Search results

Simulating Small-Scale Agricultural Adaptation Decisions in Response to Drought Risk: An Empirical Agent-Based Model for Semi-Arid Kenya

In Eastern Africa, increasing climate variability and changing socioeconomic conditions are exacerbating the frequency and intensity of drought disasters. Droughts pose a severe threat to food security in this region, which is characterized by a large dependency on smallholder rain-fed agriculture and a low level of technological development in the food production systems. Future drought risk will be determined by the adaptation choices made by farmers, yet few drought risk models … incorporate adaptive behavior in the estimation of drought risk. Here, we present an innovative dynamic drought risk adaptation model, ADOPT, to evaluate the factors that influence adaptation decisions and the subsequent adoption of measures, and how this affects drought risk for agricultural production. ADOPT combines socio-hydrological and agent-based modeling approaches by coupling the FAO crop model AquacropOS with a behavioral model capable of simulating different adaptive behavioral theories. In this paper, we compare the protection motivation theory, which describes bounded rationality, with a business-as-usual and an economic rational adaptive behavior. The inclusion of these scenarios serves to evaluate and compare the effect of different assumptions about adaptive behavior on the evolution of drought risk over time. Applied to a semi-arid case in Kenya, ADOPT is parameterized using field data collected from 250 households in the Kitui region and discussions with local decision-makers. The results show that estimations of drought risk and the need for emergency food aid can be improved using an agent-based approach: we show that ignoring individual household characteristics leads to an underestimation of food-aid needs. Moreover, we show that the bounded rational scenario is better able to reflect historic food security, poverty levels, and crop yields. Thus, we demonstrate that the reality of complex human adaptation decisions can best be described assuming bounded rational adaptive behavior; furthermore, an agent-based approach and the choice of adaptation theory matter when quantifying risk and estimating emergency aid needs.

Review article: Natural hazard risk assessments at the global scale

Since 1990, natural hazards have led to over 1.6 million fatalities globally, and economic losses are estimated at an average of around USD 260–310 billion per year. The scientific and policy communities recognise the need to reduce these risks. As a result, the last decade has seen a rapid development of global models for assessing risk from natural hazards at the global scale. In this paper, we review the scientific literature on natural hazard risk assessments at the global scale, and we specifically examine whether and how they have examined future projections of hazard, exposure, and/or vulnerability. In doing so, we examine similarities and differences between the approaches taken across the different hazards, and we identify potential ways in which different hazard communities can learn from each other. For example, there are a number of global risk studies focusing on hydrological, climatological, and meteorological hazards that have included future projections and disaster risk reduction measures (in the case of floods), whereas fewer exist in the peer-reviewed literature for global studies related to geological hazards. On the other hand, studies of earthquake and tsunami risk are now using stochastic modelling approaches to allow for a fully probabilistic assessment of risk, which could benefit the modelling of risk from other hazards. Finally, we discuss opportunities for learning from methods and approaches being developed and applied to assess natural hazard risks at more continental or regional scales. Through this paper, we hope to encourage further dialogue on knowledge sharing between disciplines and communities working on different hazards and risk and at different spatial scales.

