Assessment Flood Control

WCD Thematic Review
Options Assessment: IV.4

Assessment of Flood Control
and Management Options

Final Version: November 2000

Prepared for the World Commission on Dams (WCD) by:

C.H. Green, D.J. Parker, S.M. Tunstall
Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex University

Secretariat of the World Commission on Dams
P.O. Box 16002, Vlaeberg, Cape Town 8018, South Africa
Phone: 27 21 426 4000 Fax: 27 21 426 0036.
Website: http://www.dams.org E-mail: info@dams.org
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options i
This is a working paper prepared for the World Commission on Dams as part of its information gathering activities. The views,
conclusions, and recommendations contained in the working paper are not to be taken to represent the views of the Commission

Disclaimer

This is a working paper of the World Commission on Dams - the report published herein was
prepared for the Commission as part of its information gathering activity. The views, conclusions,
and recommendations are not intended to represent the views of the Commission. The Commission's
views, conclusions, and recommendations will be set forth in the Commission's own report.

Please cite this report as follows:
Green, C.H., Parker, D.J., Tunstall, S.M. 2000. Assessment of Flood Control and Management
Options, Thematic Review IV.4 prepared as an input to the World Commission on Dams, Cape
Town, www.dams.org

The WCD Knowledge Base

This report is one component of the World Commission on Dams knowledge base from which the
WCD drew to finalize its report Dams and Development-A New Framework for Decision Making.
The knowledge base consists of seven case studies, two country studies, one briefing paper,
seventeen thematic reviews of five sectors, a cross check survey of 125 dams, four regional
consultations and nearly 1000 topic-related submissions. All the reports listed below, are available on
CD-ROM or can be downloaded from www.dams.org

Case Studies (Focal Dams)
Grand Coulee Dam, Columbia River Basin, USA
Tarbela Dam, Indus River Basin, Pakistan
Aslantas Dam, Ceyhan River Basin, Turkey
Kariba Dam, Zambezi River, Zambia/Zimbabwe
Tucurui Dam, Tocantins River, Brazil
Pak Mun Dam, Mun-Mekong River Basin,
Thailand
Glomma and Laagen Basin, Norway
Pilot Study of the Gariep and Van der Kloof
dams- Orange River South Africa

Country Studies
India
China
Briefing Paper
Russia and NIS
countries
Thematic Reviews
TR I.1: Social Impact of Large Dams: Equity and
Distributional Issues
TR I.2: Dams, Indigenous People and Vulnerable
Ethnic Minorities
TR I.3: Displacement, Resettlement,
Rehabilitation, Reparation and
Development

TR II.1: Dams, Ecosystem Functions and
Environmental Restoration
TRII.1: Dams, Ecosystem Functions and
Environmental Restoration
TR II.2: Dams and Global Change

TR III.1: Economic, Financial and Distributional
Analysis
TR III.2: International Trends in Project Financing

TR IV.1: Electricity Supply and Demand
Management Options
TR IV.2: Irrigation Options
TR IV.3: Water Supply Options
TR IV.4: Flood Control and Management Options
TR IV.5: Operation, Monitoring and
Decommissioning of Dams

TR V.1: Planning Approaches
TR V.2: Environmental and Social Assessment for
Large Dams
TR V.3: River Basins Institutional Frameworks
and Management Options
TR V.4: Regulation, Compliance and
Implementation
TR V.5: Participation, Negotiation and Conflict
Management: Large Dam Projects
Regional Consultations Hanoi, Colombo, Sao Paulo and Cairo

Cross-check Survey of 125 dams
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options ii

Financial and in-kind Contributors:

Financial and in-kind support for the WCD process was received from 54 contributors including
governments, international agencies, the private sector, NGOs and various foundations. According to
the mandate of the Commission, all funds received were untied-i.e. these funds were provided with
no conditions attached to them.

ABB
ADB - Asian Development Bank
AID - Assistance for India's Development
Atlas Copco
Australia - AusAID
Berne Declaration
British Dam Society
Canada - CIDA
Carnegie Foundation
Coyne et Bellier
C.S. Mott Foundation
Denmark - Ministry of Foreign Affairs
EDF - Electricit de France
Engevix
ENRON International
Finland - Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Germany - BMZ: Federal Ministry for Economic
Co-operation
Goldman Environmental Foundation
GTZ - Deutsche Geschellschaft fr Technische
Zusammenarbeit
Halcrow Water
Harza Engineering
Hydro Quebec
Novib
David and Lucille Packard Foundation
Paul Rizzo and Associates
People's Republic of China
Rockefeller Brothers Foundation
Skanska
SNC Lavalin
South Africa - Ministry of Water Affairs and
Forestry
Statkraft
Sweden - Sida
IADB - Inter-American Development Bank
Ireland - Ministry of Foreign Affairs
IUCN - The World Conservation Union
Japan - Ministry of Foreign Affairs
KfW - Kredietanstalt fr Wiederaufbau
Lahmeyer International
Lotek Engineering
Manitoba Hydro
National Wildlife Federation, USA
Norplan
Norway - Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Switzerland - SDC
The Netherlands - Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The World Bank
Tractebel Engineering
United Kingdom - DFID
UNEP - United Nations Environment
Programme
United Nations Foundation
USA Bureau of Reclamation
Voith Siemens
Worley International
WWF International
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options iii

Executive Summary

General principles

This report is about managing floods and how to identify the appropriate flood management strategy
for local conditions. It is not an analysis of the flood management role of dams in isolation but of
how to choose the most appropriate flood management strategy in the particular local conditions.
What is the most appropriate strategy will vary according to the nature of the flood and other local
conditions.

The recommended approach is necessarily comparative: the only way to identify the potential role of
dams in flood management is in the context of the appropriate role of all other flood management
options. Moreover, the most appropriate local flood management strategy will often consist of a
combination of measures, one of which may or may not be a dam. The most appropriate management
strategy will frequently involve a mix of measures.

The required logical approach is to begin by analysing the nature of the flood problem in the area,
identify the available options, compare these in terms of their contribution to the societys objectives,
and finally to select the best available option. A second key principle in this report is the need for an
appropriate strategy for the local problem; floods differ very widely in their nature and so do the
characteristics of the floodplains affected. What is an appropriate flood management strategy in the
context of one catchment will not be so in another catchment. In particular, a problem for the
developing countries has been the parochialism of the approaches proposed as the solution of those
countries problems. There has been a tendency to propose that the approaches adopted for the
Rhine, Mississippi or the Thames should be applied to the Yangtze or Bramaputra although
conditions are quite different in the five countries.

Consequently, it is not possible to argue for or against dams in principle, but it is possible to argue
that there is a better option in a particular local context. What a society means by better is then a
critical question, and one that has often been addressed too narrowly in the past. It is also one that
can be only answered comparatively in terms of the available options. However, under the
appropriate circumstances, dams have proved to be highly effective means of reducing flood losses.
Whether they are the most appropriate solution in local conditions then depends on the available
alternatives.

Thirdly, a significant proportion of the failures of the past fifty years in water management have been
institutional, and the physical solutions adopted have frequently required institutional systems to
support them that have not been sustainable. Thus, the failure of those physical systems has
frequently been a consequence of the failure of the supporting institutional system. At present, we
would seem to be somewhat, but only somewhat, better at designing physical systems than
institutional ones.

Catchment management

A catchment-based perspective must be taken that includes flood hazard management along with the
other aspects of water and land management. Such an approach takes account of the
interdependencies between functions, across geographical areas and between the use of both land and
water. In most aspects of water management, runoff is the resource; in the case of floods, runoff is
the problem. Thus, floods are to a greater or lesser extent an externality of land use where the area
generating the runoff can be hundreds of kilometres away from the area being flooded, often in
another country. In addition, the pattern of variation in the availability of runoff is often inconsistent
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options iv

with the pattern of human use; for water resources, the problem is then of concentrating runoff in
time and space in order to satisfy the pattern of human use. Conversely, flooding is the obverse
problem: runoff is too concentrated in time and space. Some parts of the world therefore suffer both
problems: flooding and an insufficiency of water at other times of the year.

In the case of flooding, the appropriate economic objective is to maximise the efficiency of use of the
catchment and not to minimise flood losses. Trends in national flood losses need not provide any
guide to the success or failure of the national flood hazard management strategy adopted: it can be
readily shown that efficient flood hazard management policy can be accompanied by a rise in both
flood losses and the costs of flood management. Taking such a catchment-based approach means that
terms such as floodplain encroachment are very misleading. The two questions that should be
asked are: should the intensification of development on this particular area of floodplain be
encouraged? and, if so, what form of flood management strategy should be adopted in this area? The
environmental damage caused by developing other parts of the catchment instead of the floodplain
may be greater.

Floodplains

Floodplains have competitive advantages over other areas of land and therefore have always been
centres for human settlements. At the same time, the wetlands that develop in floodplains are
amongst the most valuable ecological resources on the planet. Ecosystems always develop on the
basis of the prevailing water regime; modifying that water regime, which is the purpose of physical
flood mitigation measures, will necessarily cause damage to the existing ecosystems. In many parts
of the world the floodplains have been heavily modified by past human intervention and here the
dominant ecosystems will depend upon the water regime that has resulted from that intervention.
Consequently, abandoning or changing those past patterns of human intervention will cause
environmental damage.

Rivers are dynamic, adaptive systems whose form varies as runoff and sediment loads vary over time.
Rivers are systems for transporting, depositing and eroding sediment as much as they are systems for
concentrating and transporting water. Interventions must recognise that rivers have these
characteristics. Trying to fix rivers to a stable form often fails and is usually expensive but in some
circumstances is necessary.

National differences

There are no universally appropriate solutions; the locally appropriate solution depends upon both the
nature of the country and of the flood problem. The appropriate local flood hazard management
option is dependent upon:

the nature of the local flood problem;
whether there is already an alleviation scheme in place;
the intensity of use of the floodplain and
the state of development of the country.

Therefore, there are no off the shelf management strategies which are invariably more appropriate
than others; the strategy that is appropriate for one catchment can be totally inappropriate for another
catchment. The nature of the flood problem can differ widely, particularly between those in flashy,
small and steep catchments, and those on mature river floodplains.

Important variables in differentiating between countries (and between provinces within a country)
include:
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options v

the availability of arable land per capita;
the degree of urbanisation;
population density and
the intensity of economic activity per unit area.

Countries or regions will have more flood management options when:
they have more than about 0.15 ha of arable land per capita;
they are highly urbanised (eg 70% of the population live in urban areas and have low population
densities on average [eg less than 100 people per km
2
) and
they have low intensities of economic activity for their stage of development.

Flood management in North Dakota with a population density of 2 people/km
2
is trivially easy
compared to flood management in countries such as Bangladesh and China where population
densities may exceed 600 people/km
2
.

Rather than simply transposing the approach to flood hazard management that is appropriate for one
country to another, we need to transfer the knowledge about what made that approach appropriate.
Simply proposing to adopt the approach that is appropriate in one area to another area is parochial at
best and neo-colonialist at worst.

Both rivers and floods are cultural constructs; in highly adapted societies, the annual floods are
expected and welcomed although the extreme floods cause death and destruction. In different
cultures, rivers may be sacred spaces, valued for the environment and resources they support, or
regarded as a waste of valuable land. These differences colour the way in which floods are managed.
Traditional/indigenous societies have developed adaptations to cope with flooding that offer useful
lessons; however, those adaptations are not usually capable of coping with extreme floods.

In general, in highly urbanised countries with industrial scale farming, once all direct and indirect
agricultural subsidies have been removed, it is unlikely that flood protection will be economically
justified in rural areas although land drainage may be.

Appraisal led design

Appraisal-led design means starting with identifying the objectives and then continuing to assess the
identified options against these objectives throughout the iterative project cycle, rather than designing
the project first and then assessing the economic, environmental and distributional impacts of that
project afterwards.

It is necessary to both start with the questions of what is the problem? and what are our
objectives? and keep asking these questions throughout the project life cycle. After 15 years or so,
the primary objective has often been transmuted into completing the project and, when the project is
operating, into meeting some bureaucratic criteria.

Decisions concerning flood management should always be appraisal-led: a preliminary assessment of
the likely benefits and costs of identified options should always be made before detailed engineering
and hydrological studies are made. These assessments should be progressively refined as the design
process develops. The purpose of appraisal is to gain understanding as to what the decision involves
and to communicate this understanding to all those who have an interest in the decision. Therefore,
the appraisal process must be transparent and open to public involvement. It is the gain in
understanding that is important rather than any numbers that emerge from the analysis.

Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options vi

The principles of flood hazard management

Flooding should not be assumed to be the problem; the impact of the flood may be only a symptom of
a wider problem, ie the vulnerability of the population to a wide variety of threats. In these cases,
rather than simply introducing a flood alleviation strategy, it would be more useful to look at ways of
reducing the vulnerability of the population and to promote sustainable livelihoods. This might, for
example, include introducing soft credit and empowering the members of the society.

In developing a flood hazard management policy, it is essential to consider how all floods will be
managed and not just some (eg those up to some design standard of protection). This means that it is
necessary to design for failure: to consider both the flood conditions under which a particular strategy
will fail and the mode of failure, including how to respond to extreme events. Because all strategies
will fail under some conditions, it is more appropriate to talk in terms of flood alleviation or flood
mitigation than of flood protection or flood control. One consequence of this approach is that a
flood management strategy will typically involve a combination of different approaches rather than
reliance on a single one.

The ideal flood to manage is a slow-rising flood, with a long time to peak and a low peak level.
Consequently, it is desirable to reduce the proportions of precipitation converted into runoff and
runoff into river flow downstream and to slow the rates at which these processes happen. Storage,
whether it be in the soil or surface water , has a central role in controlling both conversions.
Desynchronising the peak flows from different tributaries is often an important part of flood
management in order to reduce the peak flow level on the main stem of the river Again, storage is an
important means of desynchronising peak tributary flows. With storage, control of the rate at which
it is taken up, the amount that is stored and the rate at which the stored volume is released are
important. In all forms of storage, the antecedent conditions are important: if the soil has been
saturated by previous precipitation or surface water storage, natural or artificial, has been taken by
the runoff of earlier event precipitation events or the start of the individual event, then it will have
little effect in mitigating the current flood.

It is also desirable to avoid discontinuities in the appropriate form of adaptation by those at risk eg
points at which a particular strategy of coping with flooding suddenly becomes a counter-productive
form of adaptation for a more extreme flood.

Slowing the time to peak is particularly important when flood warning lead times are short and the
risk to life is significant; both are problems on small, flashy, steep catchments. Compared to other
hazards, floods have a high probability of occurrence. In general, however, the conditional
probability of death should a flood occur is low as compared to other hazards. But, there are contexts
in which this conditional probability is high and it is essential in developing any flood hazard
management strategy to identify those conditions where there will be a high risk to life, and then to
identify a strategy to manage the risk in those areas affected.

For agriculture, it is more appropriate to think in terms of water level management than of flood
management: to maximise production, the moisture in the root zone must be within certain limits.
This may involve land drainage and/or irrigation, and often both at different times of the year. For
dryland farming, losses from floods are typically much less important than the losses from inadequate
land drainage and floods can, but do not always, provide benefits in the form of replenishing soil
fertility. Consequently, controlling soil water levels through drainage will normally be a higher
priority than protecting against out-of-bank flows from watercourses.

The appraisal process
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options vii

In making societal decisions, including whether a floodplain should be developed and the form of the
flood management policy to do adopt, we seek to try to take the right decision. By right decision,
we mean both the correct and the just decision We also mean both achieving the right outcome and
doing so by the right decision process. Different societies, however, differ in what they take to be the
overall goal of societal decision making. Thus, in Continental Europe it is common to speak of
social or national solidarity and Islamic societies take account of the duties owed to other people
and to other species. In the UK, it was usual to speak of identifying some over-arching public or
national interest whilst in other countries the choice may be defined solely in terms of a conflict of
private interests. There is no right answer but the ideological power of economics can result in the
neglect of the reality that there is more to life than economic efficiency.

The definition of sustainable development agreed at the Rio Conference specifies that two defining
conditions of the right process are the involvement of the public at all levels of decision making and
the recognition of the role of women. Some societies also characterise the aim of the decision
process to be to achieve a consensus whilst others define societal choices in a much more adversarial
way.In any event, decisions as to the flood hazard management policy to be adopted should be
appraisal-led: the different available strategies should be compared against the societal objectives
brought to the choice, or, equivalently, appraised in terms of their consequences.

The strategy identified through the appraisal process can be no better than the best of the options
compared. Therefore, it is critical that an adequate range of options be considered if the best option
is to be found amongst them. Whilst some rules have been proposed so as to increase the likelihood
that the best option is included amongst those considered, the most useful approach is to involve the
public early on in the identification of both important issues and possible options.

Choices are made between alternatives and appraisals are therefore necessarily comparative.
Consequently, the advantages and disadvantages of one option exist only relative to those of another
option. In turn, identifying the potential role of dams in flood hazard management requires
simultaneously identifying the potential roles of all other flood hazard management options. In
urbanised countries, where farming is industrialised, managed retreat and resettlement of those
currently living on the floodplain should normally be amongst the options considered.

Choice is also inherently about conflict; a choice only exists if the available options are mutually
exclusive and we can choose only one or another option. The reasons why the alternatives are
mutually exclusive vary and an important aspect of the appraisal process is to identify the nature of
the conflict that is involved.

Choices are also necessarily to be made under uncertainty; because they lie in the future, the
consequences of all the options are shrouded in uncertainty. Uncertainty is the lack of differentiation
and can exist either or both between outcomes and/or the probabilities of each outcome. Decisions
under risk are those where we can differentiate between the probabilities and the outcomes associated
with each option; when we cannot differentiate between the probabilities attached to each option but
only between the outcomes, then we are making a decision under uncertainty. Other combinations
are possible and we are seldom so lucky as to be making a decision under risk.

