple factors, such as flood frequency analysis, hydrodynamic model calibration, or flood damage (magnitude–damage functions) models. The uncertainty linked to the flood frequency analysis is one of the most important factors (previous and present estimation point to 40%). Flood frequency analysis uncertainty has been approached from different points of view, such as the application of complex statistical models, the regionalization processes of peak flows, or the inclusion of non-systematic data. Here, we present an achievable approach to defining the uncertainty linked to flood frequency analysis by using the Monte Carlo method. Using the city of Zamora as the study site, the uncertainty is delimited by confidence intervals of a peak flow quantile of a 500-year return period. Probabilistic maps are derived from hydrodynamic results, and further analysis include flood hazard maps for human loss of stability and vehicle damage. Although the effect of this uncertainty is conditioned by the shape of the terrain, the results obtained may allow managers to achieve more consistent land-use planning. All those Zamora city results point out the probable underestimation of flood hazard (the higher hazard areas increase around 20%) and risk when the uncertainty analysis is not considered, thus limiting the efficiency of flood risk management tasks.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Flood Risk Assessment and Management · Hydrology and Drought Analysis · Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Geodynamics, Stratigraphy and Paleontology, Complutense University of Madrid, E-28040 Madrid, Spain

Geological Hazards Division, Geological Survey of Spain (IGME, CSIC), E-28003 Madrid, Spain

Funding

Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad, Gobierno de España

References (71)