Integrated flood disaster management and spatial information

Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XL-8, 147-154, 2014www.int-arch-photogramm-remote-sens-spatial-inf-sci.net/XL-8/147/2014/doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-8-147-2014Integrated flood disaster management and spatial information: Case studies ofNetherlands and IndiaS. Zlatanova1, T. Ghawana2, A. Kaur2, and J. M. M. Neuvel31Faculty of Architecture, Jullianalaan, TU Delft, 134, 2628BL Delft, the Netherlands2Centre for Disaster Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Sector-16C, Dwarka, New Delhi, P.O. Box-110078, India3Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Risk management, Handelskade 75, 7417 DH Deventer, the NetherlandsKeywords: Floods, Spatial Information Infrastructure, GIS, Risk Management, Emergency Management Abstract. Spatial Information is an integral part of flood management practices which include risk management &emergency response processes. Although risk & emergency management activities have their own characteristics, forexample, related to the time scales, time pressure, activities & actors involved, it is still possible to identify at least onecommon challenge that constrains the ability of risk & emergency management to plan for & manage emergencieseffectively and efficiently i.e. the need for better information. Considering this aspect, this paper explores flood managementin Netherlands& India with an emphasis on spatial information requirements of each system. The paper examines theactivities, actors & information needs related to flood management. Changing perspectives on flood management inNetherlands are studied where additional attention is being paid to the organization and preparation of flood emergencymanagement. Role of different key actors involved in risk management is explored. Indian Flood management guidelines, byNational Disaster Management Authority, are analyzed in context of their history, institutional framework, achievements andgaps. Flood Forecasting System of Central Water Commission of India is also analyzed in context of spatial dimensions.Further, information overlap between risk & emergency management from the perspectives of spatial planners & emergencyresponders and role of GIS based modelling / simulation is analyzed. Finally, the need for an integrated spatial informationstructure is explained & discussed in detail. This examination of flood management practices in the Netherlands and Indiawith an emphasis on the required spatial information in these practices has revealed an increased recognition of the stronginterdependence between risk management and emergency response processes. Consequently, the importance of anintegrated spatial information infrastructure that facilitates the process of both risk and emergency management isaddressed.Conference Paper (PDF, 1063 KB)   Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XL-8, 147-154, 2014www.int-arch-photogramm-remote-sens-spatial-inf-sci.net/XL-8/147/2014/doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-8-147-2014Integrated flood disaster management and spatial information: Case studies ofNetherlands and IndiaS. Zlatanova1, T. Ghawana2, A. Kaur2, and J. M. M. Neuvel31Faculty of Architecture, Jullianalaan, TU Delft, 134, 2628BL Delft, the Netherlands2Centre for Disaster Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Sector-16C, Dwarka, New Delhi, P.O. Box-110078, India3Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Risk management, Handelskade 75, 7417 DH Deventer, the NetherlandsKeywords: Floods, Spatial Information Infrastructure, GIS, Risk Management, Emergency ManagementAbstract. Spatial Information is an integral part of flood management practices which include risk management &emergency response processes. Although risk & emergency management activities have their own characteristics, forexample, related to the time scales, time pressure, activities & actors involved, it is still possible to identify at least onecommon&

Geographical dimensions of risk management

Land use or land-use changes can trigger or generate hazards and affect the potential consequences of these hazards. Deforestation can trigger land slides, for example, and land reclamation or levee construction can increase flood hazards downstream. New dwellings in or near forests can trigger wildfires, especially if home owners fail to prioritise fire safety measures. In addition, if land is used for industrial activities, new technological hazards, such as the risks resulting from the storage or production of hazardous materials, can be introduced into the environment. Moreover, land-use changes can increase damage potential. Residential developments in hazard-prone areas, such as areas prone to flooding or earthquakes, can negatively affect the number of properties and people exposed to hazards. Consequently, spatial planning activities that are concerned with influencing land use by locating physical structures and activities such as agriculture, recreation or industry within a territory (Couclelis, 2005; Tewdwr-Jones, 2001) can result in new or increased safety risks in a particular area.

Knowledge platforms addressing nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction at European and national levels

The need to integrate flood and drought disaster risk reduction strategies

Most research on hydrological risks focuses either on flood risk or drought risk, whilst floods and droughts are two extremes of the same hydrological cycle. To better design disaster risk reduction (DRR) measures and strategies, it is important to consider interactions between these closely linked phenomena. We show examples of: (a) how flood or drought DRR measures can have (unintended) positive or negative impacts on risk of the opposite hazard; and (b) how flood or drought DRR measures can be negatively impacted by the opposite hazard. We focus on dikes and levees, dams, stormwater control and upstream measures, subsurface storage, migration, agricultural practices, and vulnerability and preparedness. We identify key challenges for moving towards a more holistic risk management approach.