However, the form of uncertainty that is important is decision uncertainty: uncertainty about what to
do. The state of being uncertain can then be defined as a state of rational doubt as to what to do. In a
real sense, there is therefore no decision to be made if we are certain what option is the best option:
we are uncertain either because of the complexity of the choice or because there is an inherent
conflict between the options. Outcome uncertainties must not be allowed to obscure decision
uncertainty and the latter can be easier to manage; it is only necessary to decide what is the best of
the options available, and not what precisely the future will be. It is dangerous to treat a decision
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options viii

under uncertainty as simply being one under risk and it has been argued then when confronted with
uncertainty, or even less differentiated expectations about the future, an adaptive management
approach should be adopted. Rather than pretending that we can know the future, we should instead
approach all decisions as being part of a learning process, knowing that we will make mistakes and
must seek to learn from them. The adaptive management approach implies that we should have a
preference for options that involve resilient natural systems, forgiving artificial systems or that
enhance the coping capacity of individuals and communities.

A number of different techniques exist to aid in the appraisal process (eg benefit-cost analysis, multi-
criteria analysis). The reason for using these approaches is to inform the decision process, to clarify
the nature of the choice that must be made. It is this understanding that is important, particularly as
to the nature of the conflicts involved in the choice. In order to promote this understanding, the
appraisal method needs to be transparent and all assumptions should be explicit. None of the
available techniques is without drawbacks and limitations.

Consideration should be given to incorporating environmental impacts into the decision process by
introducing the concepts of critical natural capital and constant natural assets as constraints. Critical
natural capital covers those environmental assets that are too important to be sacrificed except in the
most extreme circumstances. Constant natural assets are those where individual sites may be lost
provided that the total stock remains constant; an example of this approach is the no net loss and
wetland banking policy adopted in the USA.

All physical interventions will have consequences both for the water and sediment regimes, and
therefore for the environment, because this is what they are intended to do. A by-product of
institutional changes may be, but wont necessarily be, environmental changes. All interventions
should be expected to have some impact on existing settlement patterns and result in some
resettlement.

Flood management options

Before a choice can be made, the nature of the flood hazard must be modelled. The simplest form of
model is a flood hazard map. On such maps should be indicated the critical characteristics of the
flood hazard, such as the depth and velocity of flooding, floodways and storage areas. Very
vulnerable areas of population should also be shown. Shading should be used throughout; lines
should never be used both because there will be major uncertainties and because a line implies a
significant difference between conditions on the two sides of the line. In particular, the map should
not be limited to the outline of the 100-year return period because to do so violates the principle that
all floods must be managed and not just some.

The flood management options available can be characterised as those that reduce the challenge and
those that enhance the capacity of individuals and society to cope with the flood. Usually, the most
appropriate management strategy will involve a combination of approaches. In modifying the
challenge presented by the flood, we are seeking to modify the flood so that it is the easiest type with
which to cope: slow rising, with a long time to peak, and with a low peak level.

The form of intervention can also be categorised into those that involve a physical intervention versus
those that involve an institutional change. In both cases, it is essential to consider how that
intervention will be maintained and how the necessary funds for maintenance will be generated. A
common cause of failure of both physical and institutional interventions is a lack of maintenance,
frequently as a result of lack of funds. In the case of physical interventions, the designer should
provide a maintenance schedule setting out the maintenance actions required, their frequency and
cost, in the same way that a bill of quantities will be part of the contract documents. A similar
approach is also necessary for institutional strategies.
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options ix

For physical interventions, there are major economies of scale for collective flood alleviation over
individual flood mitigation. Thus, for example, the costs of a dike to protect an area are a function of
the length of bank involved whilst the costs of flood proofing individual properties in that area are a
function of the number of properties in that area. Therefore, at some intensity of development, a
dike, for example, would be more efficient than flood proofing. Similarly, there tend to be economies
of scale in the provision of physical structures: a large area of storage being lower in cost than a
number of small areas having the same total capacity.

Source control should normally be considered, particularly in urban areas. When considering
afforestation, its affects on water availability in general and not just on flood runoffs should be
considered. Native species should normally be used. In assessing the likely effectiveness of source
controls, pre-flood conditions (eg frozen or saturated ground) must be considered. Source control
can be considered as a form of storage in the soil or via the soil.

Surface water storage, by way of dams and detention basins, is most likely to be appropriate on
small, flashy catchments and in complex river systems where it is necessary to avoid the flood crests
from different tributaries coinciding. Control of both the rates of inflow to the storage and of the
outflow has significant advantages in that this avoids storage capacity being taken up by the rising
arm of the flood; storage is most usefully applied to remove the peak of the flood. Dams, in the
appropriate circumstances, can be a highly effective way of reducing downstream flood losses, and
particularly of capping the peak flows of the more extreme floods. Check dams have the added
advantage in some areas of enabling the recharge of groundwater although their primary role is
generally for erosion control. Detention basins can be similarly useful in lowland areas to cap the
peak of flow floods, as may be engineered wetlands.

Dikes are most likely to be appropriate for floodplains that are already intensely used, such as urban
areas and rural areas in countries that are not urbanised and have a history of interventions to promote
flood alleviation. Storage and dikes can be a particularly useful combination of approaches, with the
storage being designed to control the more extreme flood flows.

Land use control: if intensified development on a particular floodplain is undesirable, then
providing incentives for development to be undertaken elsewhere will probably work better than
simply trying to stop development on the floodplain which may merely result in corruption. Where
land is under development pressure, especially from informal development, planning constraints are
unlikely to work.

Flood proofing or house raising are most likely to be appropriate where development intensities are
low and properties are scattered. The population should generally evacuate or be evacuated prior to
the flood and not attempt to sit out the flood in their dwelling.

Warning and evacuation depend for their success on prior emergency planning. An all hazards
emergency plan should be prepared and the emergency plan should treated as the development of a
network of individuals and organisations rather than as a document. Emergency planning is about co-
ordination and co-operation between institutions rather than a schedule of actions. Institutional
maintenance is essential if the management of a flood is to be effective; continuing rehearsals and co-
operation between the parties involved is a requirement of successful emergency planning.
Emergency plans are essential for areas lying behind dikes and below dams. It is necessary that the
information contained in them be disseminated to the public at risk and they should be based on
realistic expectations of how the public will behave in a flood.

Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options x

Flood warnings are always necessary but dissemination takes time; in very flashy catchments in
particular it is unwise to rely upon the reliability of a formal flood warning system. There is a
necessary trade-off between warning lead time and forecast reliability; a reliable and effective
warning system is consequently difficult to achieve when warnings must be based on predicted
rainfall because the time between the rainfall and the flood is too short to for the dissemination of a
warning. Unfortunately, these flash floods are amongst those that present the greatest risks to life.

Typically, investment is focused on improving the technologies required to improve flood forecasts;
however, the weakness of flood warning systems is usually found in the process of converting that
forecast into a warning and getting that warning to those who need it in time for it to be useful for
them. It is essential to start by finding out the user needs of those at risk and also of the different
organisations who will be involved in translating the forecast into a warning and then in
disseminating the warning.

Evacuation is essential where the buildings or other features do not provide a safe place of refuge
during a flood. Depending upon circumstances, evacuation may be upward (eg into a flood refuge) or
outward. Outward evacuation will generally be necessary where the depths of water are significant
(eg > 2m, flood velocities are high (> 2m/s), or buildings are flimsy (eg not masonry or concrete
framed). For outward evacuation to be successful, it must be planned in advance and the population
concerned must know what to do in a flood emergency.

Different countries construe the nature of society in different ways. In most countries, it is usual for
government to provide some level of compensation to victims of disasters. Where this is done there
can be advantages to sub-contracting the assessment and distribution of compensation to the
insurance industry because of its expertise in this area.

Except in partnership with government, the insurance industry has treated floods as an uninsurable
risk. There are different possible forms of such a partnership and these can have the effect of
transferring some or all of the burden of compensation on to those who buy insurance. In general,
however, the government will always be the reinsurer of last resort and for that reason it is advisable
that the nature of this public-private partnership be formalised. In general, flood insurance is an
adjunct to a flood hazard management policy rather than being a tool for implementing such a policy.

The principle of managing the catchment as a whole means that multi-functional options are
becoming increasingly important. An artificial wetland can, for example, provide flood storage,
increase biodiversity and remove pollutants from the water.

Reducing the barriers to achieving sustainable flood management

Sustainable flood management strategies are those appropriate to local conditions, as determined
through public involvement, and ones that can be maintained. There are a number of barriers to be
overcome to achievement of this objective.

Since decisions are made and implemented by institutions, institutional design is critical to the
success of a flood hazard management policy. All institutions necessarily have geographical and
functional boundaries, not least to promote accountability. Because the scope for redefining
institutional boundaries is typically limited for historical, cultural or other reasons, it is essential to
establish ways of co-ordinating across boundaries.

There is an apparent tension between promoting public involvement, which tends to imply the
devolution of decision making to the lowest possible level, and holistic management of the
catchment, which pulls towards a multi-functional institution that covers the entire catchment. To
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options xi

minimise these problems, catchment management authorities should be responsible downwards rather
than upwards; they should have a board of directors made up of representatives from the
organisations, authorities and others living and using the catchment rather than being responsible
solely to higher levels of government.

Holistic management of the catchment will increasingly result in multi-functional options being
adopted. One boundary that can prove a major hindrance to achieving such holistic solutions is
single functional funding. Different institutions have funding restrictions that reflect their functional
and geographical boundaries; agreeing to the funding of a multi-functional approach on a case by
case basis with the different institutions can be time consuming where it is possible at all. A general
funding protocol should be negotiated instead.

The different disciplines are one aspect of institutions. The nature of the discipline defines what it
does and equally what is expected of that discipline. Thus, when a specialist is appointed to examine
a problem, society, by deeming that specialists discipline to be appropriate to the problem, has
implied the expected solution, or approach, to the problem. If engineers became engineers in order to
build things, society expects engineers to build things. In practice, engineers are more problem
orientated than most disciplines and this is an aspect of engineering training that should be
encouraged. Similarly, engineering organisations are increasingly becoming multi-disciplinary and
they have arguably progressed further in this direction than organisations deriving from other
disciplines. Indeed, engineers are the bridge between decision makers and pure scientists, between
whom there is otherwise frequently a major gap: decisions makers have to do something, pure
scientists want to study it.

Water engineers have had a long history of public service. But societies are changing rapidly to be
more pluralistic and the nature of public service is changing with it. In earlier generations, engineers
sought to determine what the public needed and then provided it. Now, engineers play an enabling
role; engineers have to listen to the different publics and then assist those publics in achieving their
goals. Engineering training needs to be orientated towards this wider role.

In the long run, better flood management will only emerge from better research. But the institutional
boundary in universities is between different disciplines and here again the problem is to determine
how to build co-operation across these boundaries. Here, the problem is that the disciplinary focus
tends to orient academics towards developing the discipline in the eyes of their peers, and to studying
flooding from a disciplinary orientation, rather than developing inter-disciplinary perspectives that
speak to the needs of the decision makers.

When giving aid, governments have been known to put the interests of their national companies
ahead of those of the recipients; and similarly NGOs to put the interests of their members ahead of
the sustainable livelihoods of those who live with floods. Both are forms of neocolonialism.
Conversely, alternative viewpoints can enrich the problem space, increasing the likelihood that the
most appropriate strategy will be identified.

Developing countries should seek to learn from the mistakes made by the more developed countries
rather than to replicate them; the objective should be to skip the generation of mistakes made by the
developed countries so as to leapfrog them. Study tours of the developed world should, therefore, be
concerned more with identifying what went wrong in the developed countries rather than looking for
solutions that can be imported. We learn at least as much from our mistakes as our successes.

The understanding of the nature of the choices that must be made in flood management is enriched
and widened by involvement of all interested parties. At the same time, all those who seek
involvement have to answer for their legitimacy: what right do they have for their voice to be heard in
a decision? One claim for legitimacy is that their concern is with the sustainable livelihood of those
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options xii

who will be affected by the decision to be made. Public involvement does not mean allowing the
system to be captured by those with the most power, influence or social competency. The interests of
others must be protected and integrated into the decision process.

Democratising information is a prerequisite of effective public involvement. This means more than
making data available; it also means providing the public with the means to convert raw data into
useful information. The start is to ask the public what the questions are they want answered. Local
ownership of flood alleviation strategies and the options involved is necessary for long run success.

For equity reasons, it will often be appropriate for the central government to contribute towards the
capital costs of the strategy adopted, the extent of its contribution varying according to the relative
wealth of the area in question. However, the population that benefits should normally bear the costs
of operating and maintaining the strategy. Hypothecated taxes for this purpose are more transparent
than paying these costs out of general revenue and a locally accountable organisation is more
appropriate than a more centralised body.

The role of dams in flood management

In the appropriate circumstances, the storage provided behind dams can result in a substantial
reduction in flood losses. The California Flood Emergency Action Team (1999) report on the 1997
floods claimed that on a number of major river systems, flood control dams reduced flood flows by
half; the US Army Corps of Engineers annual reports to the US Congress routinely claim very
substantial reductions in flood losses as a result of the storage provided in dams. Storage in soil or in
surface waters will reduce total flood flows and controlled storage reduces the peak flood flow, the
latter being particularly helpful in flood management. The forms of storage that are possible, if any,
are determined by local conditions. Positioning the storage in relation to the areas at risk and the
timing of storage uptake and release are both important to the choice of the form of storage to adopt
and the impact of the storage on the flood.

But, to reiterate, the choice of flood management strategy must be made on a comparative basis, the
advantages and disadvantages of each available option being compared.

A dam is most likely to form part of the appropriate management strategy when:
the major part of the runoff comes from a small, steep catchment immediately above the area at
risk;
the time to concentration is short;
multiple tributaries contribute to the local flood problem and it is important to prevent the flood
crests from the different tributaries being synchronised;
the ratio of flow in an extreme flood to the flow of the annual flood is high and
the floodplain is heavily developed.

Where the reservoir created can also be used for other purposes, such as irrigation or power
generation, the case for a dam is strengthened.

Small scale warping and catch dams can frequently form a useful component of a strategy to
control soil erosion and sediment movement in areas where the sediment loads generated would
otherwise be considerable.

Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options xiii

Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 The Nature Of Flood Problems ..................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Measures of the global flood problem........................................................................................... 2
1.2 The Four Generations of Flood Hazard Management ................................................................... 4
1.2.1 Indigenous Flood Adaptations....................................................................................................... 4
1.2.2 Flood Control and Defence, and Efficient Rivers ...................................................................... 7
1.2.3 Non-Structural Approaches ........................................................................................................... 7
1.2.4 Holistic Approaches ...................................................................................................................... 8
1.3 The Cultural Construction of Floods and Flood Hazard Management ......................................... 9
1.4 The Evolution of Dams in Flood Hazard Management............................................................... 11
2. The Nature Of Floods, Flood Generation And Floodplain....................................... 18
2.1 Flood Production ......................................................................................................................... 18
2.2 The Use Of Floodplains............................................................................................................... 20
3. The Benefits and Costs of Floods ................................................................................ 26
3.1 Risks to Life and Health.............................................................................................................. 29
3.2 Agricultural Benefits and Costs .................................................................................................. 32
3.2.1 Flood Losses................................................................................................................................ 33
3.2.2 Land Drainage ............................................................................................................................. 34
3.2.3 Livestock Benefits and Losses .................................................................................................... 35
3.3 Urban Impacts.............................................................................................................................. 36
3.4 Environmental Consequences of Flooding.................................................................................. 38
3.4.1 Unregulated Rivers...................................................................................................................... 38
3.4.2 Managed and Regulated Rivers................................................................................................... 39
3.4.3 Offshore Impacts of Flooding...................................................................................................... 39
3.4.4 Integrated Catchment Management and the Environment .......................................................... 39
4. Flood Management Options ........................................................................................ 41
4.1 Managing all Floods and Not Just Some..................................................................................... 42
4.2 What is Vulnerability and Who is Vulnerable ? ......................................................................... 44
4.2.1 Alternative Definitions of Vulnerability ..................................................................................... 45
4.3 Identifying the Threat .................................................................................................................. 46
4.4 Reducing the Challenge............................................................................................................... 49
4.4.1 Controlling Runoff ...................................................................................................................... 57
4.4.2 Storage......................................................................................................................................... 59
4.4.3 Slowing the Flood Wave ............................................................................................................. 60
4.4.4 Carrying the Flow........................................................................................................................ 61
4.4.5 Separating the People and the Threat .......................................................................................... 61
4.4.6 Economies of Scale in Flood Alleviation.................................................................................... 68
4.4.7 The Environmental Effects of the Different Options .................................................................. 70
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options xiv

4.5 Enhancing Coping Capacity........................................................................................................ 72
4.5.1 Emergency Planning and Management ....................................................................................... 73
4.5.2 Flood Forecasting and Warning .................................................................................................. 75
4.5.3 Evacuation ................................................................................................................................... 79
4.5.4 Compensation.............................................................................................................................. 80
4.5.5 Flood Insurance ........................................................................................................................... 81
4.5.6 Help and Counselling .................................................................................................................. 85
4.6 Matching the Solution to the Problem......................................................................................... 85
5. The Role of Dams in Flood Hazard Management ..................................................... 94
6. Making the Right Decision?...................................................................................... 99
7. Barriers to Sustainable Flood Management............................................................. 109
7.1 Institutional Barriers.................................................................................................................. 110
7.2 Professional Roles ..................................................................................................................... 112
7.3 Exporting/Importing Failure...................................................................................................... 113
7.4 Financing ................................................................................................................................... 113
7.5 Maintenance .............................................................................................................................. 114
7.6 Research .................................................................................................................................... 115
7.7 Corruption.................................................................................................................................. 115
7.8 Public Involvement .................................................................................................................... 116
7.9 Legitimising voices.................................................................................................................... 116
8. Conclusions and Recommendations.......................................................................... 118
References........................................................................................................................... 120
Appendix I: List of Contributing Papers to the Assessment of Flood Control and
Management Options Thematic Review.......................................................................... 133
Appendix II: Submissions for Thematic Review IV.4................................................... 134
Appendix III: Review Comments received on Thematic Review IV.4.......................... 136

Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options xv

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Hydrograph for the Tone River, Japan 1-4 August, 1982................................................ 14
Figure 1.2: Reported Trends over Time in the Number of Dams Built.............................................. 16
Figure 3.1: Subjective Assessments by Households of the Relative Severity of the Different
Impacts of Flooding.......................................................................................................... 27
Figure 3.2: The Mechanisms of Flood Losses.................................................................................... 28
Figure 3.3: Depth-Damage Curves for Dwellings .............................................................................. 29
Figure 3.4: Crop Losses in a Northern Climate (Hungary) ................................................................ 34
Figure 3.5: Crop Losses in a Southern Climate (Australia) ............................................................... 34
Figure 4.1: Hypothetical flood hazard map ........................................................................................ 47
Figure 4.2 Examples of flood hazard management options .............................................................. 49
Figure 4.3: Changes to Flood Hydrograph by Management Option .................................................. 51
Figure 4.4: Schematic Differences in the Loss-Probability Curve by Management Option .............. 52
Figure 4.5: Risk to Life by Management Strategy and Exceedance Probability................................ 54
Figure 4.6: Flood Management in a Hypothetical Catchment............................................................ 55
Figure 4.7: Tributary Floods First: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B ......................................... 55
Figure 4.8: Main Stem Floods First: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B....................................... 55
Figure 4.9: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B with Flood Storage on the Main Stem.................. 56
Figure 4.10: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B with Flood Storage on the Tributary .................... 57
Figure 4.11: Comprehensive Flood Management Strategy Adopted on the Middle and
Lower Yangtze River: Dams, Detention Basins, Dikes as well as Flood Warnings
and Resettlement.............................................................................................................. 64
Figure 4.12: Dike Failure Probabilities for an Eexisting Dike System................................................ 65
Figure 4.13: Economies of Scale in Collective Versus Individual Flood Response ............................ 69
Figure 4.14: Probability of Successful Response as a Function of Warning Lead Time..................... 77
Figure 4.15: Data Required in Order to Increase Warning Lead Time ................................................ 79
Figure 6.1: The Distribution of Project Net Benefits over Time...................................................... 101
Figure 6.2: Distributional Impacts of a Project ................................................................................ 102
Figure 6.3: Multi-Criteria Analysis: the Analysis of Alternative Options ....................................... 104
Figure 6.4: Project Prioritisation by Multi-Criteria Analysis.......................................................... 105
Figure 6.5: Confidence in the Economic Viability of a Project as a Function of the Benefit-
Cost Ratio ...................................................................................................................... 106
Figure 6.6: Differentiation Sensitivity of Alternative do something Options to Key Parameters. 106
Figure 7.1: The Different Ways in which Institutional Boundaries have been Drawn with Respect
to Dikes .......................................................................................................................... 112

Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options xvi

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Types of Flood....................................................................................................................... 1
Table 1.2 Global Loss of Life by Geophysical Event, 1945-1986 ........................................................ 3
Table 1.3: The Comparative Evolution of Flood Management: Determinants of Flood
Management Policies........................................................................................................... 11
Table 1.4: Number of Dams Constructed at Least in Part for Flood Alleviation Purposes in Japan .. 12
Table 1.5: Dams and Flood Management in China .............................................................................. 12
Table 1.6 Flood Management Options for the Upper Mississippi and Lower Missouri Rivers ......... 15
Table 2.1: Gross Domestic Product and Population Density per Square Kilometre............................ 22
Table 2.2: Arable Land Availability per Capita ................................................................................... 22
Table 3.1: The Beneficial Impacts of Floods........................................................................................ 26
Table 3.2: Flood Conditions and Probability of Structural Failure of Masonry Buildings.................. 32
Table 3.3: Economic Benefits of Land Drainage in the UK................................................................. 35
Table 3.4: A Categorisation of Urban Impacts of Floods..................................................................... 36
Table 4.1: Knowledge and Probabilities............................................................................................... 41
Table 4.2: Potential Forms and Causes of Discontinuities in the Challenge Presented by a Flood .43
Table 4.3: Hypothetical Analysis of the Likely Effectiveness of Land Use Planning ......................... 67
Table 4.4: Catchment Zones and the Importance of Flows of Water and Sediment ............................ 70
Table 4.5: The Environmental Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Flood
Management Options........................................................................................................... 71
Table 4.6: Appropriateness of Alternative Flood Management Options.............................................. 87
Table 4.7: Comparative Flood Problems on the Mississippi, Tisza, Thames and Yangtze ................. 91
Table 6.1: Possible Distributional Outcomes ..................................................................................... 102
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options 1


1. Introduction

Floodplains are areas where either there are ecologically important wetlands, or were such areas in
the past, and are also areas that have competitive advantages for human settlement. Resolving the
potential conflict between ecological value and human use is consequently a major issue in
determining the most appropriate flood hazard management strategy. At the same time, the strategy
adopted must consider how all floods are to be managed and not just some. The likely outcome is
then that the strategy adopted will consist of a mix of options.

1.1 The Nature Of Flood Problems

An economically-worded but broad definition of a flood is offered by Ward (1978): A flood is a
body of water which rises to overflow land which is not normally submerged.

These definitions suggest many different types of floods based initially upon the prime causal agent
(Table 1.1).

Table 1.1: Types of Flood
AGENT DETAILS AND EXAMPLES
Rainfall Riverine or non-riverine
Slow-onset or flash flood
Convectional/frontal/orographic
Torrential rainfall floods

Snowmelt Riverine
Overland flow

Icemelt Glacial meltwater (rise in air
temperature)
Glacial meltwater (geothermal heat
source) - eg Jokulhlaup Spate floods

Flooding during freeze-up Riverine

Flooding by ice breakup Riverine (also called ice-jam floods)

Mudfloods Floods with high sediment content
Induced by volcanic activity

Coastal/sea/tidal floods Storm surge (tropical or temperate
induced)
Ocean swell floods
Tsunamis (induced by geological
process)

Dam Dam-break flood
Dam overtopping
Failure of natural dams eg morrains

Sewer/urban drain flood Storm discharge to sewers and
drains exceeds capacity


Water distribution failure Burst water mains
Breaches in canals

Rising water tables (high groundwater tables) Land subsidence, rising sea levels,
reductions in abstractions from aquifers

Note: Flood types are not necessarily mutually exclusive. For example: convectional rainfall may
generate flash floods; and frontal rainfall may be influenced by topography to generate orographic
rainfall floods.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Floods are part of the dynamic variation of the hydrological cycle, the basic causes of which are
climatological. To this must be coupled the nature of the terrain which generates the runoff (eg
geology, soil type and vegetation cover), and the antecedent conditions as well as the stream networks
characteristics (eg storage capacity, channel length); and channel characteristics (eg channel
roughness and shape) (Ward. 1978). The latter tend to be related to characteristics of the terrain so
that steep catchments are associated with narrow rivers with low storage capacity. Many of the most
catastrophic floods are then associated with the intense rainfalls that result from hurricanes, cyclones
and typhoons, particularly when this rainfall occurs on a steep catchment.

Floods have a number of measurable characteristics, including flood depth or stage, discharge (ie
volume) or magnitude, frequency (usually estimated as a return period or recurrence interval),
duration, velocity, extent and seasonality.

A flood hazard is the threat to life, property and other valued resources presented by a body of
water which might rise and flow over land that is not normally submerged. Central to the concept of
a flood hazard is the notion that a hazard is an ever-present condition which periodically leads to
harm. This ever-present condition is likely to vary in intensity since many types of floods are
characterised by seasonality during the flood season the hazard is more intense. A crucial part of
the concept of a flood hazard is the interface between floods and people. A flood is not hazardous
unless humans are somehow affected. This is taken further by Hewitt (1983) when he states that a
hazard refers to the potential for damage that exists only in the presence of a vulnerable human
population. The concept of vulnerability is central to an understanding of flood hazards and to the
definition of the appropriate management response and is explored further below.

1.1.1 Measures of the global flood problem

Measuring the worlds flood problem presents many difficulties because of deficiencies in the quality
of statistics, increased reporting of events over time and many other factors. Neatly presented data
sets may appear to be consistent and precise but the underlying data collection processes may be
unreliable. Data on flood effects is also prone to political manipulation in order to secure aid. The
following data and the conclusions drawn from them should therefore be treated with caution.

Flood disasters are among the worlds most frequent and damaging types of disaster (International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRCRS). 1998: 147). During the latter half of
the 20
th
century floods were the most common type of geophysical disaster, generating over 30% of
all disasters between 1945 and 1986 (Table 1.2) (Glickman et al. 1992). These estimates are
corroborated by more recent data from Munich Reinsurance for the period 1986-1995 (United
Nations, Department of Humanitarian Affairs (UNDHA) b1997: 6). Glickman et al. (1992) indicate
that globally, flood disasters are about the third most harmful form of geophysical disaster in terms of


loss of life. Earthquakes and tropical cyclones kill more people than any other geophysical disaster
type, but in the 1986-1995 period floods appear to have caused more deaths than any other
geophysical disaster type according to Munich Reinsurance (UNDHA. 1997:6). For this period,
Munich Reinsurance (1997) report that 55% of deaths (367 000 people) were caused by flooding.
Swiss Re (2000) give an estimate of 55 360 as the number of deaths caused by flooding in 1999,
some 20 000 having died in the mudfloods and landslides in Venezuela alone.

Floods are ranked slightly lower when the definition of disaster is broadened to include civil strife,
drought and famine (which are all excluded from the data of Glickman et al. 1992). Data from
IFCRCS (1998: 142-45) reveal that between 1972 and 1996, earthquake, drought, famine and high
winds killed more people than floods. However, the same data reveal that floods affect the lives of
more people (an average of 65.87 million per annum between 1972 and 1996) over the same period
than any other disaster type, including drought and famine. The average annual number of people
made homeless by floods between 1972 and 1996 was also the highest for any disaster type (3.36
million). In addition, the annual average number of people injured by floods (21 874) was the second
highest for any type of disaster. All available estimates of the regional distribution of loss of life by
disaster type reveal that: (i) all disasters; and (ii) flood disasters, are ubiquitous, and that both have a
markedly skewed distribution with by far the highest reported deaths occurring in Asia. Because of
economic growth in parts of Asia, recent estimates of average annual flood damage for the 1987-1996
period reveal that the entire regions flood damage losses now exceed those of the Americas and
Europe (IFCRCS. 1998: 147). In North America the number of flood-related deaths is comparatively
low, averaging 89 per year over the period 1988-97 (US Army Corps of Engineers 1998a) but the per
capita and total economic losses appear very high because of high standards of living and high values
at risk.

Table 1.2 Global Loss of Life by Geophysical Event, 1945-1986

Type of disaster

Number of disasters
Deaths (in
thousands)

Deaths per disaster
Meteorological
Flood 395 244 618
Tropical cyclone 272 (271) 791 (291) 2 907 (1 072)
Other storm 212 28 131
Heat wave 23 5 223
Cold wave 15 4 275

Geological
Earthquake 191 (189) 1 198 (388) 6 272 (2 053)
Volcanic eruption 27 40 1 494
Tsunami 7 3 271

Other
Landslide 85 25 295
Fire 40 6 157

Total 1 267 (1 264) 2 343 (1 033) 1 849 (837)

Note: numbers in parenthesis exclude the three worst disasters. Data source: Glickman et al., (1992).
It is difficult to identify trends in the frequency and impacts of disasters such as floods. The United
States is probably the country where the most thorough analyses have been performed. Two trends
appear in the reported flood loss data for the United States: (i) loss of life has been reduced
significantly during the 20
th
century and appears to have been constant for a number of years; and (ii)
the monetary value of property losses and other economic losses has been steadily increasing.


However, the escalation of flood losses in the United States, as possibly elsewhere, may not be
particularly significant because, relative to the Gross National Product of that country, economic
losses from floods appear to have held constant over the past 50 years (Wooley. 1986).

Another way of scaling the worlds flood problem is to examine estimates of the number of people
and properties located (or exposed) in flood-prone areas. Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive
global or even national data bank to draw upon for such data. However, some estimates (Parker.
1996) have been produced for a small number of countries revealing widely varying proportions of
total country populations which are flood-prone. These are 3.5% in France, 4.8% in the United
Kingdom, 9.8% in the United States, over 50% in the Netherlands and 80% in Bangladesh.

Individual floods can cause significant losses to the economic capacity of a country; the costs of
replacing damaged or destroyed infrastructure may absorb the resources that would otherwise be
available for economic or social development. Governments and individuals may alternatively have
to borrow heavily to fund these replacements and repairs. The extent of these losses is difficult to
measure, not least because the standard national accounting model, Gross Domestic Product (GDP),
is subject to a number of well-known defects (Mishan. 1967). The basis of the GDP measure is
equivalent to a form of double entry book-keeping; for every credit, there is an equal and opposite
debit and vice versa. The effect is to minimise the apparent effect of a flood on the national economy
in most instances; the construction of 500 schools will appear in the same way whether these are to
extend educational provision or to replace schools destroyed in a flood.

1.2 The Four Generations of Flood Hazard Management

Over time, we have gained technical understanding about the nature of floods and the means of
managing whilst at the same time our perceptions of floods and rivers have changed. Thus,
approaches to flood risk management have changed over time. We need also to constantly re-assess
the management approaches adopted and to transfer knowledge from one country to another. Too
often however rather than knowledge transfer taking place, the approach developed in the context of
one country has simply been transposed to another country. At best, this is a form of parochialism; at
worse, it is a form of neo-colonialism. The knowledge that we need to transfer is the understanding
which resulted in that approach being identified as being appropriate and not necessarily the approach
itself. Historically, four different approaches to flood hazard management have succeeded each
other.

1.2.1 Indigenous Flood Adaptations

Communities which have occupied flood-prone areas for many generations have typically developed
usually small-scale, local adaptations to make them more resilient to flood hazards and disasters. For
example, in the floodplain kampungs (ie traditional villages) of Malaysia, houses are constructed on
stilts to raise them above anticipated flood levels and the use of small boats is common. Similar
adaptations to floods may be found throughout South-East Asia along rivers, in river estuaries and
along coastlines. The Cajun or Acadian population that joined the native American communities in
the coastal swamps and marshes of Louisiana in the eighteenth century also adapted their dwellings
to floods. The base floor of the dwelling construction typical of this area was set upon cypress
pilings (or stilts) sunk into the silt deposited by spring and summer flooding (Laska and Wetmore.
2000). In Bangladesh not only are some dwellings deliberately constructed on higher ground, but
some are dismantled in times flood and moved to the top of earthen flood embankments. In addition,
the agricultural economy is adapted to flooding through, for example, the use of flood-tolerant rice
crops and the use of boat-craft instead of roads since these and bridges may be washed away. These
are just a few examples of the numerous indigenous adaptations to flood problems which are used by
those who have lived and worked for generations in flood-prone areas.


In the early stages of the evolution of flood management strategies these local adaptations may be the
only, or the dominant, form of flood management. These indigenous approaches are often relatively
effective in rural areas as long as exceptional floods are not encountered when numerous lives,
dwellings and possessions may be lost. Experience suggests that as modernisation takes place (ie
through urbanisation and economic growth) indigenous approaches are eroded (Chan and Parker
1996).

Flood embankments were part of these indigenous approaches; communities banding together to
construct dike systems, partly in order to convert wetlands to arable land. Such actions started quite
early and were widespread over Western Europe (Wagret. 1967), these systems being constructed and
maintained through a system of Common Property Resource management (Ostrom. 1990).
Conversely, it has been argued (Wittfogel. 1957) that the large scale works of the Middle East and
Asia were the consequence of strong central governments.



The 1997 Flood in Poland

The July flood of 1997 was one of the largest that has been recorded in Poland. Water
swelling was mainly caused by two several-day periods of intensive precipitation, (5 - 9
July and 18

- 22

July) in the south-western parts of Poland and northern parts of the
Czech Republic. The most intensive rainfall occurred in the upper parts of the Oder
(Odra) River basin. The rain gauges, in these regions, registered precipitation at the level
of 300 600mm during several days, ie 2 to 3 times more than the total average monthly
amount of precipitation in July within those gauges (the largest precipitation took place
in the Czech Republic). Unit runoffs reached 500l/s/km
2
. As a result, flood levels
reached in the upper Oder were estimated as millennium flood-waves: they were up to 2-
3m higher than the absolute maximum ever recorded. In the Vistula basin the flood had a
more restricted character, the precipitation was more limited and the swelling of the
waters less violent.

The existing flood defence infrastructure turned out to be inadequate. Due to the limited
number of flood surcharge reservoirs, it was impossible to effectively reduce the flood
wave. The inadequate technical condition of the flood levees, most of which were
constructed back in the 19
th
century, resulted in numerous dike failures. The flood also
revealed shortages in the technical equipment of the civil defence and emergency
services and the inadequacy of the flood prevention action, especially as far as
communications, flood result forecasting and disseminating warnings are concerned.

The floods most tragic effects were 54 fatalities. Damage due to flooding was reported
in c 20 percent of the communities (gminas). Some 152 000 companies were located in
the flooded or partially flooded area of which 9 000 employed over 5 persons. Also
affected were 4 000 budget units and gminas with 680 000 household (according to the
poll conducted by the main statistic office (GUS) in early 1988). Particularly large
losses occurred in urbanised areas due partially to uncontrolled construction in
potentially flood-prone areas in the recent years. The estimates performed immediately
after the flooding based on the reports of local flood prevention committees specified the
global damages and losses countrywide at c $ 2.3 billion (in 1997 prices). The report
mostly focused on direct losses and did not consider the value of facility equipment.
Slightly later estimates performed by GUS based on surveys set global losses at c $ 3.5
billion or 2.5 2.6 percent of GDP. The breakdown of losses is as follows:

Losses in assets of budget units and gminas (communities), destruction of streets and
public roads and water systems c $ 1.5 billion
Losses incurred by companies and firms excl agriculture and forest industry c
$ 0.85 billion
Agriculture and forest industry $ 0.7 0.8 billion
Losses in household equipment c $ 0.4 billion

The long-term influence of flood damages caused to the economy is quite difficult to
estimate. Comparisons with the 1934 flooding indicate a changing pattern of flood
damages. While the area flooded then was twice as large in 1997, the number of
flooded buildings was 3.2 times larger, the number of damages bridges 38 times larger,
and the length of damaged roads 134 times larger in 1997.



1.2.2 Flood Control and Defence, and Efficient Rivers

The second generation approach, characteristic of the late 19
th
and most the 20
th
century, was the
engineering, scientifically rational approach to river management. It was often marked by state
promotion of structural (ie large-scale engineering) measures but many of the works of this time
where undertaken by provincial or local government, or, as in Hungary, by associations of local land
owners (Vituki. 1998). The philosophy was strongly rational: rivers being trained or improved to
become efficient and to stop floods interfering with human activity. There was a strong emphasis on
building flood embankments designed and constructed to engineering standards, constructing flood
relief channels and sometimes constructing a series of flood control dams. The emphasis in this
approach was to control the river and to prevent floodwater entering communities located in flood-
prone areas. The language used reflects this struggle to make rivers efficient servants of human
purposes: floods were to be controlled and defences to be prepared against floods.