Show source-provided references
1. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (2020, July 15). The International Disaster Database. Available online: http://emdat.be/emdat_db/.
2. Munich Re (2020, July 17). NatCatSERVICE Database. Available online: https://natcatservice.munichre.com/.
3. Assessing flood risk at the global scale: Model setup, results, and sensitivity10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/044019 ↗
4. Visser, H., Bouwman, A., Petersen, A., and Ligtvoet, W. (2012). A Statistical Study of Weather–Related Disasters: Past, Present and Future.
5. Probabilistic evaluation of flood hazard in urban areas using Monte Carlo simulation10.1002/hyp.8370 ↗
6. Flood risk assessment and associated uncertainty10.5194/nhess-4-295-2004 ↗
7. A framework for uncertainty analysis in flood risk management decisions10.1080/15715124.2008.9635339 ↗
8. Separating natural and epistemic uncertainty in flood frequency analysis10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.11.015 ↗
9. Di Baldassarre, G. (2012). Flood trends and population dynamics. Geophysical Research Abstracts, Proceedings of the EGU 2012 Conference, Vienna, Austria, 22–27 April 2012, European Geosciences Union.
10. Probabilistic flood hazard mapping: Effects of uncertain boundary conditions10.5194/hess-17-3127-2013 ↗
11. Probabilistic Flood Maps to support decision-making: Mapping the Value of Information10.1002/2015WR017378 ↗
12. Assessing the uncertainty in distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information within GLUE10.1002/hyp.398 ↗
13. Bayesian updating of flood inundation likelihoods conditioned on flood extent data10.1002/hyp.1499 ↗
14. Uncertainty in the calibration of effective roughness parameters in HEC-RAS using inundation and downstream level observations10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.06.036 ↗
15. Probabilistic mapping of flood hazards: Depicting uncertainty in streamflow, land use, and geomorphic adjustment
16. Influence of uncertain boundary conditions and model structure on flood inundation predictions10.1016/j.advwatres.2005.11.012 ↗
17. Monte Carlo-based flood modelling framework for estimating probability weighted flood risk10.1111/j.1753-318X.2011.01123.x ↗
18. Estimation of probabilistic flood inundation maps for an extreme event: Pánuco River, México10.1111/jfr3.12067 ↗
19. Quantification of uncertainties in flood risk assessments10.1080/15715124.2008.9635344 ↗
20. Flood risk curves and uncertainty bounds10.1007/s11069-009-9452-6 ↗
21. Uncertainty assessment of extreme flood estimation in the Dongting Lake basin, China10.2166/nh.2019.088 ↗
22. Quantifying Uncertainties in Extreme Flood Predictions under Climate Change for a Medium-Sized Basin in Northeastern China10.1175/JHM-D-15-0212.1 ↗
23. Decision-Making and Flood Risk Uncertainty: Statistical Data Set Analysis for Flood Risk Assessment10.1029/2017WR022024 ↗
24. Uncertainty introduced by flood frequency analysis in projections for changes in flood magnitudes under a future climate in Norway10.1016/j.ejrh.2020.100675 ↗
25. Assessment of extreme flows and uncertainty under climate change: Disentangling the uncertainty contribution of representative concentration pathways, global climate models and internal climate variability10.5194/hess-24-3251-2020 ↗
26. Greselin, F., Piacenza, F., and Zitikis, R. (2019). Practice Oriented and Monte Carlo Based Estimation of the Value-at-Risk for Operational Risk Measurement. Risks, 7.10.3390/risks7020050 ↗
27. Building hazard maps with differentiated risk perception for flood impact assessment10.5194/nhess-20-2647-2020 ↗
28. King, L.M., and Simonovic, S.P. (2020). A Deterministic Monte Carlo Simulation Framework for Dam Safety Flow Control Assessment. Water, 12.10.3390/w12020505 ↗
29. Large wood transport as significant influence on flood risk in a mountain village10.1007/s11069-014-1222-4 ↗
30. Pedestrian hazard criteria for flooded urban areas10.1007/s11069-013-0702-2 ↗
31. Instituto Geográfico (2020, June 22). LiDAR PNOA. Available online: https://pnoa.ign.es/el-proyecto-pnoa-lidar.
32. Uncertainties of flood frequency estimation approaches based on continuous simulation using data resampling10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.09.011 ↗
33. Jiménez Álvarez, A., García Montañés, C., Mediero Orduña, L., Incio Caballero, L., and Garrote Revilla, J. (2013). Bases Metodológicas del Mapa de Caudales Máximos de las Cuencas Intercomunitarias, Centro de Estudios y Experimentación de Obras Públicas.
34. A comparison of confidence intervals for generalized extreme-value distributions10.1080/00949659808811918 ↗
35. Quantifying the uncertainty of design floods under nonstationary conditions10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000931 ↗
36. Comprehensive at-site flood frequency analysis using Monte Carlo Bayesian inference10.1029/1999WR900012 ↗
37. Nonparametric Bayesian flood frequency estimation10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.02.005 ↗
38. Optimality of profile likelihood intervals for quantiles of extreme value distributions: Application to environmental disasters10.1080/02626667.2014.897405 ↗
39. The future of distributed models—Model calibration and uncertainty prediction10.1002/hyp.3360060305 ↗
40. Bayesian estimation of uncertainty in runoff prediction and the value of data: An application of the GLUE approach10.1029/95WR03723 ↗
41. Variance of two- and three-parameter GEV/PWM quantile estimators: Formulae, confidence intervals, and a comparison10.1016/0022-1694(92)90167-T ↗
42. Iber: Herramienta de simulación numérica del flujo en ríos
43. (2020, July 06). Boletín Oficial del Estado. Available online: https://boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2008-755.
44. USACE (2003). Economic Guidance Memorandum (EGM) 04–01, Generic Depth–Damage Relationships for Residential Structures with Basements, USACE.
45. Huizinga, J., De Moel, H., and Szewczyk, W. (2017). Global Flood Depth–Damage Functions: Methodology and the Database with Guidelines, Joint Research Centre.
46. USACE (2009). Economic Guidance Memorandum (EGM) 09–04, Generic Depth–Damage Relationships for Vehicles, USACE.
47. Flood-plain mapping: A critical discussion of deterministic and probabilistic approaches10.1080/02626661003683389 ↗
48. First Street Foundation (2020, October 27). Flood Factor. Available online: https://floodfactor.com/.
49. A Study on the connection method between Flood Insurance system and Urban Plan for the establishment of advanced Disaster Management Policy
50. FEMA, Federal Emergency Management Agency (2021, January 30). Flood Map, Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Available online: https://floodpartners.com/fema-flood-map/.
51. Strengthening linkages between land-use planning and emergency management in New Zealand
52. Struik, L.C., Pearce, L.D., Dercole, F., Shoubridge, J., van Zijll de Jong, S., Allan, J.D., Hastings, N.L., and Clague, J.J. (2015). Risk-Based Land-Use Guide: SAFE USE of Land Based on Hazard Risk Assessment, Geological Survey of Canada.10.4095/295981 ↗
53. Shakoor, A., and Cato, K. (2018, January 17–21). Disaster Risk Reduction and Land Use Planning: Opportunities to Improve Practice. Proceedings of the IAEG/AEG Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, USA.
54. FLO-2D Simulation of the Flood Inundation Zone in the Case of Failure of the Sandae Reservoir Gyeongju, Gyeongbuk10.9720/kseg.2015.4.449 ↗
55. Discharge Equation Related to a Levee-Break for a Flood Hazard Map10.9720/kseg.2015.4.623 ↗
56. Flood Hazard and Flood Risk Maps in Germany—The Guidelines of the Joint Water Working Group of the German Federal Government and the Federal States10.1007/BF03241684 ↗
57. Implementation of the floods directive in selected EU member states10.1111/wej.12129 ↗
58. Arana García, E. (2018). Mapas de peligrosidad y riesgo por inundaciones: Implicaciones técnicas y jurídicas. Riesgos Naturales y Derecho: Una Perspectiva Interdisciplinar, Editorial Dykinson.
59. An Integrated Approach to Flood Risk Management: A Case Study of Navaluenga (Central Spain)10.1007/s11269-013-0332-1 ↗
60. Fluvial flood risk management in a changing world10.5194/nhess-10-509-2010 ↗
61. Ranking sources of uncertainty in flood damage modelling: A case study on the cost–benefit analysis of a flood mitigation project in the Orb Delta, France10.1111/jfr3.12068 ↗
62. Effect of uncertainty in land use, damage models and inundation depth on flood damage estimates10.1007/s11069-010-9675-6 ↗
63. The topographic data source of digital terrain models as a key element in the accuracy of hydraulic flood modelling10.1002/esp.1278 ↗
64. Garrote, J., and Bernal, N. (2020). On the Influence of the Main Floor Layout of Buildings in Economic Flood Risk Assessment: Results from Central Spain. Water, 12.10.3390/w12030670 ↗
65. Shifting public-private responsibilities in Flemish flood risk management. Towards a co-evolutionary approach10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.05.012 ↗
66. Insurability and mitigation of flood losses in private households in Germany10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00741.x ↗
67. Gobierno de España (2021, May 20). Boletín Oficial del Estado, Real Decreto 9/2008, Available online: https://www.boe.es/buscar/doc.php?id=BOE-A-2008-755.
68. A conceptual model of people’s vulnerability to floods10.1002/2014WR016172 ↗
69. Methodology for the damage assessment of vehicles exposed to flooding in urban areas10.1111/jfr3.12475 ↗
70. Stability criteria for flooded vehicles: A state-of-the-art review
71. Shand, T.D., Cox, R.J., Blacka, M.J., and Smith, G.P. (2011). Australian Rainfall and Runoff (AR&R). Revision Project 10: Appropriate Safety Criteria for Vehicles, Engineers Australia, Water Engineering. Report Number: P10/S2/020.