Much of the history of flood mitigation in the United States during the 19
th
and 20
th
centuries (until
the late-1960s) was based upon this strategy as the US Corps of Engineers struggled to control great
rivers such as the Mississippi. The benefits of such strategies have been large during particular
periods. For example, the modernisation of the lagging economies of the Tennessee river basin
during the middle part of the 20
th
century was driven by a strategy to control river flooding and soil
erosion by building a series of large dams which had other benefits such as generating electricity for
rural electrification programmes.

Unfortunately, structural approaches have a number of disadvantages, including that flood control
structures may encourage further floodplain development; flood embankments may be only partly
effective in exceptional floods (ie they may be overtopped or breached); structural approaches may
have adverse or damaging environmental consequences (Brookes. 1988; Purseglove. 1988); perverse
impacts on downstream areas (making their flood problems worse); and flood control may only
address a part of the problems which cause flood disasters (ie flood control does not address peoples
vulnerability to flood hazards).

1.2.3 Non-Structural Approaches

The third phase was the advocacy of non-structural approaches. Although these were originally
proposed as part of an integrated strategy for the good management of floodplains (White. 1945,
1964), the non-structural options frequently came to be offered as an alternative to the traditional
engineering solutions. Whereas the second phase defined the problem as the rivers, and the solution
being to keep the rivers away from the public, non-structural approaches were argued on the basis
The flood was an impulse for upgrading to a broadly defined flood prevention system for the
country. A Flood Recovery Project based on the World Bank loan was initiated in 1998 aimed at
eliminating damage from the 1998 flood, on the one hand, and preparing for future floods, on
the other. It provides for the creation of a modern national monitoring and forecasting system,
development of a flood prevention strategy for the two main drainage basins in southern Poland
and activating local communities for flood preparations with particular focus on non-structural
measures.

Madej Pawe
Roman Konieczny
Institute of Meteorology and Water Management
Krakow, Poland



that the public should be kept away from the rivers. Rather than engineering the rivers so as to be
efficient, the approach centred upon making people behave. Not uncommonly non-structural
analyses implied that people should not be on the floodplain in the first place; and, if they insisted
upon occupying the floodplain, they should bear the consequences of their choice.

Non-structural approaches include small-scale structural modifications of individual buildings
(designed-in or retrofitted adaptations) and measures designed to move people away from floods.
The vision is one of deliberately designing and planning communities that are adapted to floods in a
variety of ways. Thus, planning controls may be proposed to prevent the spread of communities on to
the floodplains. Planning controls that seek to ensure that new buildings are flood proofed against
some design standard flood are also typical of the non-structuralist approach. Flood-proofing (which
is a planned approach to modifying buildings to make them more resilient to flooding) builds upon
indigenous flood adaptation approaches (see 1.2.1 above) and this may be promoted, as may
improved flood forecasting and warning schemes to allow people and property to be evacuated from a
flood-prone area in advance of a flood. There may also be an effort to encourage the purchase of
flood insurance. In extreme cases entire communities or parts of communities have been moved from
flood-prone to flood-free land.

This third wave was characterised by the same optimism as the second wave of approaches.
Non-structural approaches were generally assumed to offer an alternative to, and to be a replacement
for, traditional engineering approaches and there was insufficient recognition of the difficulties of
making the approaches actually work, or of the preconditions necessary for them to work. Thus, for
example, in the early part of this century, only engineering options were available: land use planning,
for example, being a concept that only started to be applied in the middle of this century. Until a land
use planning system has been effectively established, it cannot be extended to cover the control of
development on flood plains.

1.2.4 Holistic Approaches

The original idea behind the non-structural approach was expressed in the terms of coping with
floods or living with floods; holistic approaches may be seen as a return to this original idea.

Critical evaluation of the successes and failures of the non-structural strategies and the recurrence of
exceptional and highly damaging floods have led to a variety of strategies (and not a single strategy)
that are based upon a more holistic approach to addressing the basic causes of floods and flood
disasters. This emerging approach talks in terms of flood alleviation, and flood mitigation, rather
than in terms of flood control, and of flood hazard management or flood risk management. The
concept of sustainable development (ACC/ISGWR. 1992; United Nations. 1992) is one of the drivers
of this emergent approach, in particular, the requirement to think about the catchment as a whole, not
just in terms of the geographical and functional interdependencies involved, but also the inter-
relationships between land and water. Secondly, the development involves not just economic
development but also human development, including increasing public involvement in decision
making. It also includes the emphasis on intra-generational, as well inter-generational, equity often
missed when the Brundtland definition of sustainable development (World Commission on
Environment and Development. 1987) is quoted.

It is also more critical and less optimistic than either of the previous two waves. It is now becoming
clear that in the United States, although some past investments in flood control structures proved to
be wise, many structural and non-structural strategies have failed to be sufficiently effective, and that
the non-structural model of flood management, so strongly advocated in the United States, requires
rethinking (Changnon. 1996; Mileti 1999; Myers and Passerini. 2000). It requires rethinking because


of its inadequacies in the United States and because of its poor applicability to many other world
regions.

Two examples illustrate the emerging holistic analysis. The first is the advocacy of source control
approaches to flood management (Gardiner. 1994). In rapidly urbanising catchments in particular,
the driving force behind growing flood discharges and worsening flood hazards is development not
just in the floodplain but everywhere that it is occurring in the catchment. Urban development results
in permeable natural surfaces being replaced by artificial impermeable ones so that runoff
accumulates more completely and rapidly in stream and river channels rather than infiltrating into the
soil and percolating into groundwater. Sources of flood flows are thus everywhere where
development is occurring and it is here that runoff retarding and flood storage measures are required.
A whole-catchment planning approach is required. The second example stems from analysis of the
causes of floods particularly in the less-developed regions of the world where lack of access to
resources, to education and to decision-makers, and poverty generate a vulnerability amongst people
which makes them particularly vulnerable to floods, exacerbating the lasting effects of these events
(Blaikie et.al. 1994). This analysis leads to the view that floods and other hazards need to be
addressed systemically through stimulating social and economic development rather than only
through flood alleviation schemes: a sustainable livelihoods approach. Thus, developing a
mechanism for extending low-cost loans to those of low economic status may be the kind of strategy
which holds the best promise for the future in terms of making people more resilient to the effects of
floods. The approach adopted should be stakeholder driven.

This emergent approach leads to an emphasis:
on holistic catchment and coastal zone management;
on the wise use of floodplains and coastal zones (not necessarily moving out of them);
on empowering local communities to make choices about land development and flood
alleviation);
on reducing the impacts of humans on the environment, promoting flood disaster resilience
(Handmer and Dovers. 1996);
on valuing and preserving the best of indigenous adaptations;
on improving local capacities to respond; and
on addressing problems of intra and inter-generational equity (eg dealing with poverty and lack of
access to resources as a means of addressing flood vulnerability).

1.3 The Cultural Construction of Floods and Flood Hazard
Management

Both floods and flood hazard management are culturally constructed phenomena: peoples
understanding of them derives from their unique environmental and cultural conditions. Failure to
grasp the importance of these variations when designing flood management strategies is likely to lead
to adverse consequences, inappropriateness and failure.

Flood is a relative concept and varies amongst cultures and individuals in its perception and
understanding. In Bangladesh, for example, a division is drawn between the flood that is the
normal seasonal inundation of a floodplain to which traditional settlement and land use is well
adapted, and floods which represent abnormal or unwanted flooding that causes loss (Paul. 1984,
1987). The latter might be referred to as an extreme event, although technically an extreme event is
simply a phenomenon which differs substantially from the mean. Approximately 80% of the land
area of Bangladesh comprises river floodplain. Here, in contrast to many parts of the world,
flooding is a normal environmental condition to which people have become adapted and which
provides much needed soil moisture for crop growth on which people depend. Normal flooding is
therefore a resource for Bangladeshi cultivators and one to which they look forward, whereas floods


are threatening, damaging and entirely unwanted. What would be called a flood in Britain or
Germany is not perceived of as a flood in Bangladesh. But Gateley (1973) points out that, even in
Britain, a flood is a relative concept because individuals living in various parts of a floodplain have
different understandings of what constitutes a flood to them. Rivers are also cultural constructs
because peoples perceptions of them, and the values they associate with them, vary enormously from
culture to culture and within the same culture. Some may perceive of rivers as places to dispose of
waste, whilst others perceive them as sacred places or places to be reserved for wilderness and the
preservation of ecosystems in which human intervention should be limited.

As the discussion in 1.2.1. illustrates, flood hazard management is also a function of cultural and
environmental factors (Greenet al. 1991). Although there are strong commonalties in the cases cited
of dwelling design generated by the nature of floods, those living in floodplains for generations
develop indigenous adaptations which are their own cultural adaptations to floods. The roles of the
individual and state in flood hazard reduction represents a further example of cultural construction of
flood hazard management. For example, an ancient principle underlying English flood legislation is
that responsibility for drainage of land and avoidance of flooding rests first and foremost with the
individual riparian owner, and a complex history of case law has accumulated to help settle disputes
between riparian owners. Only in the lowest-lying areas did there emerge historic organisations to
address flood problems (Darby. 1983). In the Netherlands where flooding is a strategic threat to the
nation, the Constitution stating that the inhabitability of the country and the protection and
improvement of the environment are public tasks (Huisman et al. 1998), there is more of a collective
and consensual approach.

These examples illustrate the varying bases for governmental intervention in flood hazard
management which are found around the globe. In some cases, as is partly the case in England and
Wales, the basis for government decision-making is seeking a balance between the actions of various
stakeholders in floods and floodplains (eg developers, building contractors, residents of flood-prone
homes, commerce, planning authorities, environmental protection groups) and the public and/or
national interest. In other cases, as in the cases of the Netherlands and China, governmental
intervention is more of a strategic affair, and in the case of China it is about organising national
solidarity against a threat to the nation.

Public perceptions about the causes of floods and flood disasters vary enormously around the world.
In some cases floods may be perceived of as an act of god or the will of Allah, although this is
relatively uncommon (Islam 1997). More generally, floods are blamed on someone or some
organisation not doing their job. Blame follows from rationality; people seek causes, and whilst both
the causes of floods and the reasons why a flood has not occurred recently are frequently mis-
perceived (Green et al. 1991), a belief as to the cause of a flood typically then leads on to blaming
someone or some organisation for failure to act. Thus, people in Bangladesh frequently blame floods
on the actions of those in India, China and Nepal where they see the floods as having originated. To
go from cause to blame does require two additional stages: there must first be a belief that the flood
could have been controlled, prevented or at least mitigated. To be controllable, a hazard must be
foreseeable and it must also be possible to do something. Unlike earthquakes, floods are generally
regarded as foreseeable, but like earthquakes, there is generally a belief, probably an over-optimistic
belief, that it is possible to control floods or their consequences. Secondly, some organisation or
individual must be seen as having had the responsibility to do some thing but having failed to take
such action for one or another reason. An increasing expectation that something will be done is also
a corollary of increasing public involvement; public authorities will increasingly be held to account
for their actions or inactions and judged against the publics expectations of how they ought to
behave.



Table 1.3: The Comparative Evolution of Flood Management: Determinants of Flood
Management Policies
USA The Netherlands China
Very low population
density
Very low intensity of
economic activity
Very large amount of
arable land per capita
Large areas of country
are essentially untouched
by human activity except
by large scale changes
(eg acid rain, climate
change)
Constitution reserves
power to set land and
building controls to
individual States; some
State constitutions
reserve that power to
local government
Settled only in the C19th
Low proportion of land
is at risk of flooding
Historic reliance on
dikes as engineering
approach to flood
alleviation
Historically, flood
alleviation funded
through Federal
government
Very high population
density
Very high intensity of
economic activity
Relatively small amount
of arable land per capita
Landscapes and
ecosystems are largely
the consequence of past
human activity
Whilst politically the
Dutch approach is one of
consensus decision
making, central
government can require
land and building
controls
Settled in medieval
period onward
Most of the country is
reclaimed from sea and
floodplains
Historic reliance on
dikes as engineering
approach to flood
alleviation
Historically, flood
alleviation funded
through local Common
Property approach
Very high population
density
Quite high intensity of
economic activity
Very low amount of
arable land per capita
Landscapes and
ecosystems are largely
the consequences of past
human activity
Central government can
require land and building
controls but has
difficulties in enforcing
such requirements
Floodplains settled in
C9-C13th or earlier
High proportion of
usable land is at risk of
flooding
Over last 2 000 years, a
wide mix of strategies,
including the earliest
known example of flood
warning, have been
adopted
Works are undertaken by
all levels of government
but predominantly by
local government

The strategy of flood management adopted in a country therefore reflects the culture of that country
and local flood conditions; this strategy is thus shaped by history. Table 1.3 summarises the
geographical and cultural factors that have shaped flood management practices in three countries.

1.4 The Evolution of Dams in Flood Hazard Management

It is useful to separate the issues of what a dam does, regulating variations in river flow through
storage, from those of how it is done. Lakes and wetlands both regulate flow through storage; lakes
by having a naturally formed channel which to a greater or lesser extent limits the discharge capacity.
Unlike reservoirs, the outflow channel is not dimensioned so as in principle to be able to discharge
the extreme flood. Thus, in an extreme flood, either the lake level will go on rising or the natural
throttle on the discharge will fail catastrophically, as is the case with yokulhlaup, the failure of a
glacier releasing the stored up flood water behind it. Balancing lakes are artificial lakes connected
in-line with the watercourse. Weirs in stream also create some storage capacity although usually
primarily created for other purposes such as maintaining navigations. In a sense, therefore, a weir is a
low head dam. The purpose of detention basins is also to regulate flows through storage but these are
typically off-line, many being dry or semi-dry until flow is diverted into them. A reservoir is then an


in-line form of storage which creates a significantly greater head than a weir. For flood alleviation,
the important feature of a dam is the quantity of storage provided, unlike dams whose primary
purpose is hydropower where the head achieved is also important.

As a structure serving to create a reservoir, the distinguishing feature of a dam is that it is
perpendicular to the flow of the river whereas a dike or levee or flood embankment is parallel to that
flow. Otherwise they have much in common in terms of the nature of the construction and the
consequences of failure. Some dikes even exceed the simpler definition of a large dam, being more
than 15m high, although the formal definition of large dams specifically excludes dikes.

The available data on the use of dams for flood alleviation purposes is not wholly consistent and is
also partial. Thus, Table 1.4 summarises the use of dams for flood control purposes in Japan as of
March 1985; this gives 11 more single-purpose flood alleviation dams as either completed or under
construction than are given in the ICOLD tabulation, where Japan only registers dams over 30m high
(ICOLD. 1999). Similarly, China has declared 24 671 large dams to be in operation, of which details
of 1 855 are given in World Register of Dams 1988 (ICOLD. 1999). In the United States, 6 375 dams
are included as large dams in the World Register of Dams out of a total of 75 187 dams in the United
States. The Environment Defence Fund (1999) estimates that there are around 800 000 small dams
world-wide. Thus, the average dam is not a large dam.

Table 1.4: Number of Dams Constructed at Least in Part for Flood Alleviation Purposes in
Japan (Source: River Bureau 1985)
completed under construction Total
National/Public
corporation
73 89 162
Prefectural
Government
189 205 394
multi-purpose 143 147 290
flood control 46 58 104
262 294 556

Table 1.5: Dams and Flood Management in China
(Source: Tong and Xiaogan 1997)
River characteristics Song
hua
jiang
River
Liao he
River
Hai he
River
Huang
he
River
(Yello
w
River)
Huai
he
River
Yangtze
River
Zhu
jiang
River
Total
Large reservoirs 126 85 140 165 187 113 345 2 061
Reservoir capacity (million
m
3

26 900 13 000 25 500 54 400 37 000 100 400 38 700 295 900

The proportion of dams which are declared to ICOLD as having some flood alleviation function
varies from 0% (Sweden, India and Norway) through to over 40% in the cases of Argentina,
Romania, Japan and the Czech Republic. The highest proportion is in Germany which declares
nearly 56% of all dams as including flood alleviation as one of the functions of a dam. Globally, 8%
of dams are reported as having flood alleviation as one of their purposes (Lecornu 1998). There is no
obvious pattern to be observed in terms of the proportions of dams that are declared as having a flood
alleviation function between different countries and it is likely that a significant proportion of the
differences are no more than the result of national differences in the manner of recording the


purposes of multi-functional dams in particular. Alternatively, the explanation may lie in a difference
in engineering cultures in different countries. In any event the consequence is to make international
comparisons unreliable. Nor is data necessarily consistent within countries : in India, SANDRP
(2000) cite 13 dams as having been declared by the Central Board of Irrigation and Power as having
flood control as one their purposes, as opposed to the zero reported to ICOLD.

Most dams which have flood alleviation as a purpose are declared as multi-purpose dams although
there are national differences. Nearly 50% of dams in the USA which have a flood alleviation
function are declared as having that as their single function and nearly 80% in Brazil. Conversely,
China reports only 5% have flood alleviation as their sole function and Turkey 3%. Again, reporting
differences is likely to be the main explanation for these national differences and it makes
international comparisons unreliable.

It is not surprising that a low proportion of dams globally are reported as having flood alleviation as
their sole role: once a reservoir is in existence, then there is a fairly natural tendency to ask whether it
cannot be put to some other use whilst waiting for the 100-year return period flood to occur. Equally,
priorities change over time: dams which were constructed to reflect one set of needs have their
operating rules changed, and may be enlarged, when a different priority emerges. Thus, dams on the
tributaries of the Yangtze built primarily for hydropower are now being examined to see to what
extent they can be used for flood alleviation purposes as well (Daoxi and Siping. 1999). In addition,
any dam will have some advantageous or disadvantageous impact on downstream flooding; generally,
this will be beneficial (Bergstrom and Lindstrom. 1999). Thus, USCOLD, amongst other summaries
of the reductions in losses from individual floods as a result of the operation of dams, cites the
Lexington Dam, a water conservation dam, as having reduced flood losses in 1952-53 by more than
$3 million (USCOLD. 1999). Mirstkhoullava (1994) described how the settlements along the River
Dnieper are protected by a cascade of dams: flood peaks are reduced by 20-50% and the dams have a
capacity to store 25km
2
of flood waters. Saad (1999) has demonstrated the impact of the Aswan High
Dam on flooding in the Nile valley and Berga (1999) provides a general summary of the role of dams
in flood mitigation. During Hurricane Mitch, the flood inflow to the Francisco Morazon (El-Cajon)
dam was estimated as 9,800m
3
/s; this was some 70% of the PMF and had an estimated return period
of 500 years. The reservoir stored some 1 500 million m
3
and the maximum discharge was 1 200
m
3
/s. Downstream of the dam, the river passes through a narrow gorge with limited flow capacity;
above that gorge is an intensely populated alluvial plain. Upstream of the dam, flood damages were
considerable; if the flow downstream had not been attenuated by the reservoir, the losses downstream
would have been catastrophic (Palmieri, review comment).

The Committee on Dams and Floods of ICOLD (2000) detail the effectiveness of a number of dams
in reducing flood flows. They include the Tone catchment in Japan; this has already been noted as
having a very high ratio of flood flow to average annual flow. Tokyo is on the floodplain of the River
Tone and flood alleviation works were first undertaken in C16th. Severe damages were experienced
in the flood of 1947 and one element of the revised flood management strategy adopted in 1949 for
the catchment was the construction of the Shimokubo dam. During typhoon #10 in 1982, rainfall
over three days on the catchment reached 319mm, and the peak inflow to the dam reached 1 309 m
3
/s
but peak discharge from the dam was limited to 715 m
3
/s. The hydrographs for the inflow and
discharge volumes also illustrate the very rapid rate of rise of the river; in a period of about 6 hrs, the
flood flow more than quadruples and rises by a factor of approximately 60 over little more than 16
hrs, with the response to the second wave of rainfall appearing to be almost instantaneous. In terms
of issuing flood warnings, the flood occurred at probably the worst possible time: the early morning
when most people are asleep and consequently the likely effectiveness of most forms of warning is
very low.


Figure 1.1: Hydrograph for the Tone River, Japan 1-4 August, 1982

Similarly, on the Chikugo river system, during a seasonal rainfront in 1982, peak rainfall reached 60
mm/hr and the peak inflow to the Matsubara dam reached 2 911 m
3
/s, nearly 90 times annual mean
flow. The peak discharge from the dam was limited to 1044 m3/s. Similarly, when the inflow to the
Chungju dam in Korea reached 22 164 m
3
/s during the flood of 1990, considered to have a return
period of around 1 000 years, the peak outflow was less than 12 000 m
3
/s, which is somewhat less
than the flow of 14 000 m
3
/s estimated for the 100-year return period event.

Both examples are typical of Japan in that for both topographical and social reasons, it is difficult to
construct a single large dam and instead a cascade of dams is used to control the peak flow at critical
points downstream. In addition, the dams are part of a comprehensive flood management strategy
with both dikes and channel improvements, including bypass channels, having been progressively
enlarged over several centuries. However, the very high ratios of flood flows to mean annual flow
make sole reliance on the later approaches extremely difficult since either very high dikes or a very
wide floodplain are required. Thus, in the case of the Tone, the series of dams including the
Shimokubo, are intended to the limit peak flows from the 200-year return period flood to the
equivalent of those from the 50-year return period flood, so reducing the height of the dikes or width
of the floodplain required to safely pass the flood flow.

The ratio of the 1 000-year flood flow to the 100-year flood flow in the case of the Chungju dam is
also, in world terms, unusually high. The very low amount of arable land available in Japan (Table
2.1), with one hectare of arable land having to provide food for eight times the global average number
of people, and the high population density, means that leaving open wide floodplains both to carry
floods and provide some natural storage is not an option. Equally, high dikes are wide dikes and both
the cost and land take increase rapidly with height, although Japan in now constructing some super
dikes, dikes wide enough for buildings to be constructed on the crest and rear berm (Rivers Bureau
2000). Limiting peak flows through both dams and the retention basins that are also used is
consequently a logical option.

In general, the Committee does not provide estimates of the reduction in flood losses yielded by the
dams discussed, and there are a number of stages necessary before a calculated flood flow can be
converted into flood losses. Few if any of these works were constructed after a formal benefit-cost
analysis and detailed estimates of the reductions in flood losses are not generally available. In
addition, it was noted earlier (Section 2.2) that in economic terms, the objective is not to reduce flood
losses but to increase the efficiency of use of the catchment.



However, the estimates of the US Army Corps of Engineers of the reductions in flood losses resulting
from the flood storage reservoirs and basins, and the dike system, in 1993 Mississippi and Missouri
floods are cited (US Army Corps of Engineers 1995):

Dams levees All (billion $)
Mississippi 3.6 3.9 8
Missouri 7.4 4.1 11.5
11.0 8.0 19.1

The 1993 flood was an extreme event, with an estimated return period of 500 years in some areas and
at least the 100-year return period event in 88 out of the 154 streamflow gauging stations (US Army
Corps of Engineers 1995).

The Committee on Dams and Floods also points out that the US Army Corps of Engineers estimates
that the combination of upstream storage and other works reduced the flood peak at St Louis by 2m,
with the result that the flood crest was one metre below the top of the floodwall that protected the
business district.

Throughout this report, the necessity of comparing options has been stressed. Thus, one of the more
interesting figures on the effectiveness of dams is given in the US Army Corps of Engineers
assessment of flood management options for the Mississippi system. Table 1.6 summarises the
calculated impacts on flood levels of a number of management options which would either decrease
runoff or increase storage. The figures are for the Omaha District (chosen here because the figures
are most complete and generally show the greatest effects).
This particular example shows that the reservoirs had a significantly greater effect than the
alternatives tested, one advantage of reservoirs or detention basins being that the use of the storage
can be timed to have the greatest effect upon the flood peak.

Table 1.6 Flood Management Options for the Upper Mississippi and Lower Missouri Rivers
Omaha district
Remove existing agricultural levees (and
continued agricultural usage)
-0.913 to 1.37m
Remove existing agricultural levees (and
reversion to natural vegetation)
-0.21 to 0.70m
Set back levees -0.12 to 0.43m
Remove existing reservoirs +0.91 to +2.74m
flood duration increased
from 0 to 60 at Sioux
City,
1 to 67 days at Omaha,
25 to 80 days at Nebraska
City
Runoff reduction by 10%
(Note: St Paul District estimated that would
require conversion of 2.5 million acres to
wetland to provide storage equivalent to 10%
reduction in runoff)
-0.24 to 0.43m
(Source: US Army Corps of Engineers 1995)
Following a catastrophic flood in 1913, which resulted in the loss of 360 lives, local residents in the
Miami Valley in Ohio pressed for improved flood alleviation measures. New legislation permitted
the creation of a conservancy with the power to raise taxes to undertake flood alleviation works.
Prior to constructing a series of detention dams and other works, the conservancy district assessed the


benefits and costs of the plan for some 77 000 individual tracts of land along some 195kmof river.
One purpose of this exercise was to set equitable taxes but a second requirement was that the benefit-
cost ratio should exceed three. Following completion in 1929, the dams have been used over 1 000
times. This is a particularly interesting case because the works were funded by the local community.

More detailed data is available for the Cerrillos Dam in Puerto Rico. This is a 98m-high dam that
protects the city of Ponce at the mouth of the Bucana River (Committee on Dams and Floods. 2000).
The Bucana is a classic flashy river with a long, narrow catchment with an area of 81km
2
, mainly of
tropical vegetation, and an average slope of 55m/km. Consequently, flood velocities in Ponce have
been measured as up to 2.4m/s, and thus pose a significant risk to life (Section 3.1). The Cerrillos
Dam is designed to provide adequate flood storage for flood with a peak inflow of 1 342m
3
/s,
resulting from 440mm of runoff over the catchment, and a inflow hydrograph volume of 29x10
6
m
3
,
for which it provides storage for 20x10
6
m
3
rather greater than the 100-year return period flood
volume. The value of the property at risk of flooding in Ponce was estimated as $600 million. The
Committee on Dams and Floods reports that when Hurricane Hortense struck Puerto Rico in 1996,
the partially complete works reduced flood losses by $130 million.

Hurricane Georges resulted in daily rainfall amounts of 550mm and 450mm on the 21
st
and 22
nd

September, with a peak inflow to the Cerrillos Dam of 1 506 m
3
/s, estimated to be the 170-year runoff
event (US Army Corps of Engineers 1999). The Corps estimates that the reduction in flood losses
was approximately $320 million, and that otherwise the depth of flood water in the centre of Ponce
would have been 1.4m. As in the Japanese examples, the introduction of storage was coupled with
channel improvements and other control works in Ponce.

The US Army Corps of Engineering reports annually (US Army Corps of Engineers. 1998, 1999) to
the US Congress on both the estimated flood losses and the reductions in flood losses that resulted
from existing flood alleviation works. Since the emphasis in flood alleviation is on catchment
management, the reductions in losses are not generally attributed to dams versus levees. In addition,
as in the Mississippi flood of 1993, the operation rules for the dams were often varied to take account
of the conditions experienced so as to aid flood fighting in the areas downstream. But, the reports do
ascribe significant reductions in flood losses to the operation of dams; for example, the main stem
reservoirs on the Missouri reducing losses by $5.2 billion during the early spring flood in 1997 (US
Army Corps of Engineers. 1998).

A useful statistic to have would be the relative importance of dams within the flood management
strategies of different countries and the extent to which there are systematic differences between
countries in the use of dams, although such differences would probably largely reflect differences in
topography.

It is not possible to break down the ICOLD figures to see whether there have been changing patterns
of construction of dams for flood alleviation purposes over time. The caveats made above about
probable differences in national reporting patterns would also make using anything except a single
nations figures of dubious reliability. Figure 1.2 illustrates the variation over the years in the
number of all types of dams built in different countries. How these plots should be interpreted can be
argued; one possible interpretation is as a wave of development which must decline as sites for dams
are exhausted. Why any such wave exists is also a phenomenon whose meaning could be contested,
one interpretation being that dams have been regarded as a symbol of modernisation and
independence an argument that has been proposed in the case of Spain.
Figure 1.2: Reported Trends over Time in the Number of Dams Built



% of all dams by decade built
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
<
1
9
0
0
1
9
1
0
-
1
9
1
9
1
9
3
0
-
1
9
3
9
1
9
5
0
-
1
9
5
9
1
9
7
0
-
1
9
7
9
1
9
9
0
-
1
9
9
9
decade
%
USA
UK
Spain
Japan
India
Turkey
Italy
France
Korea



2. The Nature Of Floods, Flood Generation And Floodplain
Development

2.1 Flood Production

In water resource management, runoff is the resource: rivers simply concentrate and convey the
water. For human purposes, the ideal pattern of runoff is one that shows little variation from year to
year and is concentrated in the growing seasons. In general terms, the pattern of human demand for
water is generally subject to less variation in time over the year than the variation in climate.
Particularly in arid zones, variations not only within years but also between years can be substantial
(Smith 1999). The standard water availability indices (Falkenmark and Widstrand. 1992) of runoff
per capita can therefore be seriously misleading as indicators of the availability of water as a
resource. The Yellow River basin in northern China is simultaneously an area of enormous flood risk
and of water shortage (World Bank. 1997), partly because rainfall is both highly variable and
concentrated in the summer months.

In floods the problem is the runoff and the rate at which it is concentrated both over space but more
especially over time. Both the intensity of precipitation and the areal extent of the precipitation event
are important. Because tropical storms typically result in intense rainfall over a large area, they pose
particularly severe problems. In arid areas, rainfall can also be intense and North Africa, for
example, has experienced very severe flash flooding. The form and nature of the catchment
determines how much of the precipitation is concentrated into the river and how quickly. How much
precipitation is converted to runoff and how quickly depends on the form of the impermeability of the
catchment and how quickly the water is conveyed off the surface. In naturally impermeable surfaces
such as rocks and clays, a high proportion of precipitation is converted to runoff. Urban areas are
largely impermeable and cities can be seen as mechanisms for harvesting rainfall; not infrequently the
additional runoff generated exceeds the potable water required to sustain them. Runoff also depends
upon the capacity of the surface either to retain moisture or to allow it to enter groundwater. Sandy
soils thus retain little moisture but highly organic soils can absorb large quantities of precipitation
and thus reduce runoff. Runoff also depends upon previous conditions: when the soil is already
saturated, is frozen or is baked hard by the sun, a high proportion of precipitation is converted to
runoff. Many of the most catastrophic floods that have occurred have been the result of rain falling
on land whose capacity to absorb water has already been taken up by earlier falls of rain.

Afforestation reduces all runoff and not just the runoff from the events that cause flooding. In Shanxi
Province of China, terracing and afforestation to control soil erosion (Dixon et al. 1994) have also
increased water scarcity (World Bank. 1997). Similarly, in the Crocodile river basin in South Africa,
the capacity of an industrial forest to capture rainfall is reducing the availability of water not only to
the demand areas downstream but also to the Kruger National Park. It is rarely possible to manage a
catchment with only a single purpose, such as flood alleviation, in mind. On the other hand,
afforestation has other benefits, notably carbon fixing and biodiversity, if carried out using native
species.

Human activity can change not only the proportion of precipitation that is converted to runoff but
also the rate at which that runoff reaches the water courses. Surface water drainage systems in urban
areas are usually designed to get rid of runoff as quickly as possible by discharging it to the nearest
water course. Land drainage systems in agricultural and forest areas can have the same effect with
the result that the flood peak is both higher and occurs more rapidly than under natural conditions.
Topography is also critical; in small, steep rocky catchments; flash floods can be produced within a
few minutes of the rainfall event with water velocities of up to 15m/s so that such flood events are


quite capable of moving large boulders as well as uprooting trees. Such flash floods present major
risks to life.

Two obvious approaches to flood mitigation are therefore to limit runoff and slow drainage.
However, a large river is fed by a multiplicity of tributaries draining sub-catchments. The time taken
for runoff to reach a point on the main stem depends upon which tributary generated the runoff and
from what event. It is unlikely that a rainstorm will simultaneously effect the entire catchment; rather
there is likely to be a succession of runoff events as the rain front, for example, moves across the
catchment. Thus, in 1998, there were eight flood crests as the rain front moved west up the Yangtze
(Daoxi and Siping. 1999). Part of the management strategy for the Yangtze therefore is to seek to
prevent the flood peaks generated by the different tributaries and the main stem coinciding in time at
any point on the main river.

In addition to runoff, rivers also concentrate and transport sediment; this they also deposit, their
capacity to carry the sediment load depending on their flow. Some rivers, such as the Yellow River
in China, are almost a mudflow rather than a river. Therefore, it is necessary to consider controlling
erosion and the patterns of sediment transport and deposition at the same time as flood mitigation. In
areas subject to high levels of soil erosion, both check and warping dams can have a role to play
in capturing sediment before it enters the main river as well as in creating fertile areas on valley
bottoms (Development Alternatives. 1999; Leung. 1999; New South Wales. 1999).

Because flooding is the result of runoff, it can be seen as an externality of land use in an area perhaps
hundreds of kilometres from the area affected by flooding. At the same time, flooding is only a
symptom of a problem rather than being a diagnosis of the problem. Thus, one reason why flooding
is increasing in Bangkok is because of excessive groundwater abstraction has lead to falls in ground
level.



2.2 The Use Of Floodplains

The Consequences of Afforestation and Deforestation

Afforestation normally results in increased evapotranspirational losses, but it does not necessarily
reduce flood risk; indeed, it may increase it if drainage ditches are used.
Afforestation may increase evapotranspiration by 50-100% and trees with high
evapotranspiration rates may be planted specifically to reduce flood risk and lower annual runoff,
eg -2%/10% increase in forest cover (Nisbet. 1990). Experimental evidence from the Institute of
Hydrology on Plynlimon catchments shows 14% lower annual runoff in the forested basin
(Blackie and Newson. 1986).
The effect seems to reduce as the forest matures, perhaps because of reduced interception rates
through loss of branches or acid rain damage, or lower growth rates (Hudson and Gilman. 1993).
This reduction in flood protection may be offset by degradation of ditches dug during planting.
Ditches increase drainage density and can halve time to peak, produce peakier response, higher
flood frequencies and volumes, and higher annual runoff (Robinson. 1990). Increased sediment
yields may aggravate flooding downstream.
Deforestation tends to reduce evapotranspiration and runoff concentration times and thus
increase annual runoff, flood peaks and the peakedness of stormflow (Trimble and Weirich.
1987; Bosch and Hewlett. 1982). However, the combination of climate, basin characteristics, tree
species and husbandry cause wide differences in response. Some catchments show no effect,
others only on some peak flows (Wright et al.1990), and larger peaks may not be affected,
perhaps because very intense storms in saturated basins generate substantial flows whatever the
landcover (Bruijnzeel and Bremmer. 1989). Jones and Grant (1996) found a 100% increase in
peak discharges in large basins, but only 50% in small basins. Peaks increased by 7% in North
Carolina (Hewlett and Helvey. 1970), 13% (in winter) in British Columbia (Henderson and
Golding. 1987) and 38% in Malaysia (Bruijnzeel. 1990).
Changes in evapotranspirational losses vary with species of tree. Removal of pine/eucalyptus
forest can increase runoff by 40mm/10% change in forest cover compared with 10mm/10% for
scrub (Dunne and Leopold. 1978). However, if natural regeneration is allowed, the effects may
only have a half-life of 2-7 years in high rainfall areas (Hibbert 1967). Sometimes flow can be
reduced by rapid grass growth.
Infiltration capacities tend to reduce, through compaction by logging vehicles and new roads,
or through changes in soil processes, especially root density. This will enhance infiltration-excess
overland flow, but in basins where saturation overland flow is a dominant source of floodwaters,
effects may be less.
Climatic effects include: (i) less impact where torrential rains are common; (ii) reduced
snowmelt flooding where snow accumulation under the forest has been significant; and (iii)
reduced capture of occult precipitation where forests were above the condensation level.
Flooding may be enhanced by accelerated soil erosion, landslides, deposition and reduced
channel capacities (Chan and Parker 1996). However, Hofer (1998) suggests this is not such an
important factor in increased flooding in Bangladesh, which is commonly blamed on
deforestation in the Himalayas.
Finally, forestry practices can be extremely important and effects can be reduced by careful
management (Collins and Pess. 1997; Forestry Commission. 1993).

J A A Jones,
University of Aberystwyth


Floodplains were amongst the areas first developed for human settlements: the soils are often rich,
alluvial deposits; the land is flat; rivers were the best routes for transport; water was plentiful; and the
local wetlands provided good sources of material for building and domestic uses such as baskets.
Thus, floodplains have major competitive advantages for human settlement and people from early
history chose the advantages of arable farming on the floodplains over a poorer life hunting-gathering
in the hills above the floods. Whilst settling on the floodplains exposed them to the risk of flooding,
the quality of life that could be achieved was greater; that greater prosperity also reduced their
vulnerability to other hazards. Maddison (1998) reports that in C8th China, 3/4s of the population
lived in north China from dryland farming; by the end of the C13th, 3/4s of the population lived south
of the Yangtze from rice farming. This shift allowed an immediate doubling of the population
together with a 30% rise in per capita income.

This competitive advantage has continued to the present day. The Wentlooge Levels are a coastal
polder in South Wales; since the offshore mudflats are a Ramsar site, it looked like an ideal candidate
for managed retreat. Closer examination revealed that the reason why large new investments are
being attracted to the area are exactly the same as the reasons why the area was first reclaimed in
Romano-British times and was a centre for industrial activity in the C19th: the only alternative land is
either steep hillside or narrow river floodplain (Chatterton et al. 1993).

From an economic perspective, the objective is to make the best use of the catchment as a whole: it is
not to minimise flood losses. Indeed, a rise in average flood losses can be quite consistent with an
increase in economic efficiency (Green et al. 1993; Green. 1999). From the catchment perspective,
there are two different questions to be answered:
should further intensification in the development of the floodplain be encouraged? and
should flood alleviation be undertaken for that development?

In most of the world, the floodplains are already part of the web of the socio-economic system; few
are untouched by human activity. From this catchment perspective, the term floodplain
encroachment is highly misleading and also carries an essentially ideological message: the real
decision is whether it is better to develop on the floodplain than elsewhere. The answer may be yes
for one of two reasons: it is better to develop on the floodplain than anywhere else or there is
nowhere else to develop. Once other planning constraints are taken into account, such as
designations as areas of landscape value, of archaeological significance or Green Belt, the
floodplain may be the least damaging place for intensified development. For instance, the municipal
government decided to undertake flood alleviation works on the Black Brook near Loughborough and
then to develop the area because the alternative was intrusion into Charnwood Forest (Parker. 1995).
In relative terms, the costs of flood alleviation are often much lower than the infrastructure and other
costs of intensifying development elsewhere. For example, in the Wentlooge Levels, the cost of
renovating the existing dike system was around 4,000 ($6,000) per property if the costs were only
shared across households. By contrast, the cost of providing infrastructure to a greenfield site
amounted to some 10,000 ($15,000) per property (Green and Warner. 1999).

The constraints on flood management and the use of floodplains vary significantly between different
countries. Consequently, what is an appropriate policy in one country may be quite inappropriate in
another. Three measures of the pressures and constraints under which an appropriate flood
management policy must be developed are:
Gross Domestic Product (GDP)/km
2
;
population density; and
arable land per capita.

The first is a joint measure of the availability of natural resources and the intensity with which they
are already being used; the second is a measure of the intensity of demand for those resources; and


the third a measure of the availability of a key resource (Tables 2.1 and 2.2). Thus, the lower the
values of the first two measures and the higher the value of the third, the fewer the likely constraints
in developing a flood management strategy.

In particular, where arable land is scarce, and in food terms arable land is much more productive than
grazing land, it is less likely to be possible to consider abandoning some of that arable land or
converting it to grazing. Similarly, resettling people who live on the floodplain is a more practical
option in those countries, particularly those of C19th settlement, where population densities are, in
global terms, very low. To bring the population density of the USA to that of France, a not-
particularly-densely-populated country, the population of the USA would have to increase to the
equivalent of 3/4 of the population of China. Conversely, 100 million people inhabit the floodplain
of the Yellow River in China (World Bank. 1997).

Table 2.1: Gross Domestic Product and Population Density per Square Kilometre
GDP/km
2
Population/km
2

New Jersey 10 010 810 371
Connecticut 6 685 702 228
The Netherlands 6 423 100 443
Japan 5 644 387 331
The United Kingdom 3 552 713 238
Germany 3 310 826 228
Illinois 1 859 901 78
France 1 600 902 104
United States 596 186 28
Missouri 587 108 29
Bangladesh 152 341 871
South Dakota 70 090 4
China 46 535 120
Montana 36 760 2
Australia 33 095 2
Nepal 21 930 143
Mali 1 639 7

Table 2.2: Arable Land Availability per Capita
Country Arable land (hectares) per capita
Algeria 0.27
Australia 2.68
China 0.10
Germany 0.14
India 0.17
Japan 0.03
Thailand 0.29
United Kingdom 0.10
USA 0.67
World average 0.24
source: World Bank Selected World Development Indicators 1999/2000

Precisely because they were settled early, floodplains are typically integrated into existing
agricultural and economic activities. Floodplains are used for flood recession farming and seasonal
livestock grazing; they also provide fish and materials for construction and everyday use (Acreman
and Hollis. 1996; Drijver and Marchand. 1985). At the same time, the occupiers of the floodplains


have adapted to the risk of flooding so as to cope with the flood hazard. These adaptations vary from
the raised earth mounds constructed in Zeeland as flood refuge areas, to raising housing on stilts in
Malaysia to the practice of taking refuge in roof areas in Bangladesh. In Setubal, in Portugal,
residents have adapted to frequent flooding by closing off their front door with either a steel door or a
concrete wall. In some cases, a similar wall has been constructed across the door between the living
area and the bathroom so that when the toilet overflows in a flood, the living area is protected
(Penning-Rowsell and Fordham. 1994). The most extreme form of adaptation is perhaps that of the
char dwellers of Bangladesh. Here, the rivers are constantly changing their courses, creating and
eroding islands and the char dwellers retain title to land whether or not it is currently part of the river
channel (Schmuck-Widmann. 1996).

Thus, many populations are highly adapted to the routine pattern of flooding. For example, Charles
Namafe (1989) contrasts the language of a traditional song to the militaristic language of Dutch
consultants studying a proposed polder scheme. The language of the consultants was of flood
control, flood fighting and flood defence, defining floods as something to be fought against and
subdued as opposed to the celebratory and coping terms used in the local song. Nevertheless, as the
song itself says, some floods are so extreme that they overwhelm the traditional coping responses.

At the same time, lowland floodplains are frequently wetlands. These are amongst the richest
habitats in the world and the strongest argument against intensifying development of the floodplains
is usually the ecological value of the existing wetlands. When the functional values of wetlands (de
Groot. 1987; Maltby. 1986) are added to this equation, it can be more efficient to leave the wetlands
alone. The value of wetlands in terms of providing fisheries and other functional values have now
been extensively reported (Barbier et al. 1997; Crowards and Turner. 1997; Dixon et al. 1994;
Maltby. 1986).

Whilst some floodplains may have been chosen as highly desirable places to live, others are inhabited
by the least advantaged groups. They typically have the least choice where to live and end up by
settling on the most marginal land. This is often on the steep slopes where, with development, the
slopes become even more unstable and there is a severe risk of a land- or mudslide. In other cases,
the marginal land may be on the floodplain, particularly where proximity to a river has no advantages
to offset the risks of flooding.

Floods in Bulozi (Western Zambia)
translated by Charles Namafe from
Sibetta O K (1983) Fa Munanga Wa Lyambai, Lusaka: Neczam

It is floodtime in Bulozi!
There is the floodplain clothed in the water garment


Everywhere there is water!
there is brightness!
there are some sparkles!
waves marry with the suns glory
Birds fly over the floods slowly,
they are drunken with cold air
they watch a scene which comes but once a year
floods are beautiful.

Bulozi is the floods place of abode
every year the floods pay us a visit
A Lozi does not beg for floods
We do not turn to herbs to have floods
We do not practice witchcraft whatsoever
They are floodwaters indeed!
The floods know their home area.

Floods are ours
the floods themselves
they know their own route
they know their home area
they know where theyre needed
And when we ourselves see them
we are inflated with happiness
our hearts become lighter
we do not fear floods.

Floods are a typical Lozis patelo
When floods are in, we prepare the royal boat
It is a happy occasion in Bulozi
Listen! the royal drums boom in the palace
the royal drums are calling paddlers
they are calling the youth paddlers and others.

Floods are a typical Lozis patelo
the royal drums are never bought
they cannot be priced
they cannot be given away.

We might give away cobs of maize or fishes
but royal drums are ours, and ours alone
their boom sound tickles our blood
we get mad of our cultural heritage
we then dress in animal skin loins.
Floods, Kuomboka Ceremony and the royal drums
are all ours, and ours alone.

Disadvantaged communities and their location in floodplains a case study

The unplanned and unmanageable large-scale migration from rural to urban areas is a feature
of many developing countries of the world, especially in Africa. Often, the only available
areas close to employment opportunities, schools and hospitals, are on the floodplains that
were previously identified as being unsuitable for residential occupation. The steadily
increasing occupation of these flood prone areas by socially and economically disadvantaged
communities in developing countries, has resulted in an increasing proportion of their
populations becoming vulnerable to floods.

A hydrological factor that exacerbates the problem in the semiarid regions of Africa is that
the variability of river flow increases with aridity. In the semiarid regions a dry river bed can


Automatic rainfall telemetry equipment was installed at several sites in the Jukskei River
catchment. This information is relayed to the crisis control centre. Sirens within
Alexandra will be activated by radio from the crisis centre when the water level in the
river at an upstream road bridge reaches a level that is likely to pose a threat in
Alexandra. The advance warning will be very short - possibly less than 30 minutes - so
it is imperative that the communities at risk should know what to do when the sirens are
sounded.

The only viable long term solution is to provide incentives that will encourage the
threatened communities to move to less vulnerable areas. This can be achieved by the
provision of new houses in safe areas for those most at risk. However, there are difficult
political and economic decisions that have to be taken before this objective can be
achieved. Those most at risk are usually those who arrived last by which time no other
land was available. They therefore have the lowest priority for new houses. If they are
given high priority, this policy will become known and will encourage others to
deliberately occupy unsafe areas.

Areas that have been evacuated may subsequently be re-occupied if the local authority
does not have powers to prevent this happening. Forced removal is politically
unacceptable and occupants of shacks in unsafe areas may prefer to stay where they are,
rather than to move to better housing further from their places of employment, schools,
and other facilities. It must be appreciated that flood risks are not the only risks to life
and property that these communities have to face.

The unplanned occupation of flood prone urban areas by socially and economically
disadvantaged communities is a problem that is more likely to increase than decrease in
the years ahead.

W. J. R. Alexander, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Pretoria, South
Africa, and member of the United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on
Natural Disasters.



3. The Benefits and Costs of Floods

The effects of floods are extraordinarily complex and include both beneficial (ie positive) and
adverse (i.e. negative) impacts on society and the environment. One of the problems of flood impact
assessments is that they often focus solely or mainly upon the adverse impacts and a truly balanced
flood impact assessment methodology has yet to emerge. There is no doubt that floods destroy
economic resources of value to society, but it is also true that floods can generate financial gains
which can offset financial losses (Parker. 2000).

Some of the most beneficial social and environmental effects of floods are listed in Table 3.1. They
arise from the moisture and sediment content of floodwater, the positive impacts of floods on aquatic
systems, and the increases in economic and other activities which are generated by floods. These are
effects which may be hidden and forgotten. Flood impacts are distributive in that losses in the
floodplain sometimes generate gains elsewhere outside of the floodplain. For example, the flooding
of a retail outlet will normally lead to customers temporarily transferring their business to a flood free
outlet which experiences a gain in business. Following damaging floods there is usually an increase
in business amongst building and repair firms who gain from the flooding. Similarly, regions heavily
affected by floods may lose trade to neighbouring regions which remain flood-free. The adverse
effects of floods are difficult to trace because of the multiple-order effects on society and economy,
but much is now known about these impacts (Parker et.al. 1987; Parker and Thompson. 1991).

Table 3.1: The Beneficial Impacts of Floods

Among the beneficial effects of floods are that they may:

replenish soils with alluvial silt which adds to soil fertility and
subsequent soil productivity;
replenish soil moisture which may be a factor in subsequent increased crop
yields (this is particularly important in recession agriculture);
be beneficial to aquatic ecosystems and to human livelihoods (eg fishing)
associated with them;
lead to medium to long term gains in industrial efficiency where plants based upon out-dated
layout and machinery are replaced by redesigned and updated ones; and
lead to an increase in family and community spirit and bonding.

The impacts of floods may be divided in several ways. One common way is to categorise flood
losses as tangible or intangible. Tangible damages are usually taken as those which can be measured
in monetary terms, such as the dollar damage to the fabric of a factory, although such measurement is
hardly ever precise and relies heavily upon damage estimation procedures. Tangible flood losses can
be very large as in the 1988 river flood in Bangladesh which caused an estimated $1 416 million
(Islam. 1997). Intangible losses are those which either presently defy monetary measurement (eg the
loss of an archaeological complex by erosion caused by flooding), and/or those for which monetary
estimates are considered undesirable and inappropriate. Thus, at one time all flood impacts were
intangibles; as the state of the art has developed, some have been converted into tangibles. At any
time, therefore, intangibles are the bits left out of the analysis and because they are not quantified,
they may be the most or least important impacts of flooding. It has been found quite consistently
(Allee et al. 1980; Green and Penning-Rowsell. 1986, 1989; Penning-Rowsell et al. 1992) that the
intangible impacts of flooding on households - the stress, disruption and loss of items of sentimental
value - are more important to the affected households than the damage to their home and its
replaceable contents. The results from more than 1 300 interviews with flood victims are summarised


in Figure 3.1. The impacts are arranged from front to back in terms of increasing average severity
and the locations similarly ordered from left to right by decreasing average impact severity.

Figure 3.1: Subjective Assessments by Households of the Relative Severity of the Different
Impacts of Flooding
(sources: FHRC data)

scales: 0 = minor impact
10 = very severe impact

A further way of dividing flood losses is to categorise them as direct or indirect. Direct flood losses
are those which arise through the physical contact of floodwater with people or property, as for
example in floodwater damaging the carpets and furniture of a home through immersion. Indirect
flood losses are those damages which are consequent upon direct flood damage. For example, when
a factory suffers direct flood damage its production processes may be interrupted leading to loss of
sales and other losses (such as increased cleaning costs). Finally, a third way of categorising losses is
through multiple-order effects so that primary, secondary and tertiary losses are identified.



Figure 3.2: The Mechanisms of Flood Losses
chemicals
depth
salt
sediment
loads
duration
velociity
undermining of
foundations
battering by
debris
depth + velocity
flood
losses
sewage
debris

Flood damage is produced by a number of damage mechanisms (Figure 3.2). The depth of
flooding is a key determinant of flood damage (Penning-Rowsell and Chatterton. 1977; Black and
Evans. 1999) and depth-damage curves have been developed for a number of countries (Figure 3.3).
Floodwater velocity is also a determinant of flood damage, with damage values tending to increase as
velocities increase. Riverine flash floods and dam-break floods can generate high floodwater
velocities which are quite capable of sweeping away robustly constructed structures and buildings
(Bureau of Reclamation. 1988; Emergency Management Australia. 1999; New South Wales
Government. 1986; Reiter. 2000; Sangrey. 1975). Whilst the interaction of depth and velocity is
important in determining the probability of structural collapse, timber and masonry buildings are
likely to fail when flood velocities exceed 2m/s. Since buildings obstruct flood flows, they can
create locally intense flood velocities that induce scour that can itself induce the structural failure of
buildings (US Army Corps of Engineers. 1998a).

Flash floods often carry large loads of debris (derived from trees, eroded banks, damaged structures
and vehicles caught in the flooding) which are themselves mechanisms of further damage. For
example, Oi (1993) shows a 5000 tonne boulder that was deposited by the Mandu Khola during the
1993 floods in Nepal.

Flood duration can lead to increased flood damage values, both direct and particularly indirect losses.
Indirect industrial flood losses are related to the length of plant outage, both as a result of closure
whilst flooded and recovery afterwards (Parker et al. 1987). A number of other mechanisms may
contribute to overall damage values. The sediment or debris load of floodwaters is one example and
floodwater is also often contaminated. In residential areas floodwater is usually contaminated with
sewage because of the flooding of sewers and sewerage systems. In industrial areas floodwater may
be contaminated by any manner of chemicals derived from commercial processes and vehicles. This
can lead to fire or, for example, to the contamination of fresh water supplies.



Figure 3.3: Depth-Damage Curves for Dwellings
Dwellings: structural losses
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
-
0
.
3
0
.
1
0
.
3
0
.
7
5
1
.
2
1
.
8
2
.
4
2
.
7
4
3
.
6
6
depth
p
r
o
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
a
l

l
o
s
s
UK:FLAIR - all dwelling
USA - FIA 1985
(Appelbaum)
Japan %
Bangladesh : house type 4
Australia - SMEC 1975
Canada- IBI/ECOS 84m2
2storey* (1982 prices)

(Source: Halcrow et al. 1999)

3.1 Risks to Life and Health

Floods are high probability events since protection is not usually provided to reduce the risk to less
than 1 in 200 per year and in most countries the standard of protection is considerably lower.
However, the risk of death should a flood occur is usually low compared to other hazards, although
this depends on the zone affected. Nevertheless, floods do kill and sometimes kill hundreds of people
(floods in Eastern Mexico in October 1999 resulted in at least 300 deaths (Independent, October 12,
1999)), and where very large areas of low-lying land are affected, with very large populations, large
numbers of people may die, as in the Bangladesh floods of 1987 and 1988. Very often in major
events the number of lives lost may never be accurately known.

The flood conditions in which the risks of death are likely to be greatest are those where one or more
of the following conditions exist:

flow velocities are high;
flood onset is sudden as in flash floods, for example the Big Thompson flood, USA, in 1976
and flash floods in Southeast China in 1996 (Gruntfest, 1997);
flood waters are deep;


natural or artificial protective structures fail by overtopping or collapse. Flood alleviation
and other artificial structures themselves involve a risk to life because of the possibility of
failure, for example dam or dike failure; and
where extensive low lying densely populated areas are affected, as in Bangladesh.

Deaths occur in flood events through a range of circumstances:

Death rates in floods are high where buildings fail to provide a safe refuge (Table 3.2),
collapsing or being swept away (Green, Parker and Emery. 1983). Timber-framed buildings,
mobile homes, informal, temporary and fragile structures and tented dwellings may give rise
to significant loss of life or hazardous rescues. In many countries, floodplain land is the only
space available for settlement particularly by poor, or migrant, people who are likely to lack
the resources to build sound structures.
People trapped in buildings or on the roofs of buildings may die from exposure as illustrated
by the Mozambique floods of February/March 2000.
Deaths can also occur where people are trapped in single-story buildings, ground-floor
apartments, cellars or underground structures, such as railways or car parks which can pose a
particular threat to life in urban areas. The growing tendency to multi-levelled cities where
shopping centres and cinemas are below ground level, as for example in Hong Kong, is
increasing this risk. Metro systems present a particularly high risk, especially from flash
floods but also from burst water mains and surcharged sewers.
Pedestrians unaware of the power of flood waters may be swept away. Abt et al. (1989), in
an experimental study, concluded that the safe limit would be a product of depth (metres)
times velocity (metres/sec) of 1.0. Australian data give similar results (Emergency
Management Australia. 1998; New South Wales Government. 1986), as does Finnish
research (Reiter. 2000). 80% of the estimated 200 deaths in Monterrey, Mexico in 1988 were
attributed to attempts to ford the flooded river (Vazquez et al. 1997).
Many deaths in floods occur because people attempt to drive though or away from flood
waters and get swept away or trapped in their cars; their cars either then get swept away as a
result of positive buoyancy (Bureau of Reclamation. 1988; Emergency Management
Australia. 1998; New South Wales Government. 1986; Reiter. 2000) or stuck in the flood
water. For example, in the Big Thompson flood in the USA many of those who died were
drivers who attempted to outrun the flash flood.
In Bangladesh, a significant number of deaths during floods are from snake bite as both
people and reptiles take refuge in the same trees.
In flooded urban areas, people attempting to move about, particularly where flood waters are
turbid or discoloured, may fall down blown manholes, into excavations or into ditches.

It should be stressed that where there is a risk of flooding, it is commonly very high relative to that
from other hazards. Outside of the Netherlands and some other countries, it is unusual for a flood
alleviation project to be designed to protect against a flood more severe with than that with a return
period of 200 years. Consequently, the risk to life from flooding is likely to be higher than those
levels of risk which are deemed to be acceptable or tolerable in regard to such hazards as nuclear
power stations or chemical plants. For those other hazards, a general rule of thumb has been adopted
that an individual risk of death per year of one in one million is a threshold value. Thus, to be
consistent with this threshold value, the conditional risk of death should a flood occur cannot exceed
one in 10 000: there is no doubt that in some contexts the conditional risk of death is considerably
greater than this. It is, therefore, essential to assess whether the risk of death is particularly high in
any area under study and to determine what are the most appropriate measures to reduce it. These
measures may include one or all of the following: emergency plans, flood warnings, the provision of
flood refuges or evacuation plans.


Some analyses have been undertaken of past floods (DeKay and McClelland. 1993; Kraak. 1994) in
order to try to estimate the risk to life from flooding but it is difficult in such studies to separate out
the small part of the population who were exposed to a high risk from those who were exposed to a
much lower risk. Grahams (1999) analysis gives conditional probabilities of death that range from
0.0002 for low-severity floods in areas where there is a good understanding of floods and more than
60 min of warning to 0.75 in areas just downstream of a catastrophic dam failure occurring without
any effective warning.

Research literature on floods (Bennet. 1970; Drescher and Abueg. 1995; Green et al. 1985; Handmer
and Smith. 1983; Heurta and Horton. 1978; Penning-Rowsell et al. 1992; Powell and Penick. 1983;
Tapsell et al. 1999; Waelde, Koopman and Spiegel. 1998) and on dam bursts (Baum. 1983) indicates
that these events can have significant health effects, ranging from premature death, higher than
expected cancer rates, although the evidence on this is inconclusive, to other clinical problems
requiring hospitalisation and medical consultations.

Depending on the circumstances and characteristics of the flood, events may pose a serious threat of
illness and death through gastro-intestinal illnesses, dysentery, cholera, and respiratory illness due to
exposure to poor and unsanitary living conditions, sewage spread, the contamination of drinking
water supplies, and the disruption to transport, food and medical supplies and services (Gueri et al.
1986). There may be an increase in the incidence of malaria, yellow fever and other insect- and snail-
borne diseases as these breed in standing water (Blaikie et al. 1994). Thus, illnesses and injuries may
result in raised death rates in the aftermath of flooding (Gueri et al. 1986, Blaikie et al. 1994). The
pervasiveness of morbidity and disablement problems after flooding is indicated by Sikanders (1983)
finding that between 43% and 57% of rural households surveyed in Pakistan following flood events
fell ill after floods. Those most vulnerable to health effects of flooding are likely to be those who are
most vulnerable in normal conditions: the young, the old, the sick, the disabled and the poor (Blaikie
et al. 1994), although the evidence is mixed as to the differential vulnerability of the elderly.

However, a major cause of subsequent health damage seems to be the stress of the flood itself. There
is evidence that stress induces immunological changes. Recent qualitative research (Tapsell et al.
1999) suggests that the stress of the flood event itself, the stress and disruption to life during the
recovery period and worry about future flooding can have a serious effect on physical and
psychological health, as well as the well being, of flood victims. Pre-existing medical conditions
were perceived to be exacerbated and some new mental and physical conditions were attributed to the
flood event (Tapsell et al. 1999).



Table 3.2: Flood Conditions and Probability of Structural Failure of Masonry Buildings
Result Velocity
Depth x
velocity
inundation damages only
partial failure
structural collapse
<2 metres/second
< 3.0 metres
2
/
second
> 3.0 metres
2
/
second
<7.0 metres
2/
/second
> 2 metres/second
> 2 metres/second >7.0 metres
2
/second

(Source: Penning-Rowsell et al. 1992)

3.2 Agricultural Benefits and Costs

Clearly flooding can have highly positive effects in agricultural areas, and the normal annual
flooding which takes place in many agricultural floodplains of the world is a vital source of moisture
for crop growth. This is particularly so in arid, semi-arid, tropical and sub-tropical climates where
drought is a major problem and irrigation is a regular requirement for crop growth; one such form of
irrigation is then recession planting (Marchand. 1987). In Bangladesh the agricultural economy
depends upon regular flooding which moisturises soils. Alluvial silt from flooding is also generally a
rich source of additional fertility, although floods may also deposit sand that decreases soil fertility.
In Bangladesh, the activity of blue-green nitrogen fixing algae during the floods are considered to
play an important role in increasing yields from the post-flood crop (Brammer. 1990). Thus, Rogers
(Rogers et al. 1990) argued that Bangladesh did not have a flooding problem but an irrigation
problem. In general, it is perhaps better to think of agricultural areas in terms of water level
management rather than of flooding; both too much and too little water being harmful to plant growth
and yields.

However, whilst in the long run, and on average, flooding may be beneficial, this is of little relevance
to the subsistence farmer who cannot fed their family in the coming year because the crop has been
destroyed as the result of an extreme flood. Nor is it to the farmer who, having borrowed against the
expected crop to buy seed and fertiliser, loses their land and is reduced to an agricultural labourer or
share cropper. But, arguably in these circumstances, the appropriate response is not to undertake a
flood alleviation scheme but, for example, to introduce systems of low cost credit and other ways of
reducing the risks of crop loss.

In temperate regions, an excess of soil moisture is a barrier to agricultural productivity and the
management problem becomes one of maintaining the water table at an appropriate height relative to
the root zone. Damage occurs when the water table rises and begins to damage crop roots;
frequently, the larger part of the value of the crops has been lost before flooding occurs. In these
circumstances the soil becomes saturated and this gradually destroys crops. In addition, localised
flooding from local rainfall may cause flooding and crop losses before flooding from the major river
in the area has occurred . Thus, in areas protected by a dike, local flooding within the protected area


can destroy the crops notionally protected by the dike. If soil water levels are not controlled then
there is generally little advantage in controlling surface water levels.

While irrigation may be needed in temperate climates during the drier seasons, in the wet season land
drainage will be required to lower the water table to acceptable levels for farming. Land drainage
comprises a range of techniques designed to keep water levels below the root zone such as continuous
pumping of land, the maintenance of efficient drainage networks and the installation of under-soil
drainage. For agriculture, the distinction between land drainage and irrigation is somewhat artificial
and it is better to think in terms of water level management: of managing soil moisture levels within
the optimal range.

3.2.1 Flood Losses

One of the difficulties about policies relating to agricultural areas is that they are only rarely
primarily about agricultural production. They may be driven by concerns about alleviating rural
poverty, ensuring national food security, avoiding migration to the cities, or simply securing votes,
but they are not generally about making the most efficient use of agricultural land. Therefore, simply
to look at flood mitigation for agricultural land in terms of crop losses can be to misunderstand the
reasons why the works were undertaken in the first place.

For these reasons, agricultural production is also typically directly or indirectly subsidised. Direct
subsidies include guaranteed prices, as found in the Common Agricultural Policy in Europe. There
are often also indirect subsidies such as subsidised prices for electricity, fertilisers, land
improvements, fuel and irrigation: it being rare that farmers pay all of the costs of irrigation (Garrido.
1999).

From an economic perspective, the value of reducing the amount of crops lost through flooding can
then be rather low since increasing crop production will also increase the amounts that must be paid
in subsidies. In terms of loss per hectare, crop losses are typically much lower than those to be
expected in urban areas and it is correspondingly more difficult to justify providing flood mitigation
in rural areas or to provide a high standard of protection. The extent of the crop losses to be expected
depends upon where the flood occurs in the growing season and also on the duration of flooding
(Figure 3.4 and 3.5).

In areas where there are two or more crops each year, a flood may damage or destroy not only the
standing crop but also prevent or delay the planting of the next crop. In some cases it may be
possible for the farmer to plant an alternative second crop but this will generally give a lower valued
yield than the preferred crop.

However, in many cases, the crops destroyed by a flood had already been severely damaged as a
result of water-logging before the land was eventually flooded (eg Hong and Zhang-Yu. 1999).



Figure 3.4: Crop Losses in a Northern Climate (Hungary)
% loss of yield - flood duration of 15 days
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
J
a
n

M
a
r
c
h
M
a
y
J
u
l
y
S
e
p
t
N
o
v
month
%
Cereals
Fodder crops
Maize
Sugar beet
Sunf lower
Grassland

(Source: Podmaniczky. 1999)

Figure 3.5: Crop Losses in a Southern Climate (Australia)
losses as % of gross margins
0
20
40
60
80
100
month
%
WHEAT
SORGHUM
BARLEY/OATS
SOYABEANS
MAIZE
SUNFLOWER
RAPE SEED

(Source: Higgin 1981)
3.2.2 Land Drainage

In agricultural areas it is typically land drainage rather than flood alleviation that offers the major
benefits. Controlling soil moisture levels increases yields and allows farmers to switch to higher-
valued but more sensitive crops: the consequent gains can be substantial (Table 3.3). Historically,
the rationale for land drainage has been to allow a switch from rough pasture to arable uses. Farmers
will make this switch even though there continues to be a high risk of flooding, provided that they
have a way of bridging, through credit or other means, between good and bad years. Thus, in
Britain, agricultural areas were seldom protected against floods with a return period of more than 10
years. Similarly, in the Netherlands and Germany, summer dikes, which only provide protection
against the floods in the peak growing season, have commonly been provided ahead of the main dike
line.

Indeed, in extreme floods, agricultural areas are commonly used for emergency flood storage. Land
drainage also requires considerable on-farm investment in the form of field drainage; it cannot be
expected that this will be undertaken by all farmers immediately that the land drainage scheme is


completed. Instead it will be some years before all farmers make that investment. Moreover, it will
be those farmers who have access to capital who undertake the works first. One consequence,
therefore, is that a land drainage scheme can have negative distributional consequences: small
farmers may be unable to finance the necessary works and may be forced to sell out their land to the
large landowners.

The dependency of arable production on soil moisture levels means that some agricultural flood
alleviation schemes have no, or negative, benefits because they are not accompanied by a land
drainage scheme for the protected area. Indeed, they may impede the drainage of the protected area.
Such problems have not been uncommon in Bangladesh.

Table 3.3: Economic Benefits of Land Drainage in the UK

drainage status economic net return (/ha - 1997/98 prices)
land use type good bad very bad
1 extensive grass -73 -81 -103 ($-146)
2 intensive grass 320 245 131 ($186)
3 grass/arable rotation 283 215 163 ($163)
4 all cereal rotation 280 217 109 ($155)
5 cereal/oil seed rotation 329 263 165 ($234)
6 cereal/ root crop rotation 280 217 109 ($155)
7 horticulture 1500 750 109 ($155) :change to LUT4

definitions of drainage
good water table depth from surface > 0.5m
bad water table depth from surface 0.3 to 0.5m
very bad water table depth from surface <0.3m

(Source: Dunderdale 1998)

3.2.3 Livestock Benefits and Losses

In many traditional farming systems, the floodplains are important areas of rough grazing for part of
the year (Marchand. 1987). In such systems, the herds of livestock are grazed on different areas at
different times of the year; one consequence is that the conversion of the floodplain to arable land can
seriously impact on way of life of livestock farmers, promoting conflict between the arable and
livestock farmers.

Conversely, a large number of animals may be killed; both the likelihood that animals will die and the
number of animals who will be killed increases with industrial farming methods. Furthermore, the
loss of a draught animal by a small subsistence farmer will have a serious effect on that farmers
ability to plant and harvest the next crop.

Both in traditional agricultural systems and in new systems, aquaculture plays an important role. Fish
and shellfish may be caught in the natural water courses, introduced into paddy fields, or raised in
fish ponds. Fish in particular may contribute a significant proportion of protein in local diets as well
as being a major source of cash income.



3.3 Urban Impacts

Some of the more important urban impacts of floods are categorised in Table 3.4. The impacts of
floods on urban areas are generally negative, although transfers are bound to take place between
flooded and flood-free sub-regional economies within metropolitan areas as a consequence of
flooding. Flood losses arise from the complex inter-dependencies which exist in urban economies in
which there will be a certain degree of redundancy (eg duplicated or alternative systems) which will
allow urban economies to overcome some of the effects of flooding. Effects on urban areas are likely
to be greater with region-wide or city-wide flooding as opposed to flooding in one part of the region
or city. Impacts will be greater for rapid-onset (flash) floods than for slow-onset floods which may
take days to develop and which allow time for rescheduling and contingency plans to be put into
place.

Table 3.4: A Categorisation of Urban Impacts of Floods
Beneficial

Financial gains in the manufacturing and service sectors arising from flood damages and losses
(for repair and replacement of damaged goods)
Financial gains in flood-free commercial sector arising from flood losses in flooded commercial
sector (ie transfers)
Stimulus to rethinking the design and layout of plant or urban areas to reduce flood exposure and
impacts (in extreme cases urban relocation from flood-prone to flood-free sites)
Increases in industrial and commercial efficiency arising from severe flood damage and
rebuilding to more efficient standards

Adverse (ie flood losses)

Direct Indirect

Physical damage to dwellings Disruption of household activities
Increased heating costs
Costs associated with evacuation

Physical damage to retail and related Disruption to trade and commerce;
businesses (eg leisure services, offices) re-routing of incoming tourists to
alternative flood-free destination

Physical damage to distribution depots Interruption of distribution systems;
and systems may lead to food and other shortages
in urban hinterlands (eg in countries
with limited alternative sources).

Physical damage to manufacturing plant Disruption to manufacturing; loss
and equipment of production; loss of sales; possible
loss of exports

Physical damage to public buildings Disruption of public services, and
and structures (eg schools, hospitals, disruption of communications; knock-on
medical services, bridges etc) effects beyond the flooded area including
possibly on health care



Physical damage to public utilities Disruption of utility services leading
sewerage and sewage treatment to utility outages knock-on effects
gas distribution and storage facilities beyond the flooded area
electricity generation and transmission
water treatment, storage and distribution
telecommunication installations

Loss of utility and/or physical damage to Disruption to travel; congestion
communication systems and knock-on effects beyond the
vehicles flooded area
road systems
rail systems
waterway systems
airports

Costs of emergency services Additional costs of deploying
damage to police, fire, ambulance the emergency services generated
and other emergency service by a flood emergency
installations

Based on Parker etal (1997)

The effects of floods in urban areas can be expected to spread well beyond the area immediately
affected by floodwater because of spatial dependencies. For example, damaged electricity sub-
stations in a flooded area may well control the supply of electricity to areas beyond the flooded zone.
Similarly, a flooded road artery is likely to generate considerable congestion throughout a large part
of a city, and well beyond the area physically affected by floodwater. Flooding of large cities can
have impacts which spread out within the nation and globally, especially if financial markets or
tourist facilities are affected.

The exposure of urban areas to flooding is increasing rapidly over time. This is because catchment
urbanisation leads to the replacement of natural pervious surfaces with impermeable ones, reducing
soil infiltration and increasing runoff volumes. At the same time urban drainage systems often
operate in such a way as to reduce the times of concentration of runoff in streams and rivers. The
growth of urban areas is also sometimes associated with increased convectional storm activity and
increased convectional precipitation. In many cities land subsidence is a problem (eg Shanghai,
Bangkok), lowering land levels, and many of the worlds largest cities are developing in flood-prone
coastal zones in which sea level is rising relative to land level. All of these effects can exacerbate the
urban flood hazard and the impacts of flooding (Parker. 1995). At the same time the values of
properties at risk (ie in existing developed areas and newly-developing ones) are rising inexorably
within cities.

The susceptibility of urban systems to adverse flooding impacts is dynamic. The socio-economic
system may be considered as a network made up of nodes and links (Green. 1995). Flooding may
then affect nodes and/or links so that the overall vulnerability of the socio-economic system is a
function of the number of nodes and links affected, the susceptibility of the individual nodes and
links to damage or disruption, and the structure of the network. The introduction of new technologies
into urban life both reduces and increases susceptibility to flood loss the picture is a particularly
complex one. For example, the increased ownership, use of, and dependence upon, electronic
appliances (eg computers) increases susceptibility to direct flood damage but increases resilience to


indirect flood loss. The introduction of just-in-time concepts into the planning and management of
retail and other businesses means that these entities may be more susceptible than previously to flood
loss (Parker and Tapsell. 1995).

At the same time, developed economies are characterised by lower degrees of redundancy than earlier
economies: individual industrial plants both produce a larger proportion of total production and
individual factories are more specialised. Therefore, if one plant is affected it can be difficult if not
impossible to source from alternative producers. In other respects, vulnerability is decreasing: the
switch to mobile phones is decreasing the vulnerability of telecommunications to flooding.

3.4 Environmental Consequences of Flooding

Ecosystems develop around the prevailing water regime. Therefore, it is necessary to differentiate
between floodplains that are currently unregulated and those where previous flood mitigation
strategies, land drainage or irrigation projects have created a particular water regime. In some cases,
the historical pattern of water level management has resulted in important ecological reserves
(Purseglove. 1988).

3.4.1 Unregulated Rivers

Floodplain rivers that are unregulated are flanked by alluvial floodplains which are subject to
flooding during high flows and support biota adapted to floods. Floodplain rivers also have
associated aquatic systems such as standing water and flowing water in branches which contain at
least some species not found in the main channel. Floods, it can be argued, have a positive ecological
impact by sustaining flood adapted species and supporting the ecological well-being of the river
ecosystem as a whole. During flooding, water is delivered to the floodplain and as flood waters
retreat, dissolved and suspended material is moved from the floodplain to the river channel, supplying
nutrients and organic material to the riverine food web. The Flood Pulse is argued to be the major
force responsible for maintaining the complex physical and ecological structure of a floodplain
(SAST. 1994).

Diverse and specialised plant communities are maintained in mosaics by the spatial and temporal
patterns of flooding. This appears to be the case throughout the world (Hillman. 2000). High
concentrations and diversity of terrestrial species are found in floodplain areas because of their plant
productivity. Mammals that live in the floodplain are usually amphibious, spending time both
feeding in the water and raising their young on land which may then be susceptible to flooding.

Floodplain aquatic ecosystems depend on floods for their water supply. These systems are diverse
and specialised and also support rare flora and fauna not found in the parent river, thus contributing
to the biodiversity of the river system as a whole. Flooding stimulates the productivity of these
systems and also allows for an exchange of organisms such as fish and resources between the river
and associated wetlands.

Floods do cause specific damage as a result of disturbance following flood events. For example: by
covering grassland in sand, washing fish fry away in floodwaters, or by isolating aquatic communities
isolated when a river changes course after a flood. However, floods are part of the natural
hydrological cycle and in natural floodplains, the effects of a flood are short term (Haeuber and
Michener. 1998). Even some extreme events (for example, 1 in 100-year events) do not seem to cause
much more drastic changes than lesser events (Hillman. 2000). Extreme events are further argued to
reset the dynamic functioning of rivers: whilst in the short term, some species are severely affected,
others gain (SAST. 1994). There is reported to be some published evidence on the ecological impact
of a large dam collapse (SANDRP. 2000) the high flows and long duration of flooding might be


expected to cause damage and habitat loss down stream. Where the rivers that flood are highly
polluted, for example the Rhine flooding of 1993, severe ecological damage can occur through
contamination of floodplain areas by flood waters, sediment containing harmful chemicals and other
substances (Dombrowsky and Ohlendiek. 1998).

3.4.2 Managed and Regulated Rivers

Most floodplain rivers are managed to some degree for flood mitigation and flow regulation so that
the interaction between the river and floodplain ecosystems may be interrupted or broken completely.
The regulated release of flows from deep storage reservoirs may lower the temperature of rivers and
alter the velocity of flows affecting riverine ecosystems (Acreman et al. 1999; Bergkamp et al. 2000).
However, river management for flood mitigation or other purposes can have positive environmental
impact. Established drained and protected areas may support rare species and special habitats. Flood
retention ponds and reservoirs may also provide valuable habitats for example, for birds, and may
make possible releases of water for environmental purposes, for example, to provide water for low
flow rivers or drying wetlands.

Because the ecosystems behind existing flood embankments and around existing river regulation
projects have developed around the resultant water regime over, in some cases, hundreds of years,
abandoning those projects can have very damaging environmental consequences. Thus, when the
rehabilitation of the weirs on the River Nene was appraised, a large component of the benefits was
contributed by the costs of otherwise maintaining the existing water regime in the large number of
sites of local, regional and national environmental importance along the river (Balfour Maunsell.
1995). Conflicts may further emerge between the proponents of the new ecosystem created by a new
water regime and those who argue for a restoration of the previous water regime. Walters (1996)
notes, for instance, that the maintenance of the new food chain in the Great Canyon resulting from the
new water regime created by the dams may be threatened by the restoration of seasonal flooding
targeted at the maintenance of the habitat requirements for endangered native fish species.

3.4.3 Offshore Impacts of Flooding

The sediment deposited by the freshwater plume of flood waters can have a deleterious impact on
coastal species. Thus, flash floods in Sinai result in sediment deposition on the coastal coral reefs
(Ras Gharib et al. 1997); increased soil erosion and the loss of the coastal mangrove swamps causes
the same problem in Barbados; whilst in Spain the channelisation of the rivers, and hence their
greater capacity to carry sediment, has resulted in offshore landslides and damage to sea grass beds.

3.4.4 Integrated Catchment Management and the Environment

Holistic flood management is based on integrated catchment management across all functions and on
the co-ordination of land and water planning. As the shift towards holistic management occurs, we
have seen three waves of progressively bolder approaches to taking account of the environmental
consequences of projects.

1. Minimising the environmental harm done by the works themselves and maintenance of those
works (Purseglove. 1988);
2. Incorporating environmental enhancements into the project (Wasserwirtshaft in Bayern. 1990),
restoration of some canalised rivers to a form nearer their natural one (Brookes. 1990; Brookes
and Shields. 1996; Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group. 1998), and the use of
bio-engineering techniques for bank protection (ARSIA/GEOPLAN/CEHIDRO/WASSER
WIRTSCHAFT. 1999);


3. The Leitbilder concept (Bundesministerium fur Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und
Technology. 1995): the development of comprehensive vision of the catchment as a whole in
what would be its natural condition, for example, the Stork project (de Bruin et al. 1987) and
landscape project in the Netherlands (Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water
Management. 1996), and the Loire Grandeur Nature project in France (Gresent. 1996))

The first two approaches are local in vision and limited to flood management, whereas the third is a
view of the catchment; the first is limited to minimising harm whereas the latter two are concerned
with improving what is already there, where what is there has been degraded by past anthropogenic
actions. The approaches are progressively more difficult to implement in institutional terms because
no one institution has the authority to undertake all of the necessary actions.



4. Flood Management Options

Flood hazard management is about managing risks under conditions of uncertainty. There is a risk of
a flood of a particular magnitude and a risk that the management strategy will fail if that flood occurs.
Dams may fail, dikes breach, culverts block or warnings fail to be given. Climate change is likely to
change both rainfall patterns and intensities as well as runoff (Arnell et al. 1994). Therefore, in
planning a flood management strategy it is important to consider how floods will be managed when
they are greater than the design standard of protection or the management strategy fails for other
reasons (Green et al. 1993). It is thus necessary to consider how they may fail; to apply reliability
engineering approaches to the design of the management strategy. In managing the floods in one
area, it is not helpful to do so by simply moving them on to elsewhere; to alleviate the flood problem
in one area by making it worse somewhere else.

The risks, and their consequences, are the subject of uncertainties. These outcome uncertainties are
of two kinds: parametric and systemic uncertainty (Blockley. 1980). The former has been called
what we know we dont know and the latter what we dont know that we dont know (Penning-
Rowsell et al. 1992). Parametric uncertainty covers, for example, the confidence intervals around the
estimates from hydrological and hydraulic models as well the measurement error in the data used to
calibrate those models. Systemic uncertainty then refers to the possibility that our theories and the
models built on those theories are incomplete, false or inaccurate. Because choices are between
alternative futures, and the future is unknown, all decisions are inherently uncertain. The meaning of
uncertainty about outcomes is that it is not possible to completely differentiate between the outcomes;
the ESRC (1999) drew the important distinction between uncertainty about probabilities and
uncertainty about outcomes and they went on to categorise the different conditions under which
decisions must then be made (Table 4.1).

Table 4.1: Knowledge and Probabilities
Knowledge about outcomes

Knowledge about
probabilities

Well-defined Ill-defined
Differentiated probabilities

Risk Ambiguity
Undifferentiated
probabilities

Uncertainty Ignorance
(Source: after ESRC 1999)

Thus, when someone is thinking about playing roulette, then they are taking a decision under risk:
both the outcomes and the probabilities of each outcome are known. When that person is thinking
about which video to rent, they are making a choice under uncertainty. They know the possible
outcomes, whether or not they will enjoy the video, but do not know the probabilities associated with
those outcomes for each video on offer. As we learn more about climate change, we are moving
from ignorance to ambiguity; the probabilities of different changes in climatic variables are becoming
clearer, but the precise consequences in terms of species loss and water availability, for example, are
not yet clear.

Methods for exploring the implications of decisions under risk are well-established; we can propagate
probabilities in component systems through Monte Carlo modelling and similar techniques in order to


obtain probability functions for outcomes (Greeley-Polhemus Group. 1992). Unfortunately, this
approach is not possible when decisions must be made under uncertainty, ambiguity or ignorance.

However, the important form of uncertainty is decision uncertainty, so that being uncertain may be
defined as a state of rational doubt as to what to do (Green et al. 2000). Choices, or decisions, may
be argued to inherently involve decision uncertainty in that if one is certain as to which option to
adopt, then only in the most trivial sense is there still a choice to be made.
The process of choosing is thus one of reducing decision uncertainty. One reason why we may be
uncertain what to do is because we are uncertain about the outcomes of the different available
options, but we can be undecided for other reasons as well (Green et al. 2000).

Conversely, it can be that we can be very uncertain about some of the outcomes of a decision without
being very uncertain about what to do. For instance, if there were only two options and we are very
uncertain about the outcomes but are certain that whatever the magnitude of the outcomes, they will
be worse under option A than option B, we have no decision uncertainty about preferring B to A.
Moreover, decision uncertainty does not exist as long as we are quite confident as to the rank order of
preference across the two best options: rank order is all that is important and we need not consider
further the remaining options once we are certain as to which are the two best options.

That decisions are about the future and must be made under conditions of uncertainty must be
recognised and built into the management approach adopted. It is no use concentrating our
understanding upon refining our knowledge of the past, such as to past flood losses and past return
periods, if the future is likely to be different. Being precise when are we uncertain can also be
dangerous: for example, drawing 100-year flood outlines on maps is both misleading and usually
inaccurate. Such outlines suggest that we are both certain as to the extent of the future 100-year
flood and that there is something qualitatively different about the flood risk within and outside of the
100-year flood contour.

Holling (1978) and Walters (1986, 1997) have proposed that, given the inherent uncertainty of
decisions, the appropriate response is to take an adaptive management approach: to treat all actions as
learning experiments. Secondly, that with natural systems, the approach should be to look for
resilient systems (Holling. 1973; Gunderson. 1999). With artificial systems, which lack the same
self-organising capacity as natural systems, we should seek for forgiving systems: those that fail
gracefully. Finally, when dealing with individuals and communities, the implication is that we
should seek to maximise the coping or adaptive capacity of those individuals or communities.

4.1 Managing all Floods and Not Just Some

The flood management strategy adopted must cover all floods and not just some floods; not just those
up to some design standard of protection. That it, it is necessary to plan how to respond before,
during and after all floods rather than simply construct an engineering solution that protects up to
some design standard flood. The flood management strategy must include management of more
extreme floods and also what to do when one or more elements of the adopted strategy fails.

The ideal flood to manage is one:

which has a slow rise and in general changes slowly over time, so allowing time to respond to the
changing risk; and
where there are no sudden changes in the nature of the appropriate coping strategy.

Thus, flash floods generally present a much more intractable management problem than mature
rivers.


Time is a critical resource in managing a flood; all actions take time, including deciding what to do.
In general, the longer the time available to take action, the more likely it is that that action will be
successful. The slower the rate of rise of a flood, the greater is the time available to mobilise
resources, communicate knowledge, plan future response and implement that response. Sudden
changes of state such as the breach of an embankment or the river taking a new course are difficult to
cope with. It is necessary to design for failure: in developing the strategy, explicit consideration
should be given to the mode and consequences of failure, and how those will be managed. Thus, dike
systems may be designed with weak points so that failure is likely to occur at the most manageable
point.

Ideally, the response which is successful for some floods would be successful for floods of all
magnitudes. This is seldom the case and those responses which are successful for the more frequent
floods are often very dangerous ones to adopt for more extreme floods. Thus, people may have learnt
to sit out a flood in their home or in another place of refuge. But for more extreme floods this may no
longer be a safe option and the appropriate option may be to evacuate to higher ground. Both
individuals and institutions learn from past experience and apply that learning to future events, but
that learning is not always appropriate to all floods, not least because they tend to expect the future to
be like the past. Thus, discontinuities in the challenge presented by a flood is a particular problem
(Table 4.2).

Table 4.2: Potential Forms and Causes of Discontinuities in the Challenge Presented by a
Flood (Green 2000)

Permanent change in the course of the river
Natural throttle points (eg gorge): when flood flow reaches the discharge capacity of the
gorge, an upstream reservoir is created with a significant depth of flooding
Artificial throttle points (eg bridge): when flood flow reaches discharge capacity or throttle
point is created by debris, creates upstream reservoir with a significant depth of flooding
Depressions that flood to a significant depth when the rim is overtopped
Natural ridge line or artificial embankment (eg road or railway): area behind floods when
ridge line is overtopped or breaches
Failure of artificial throttle points (eg of bridge, dam): causes flood wave to travel
downstream at high velocity
Breach or overtopping of dike
Velocity exceeds 2m/s: probability of building collapse is significantly higher above this
threshold
Depth exceeds 2m: probability of building collapse is significantly higher above this
threshold

It is therefore essential to plan how to manage all floods and not just some floods, including those
floods for which the primary management strategy will fail. Flood management should not be limited
to the assessment of the effectiveness of a proposed strategy up to some essentially arbitrary design
standard flood, but the impact of that option on the difficulties of managing all floods must be
considered. For example, a virtue of a channel improvement scheme is that it reduces the amount of
water out of bank in all floods and not just those up to the design standard flood (MAFF. 1999).

Planning for, or designing to, a single design standard flood will engender a false sense of security.
Whilst the probability of a more extreme flood occurring in that area is indicated by the return period
of the design standard event, it says nothing about the probability of an extreme event occurring
somewhere in the country. If there are 50 catchments in a country and the probability of a flood in
one is independent of the probability of a flood occurring in another, then each year the chance of the


500-year return period flood occurring somewhere is 1 in 11. Such a risk should not just simply be
ignored. Conversely, a flood in a catchment arises from an event and that event may result in floods
across several catchments; thus, severe floods in Bangladesh are the result of the three great rivers
being in flood simultaneously. It can therefore be more useful to think in terms of the probability of
an event rather than the probability that a particular river will be in flood.

4.2 What is Vulnerability and Who is Vulnerable ?

The concept of vulnerability is a central one in understanding the effects of floods and the means
required to alleviate these effects. The concept of vulnerability is, however, the subject of much
debate and there are a variety of definitions - partly reflecting different disciplinary and ideological
positions, and different purposes. There are three main definitions of vulnerability:

as a characteristic of the population at risk;
as a characteristic of the flood to which that population is exposed; or
as the interaction between the nature of the flood and the characteristics of the population at risk.

Blaikie et al. (1994) took the first approach, defining vulnerability as: the characteristics of a person
or group in terms of their capacity to anticipate, cope with, resist, and recover from the impact of a
natural hazard. High vulnerability frequently promotes and exacerbates flood disasters and is often,
but not always, closely associated with under-development. Whilst this definition of vulnerability
includes recovery after a flood and capacity to recover, it also includes adaptation to floods and
response during a flood.

Vulnerable people can be rural-urban migrants living in poverty in squatter settlements in Manila in
the Philippines, or the landless labourers and families living in flimsy shelters in low-lying areas of
Bangladesh. They can also include elderly, low-income pensioners who are un- or under-insured and
living in ignorance of the flood risk in one-storey retirement homes or mobile homes within a
floodplain, or in a poorly protected coastal zone in an otherwise affluent European setting.

The causes of vulnerability lie in social, economic and political processes and differential access to,
and ability to mobilise, resources. Vulnerability is an on-going state or condition in which people
exist rather than a status that can be associated with any particular hazardous event. The components
of vulnerability have been analysed by Cannon (2000) and include: (i) initial well-being (eg
nutritional status, physical and mental health, morale, capacity for self-reliance); (ii) livelihood
resilience (eg income opportunities, livelihood type, qualifications, assets and savings; (iii) self-
protection (eg building quality, protection from hazards, location of home and livelihood); (iv)
societal protection (eg as for (i) plus building regulations, technical interventions); and (v) social
capital (eg social cohesion, rivalries, number and strength of conflicting groups). Although
vulnerability and poverty are not synonymous, vulnerability to hazards such as floods is often made
worse by poverty and through related weak response and recovery capacity. Vulnerable people may
include the elderly, infirm and the immobile.

Vulnerability may then be reduced in a variety of ways. Chan (1995) demonstrates how the
vulnerability of poor, rural Malays to floods in eastern Peninsular Malaysia is reduced by close
kinship systems which exist in the floodplain villages. Resilience, which may be taken as the
opposite of vulnerability, may be enhanced by promoting access to knowledge and resources, through
poverty-reduction programmes and through processes of development as reflected, for example, in
better healthcare, housing and infrastructure. Development projects must however aim at improving
self-reliance, reducing dependence and increasing the success of the population in mobilising
resources. Conversely, ill-advised interventions to attack a perceived problem may increase the
vulnerability of some groups; in particular, Adams (1992) has argued that this has been the


consequence of a number of dam-based projects in Africa. In the longer run, Thomas and Adams
(1999) have shown in one case that adaptation to the changed conditions was more successful than in
the shortrun, but the success of this adaptation may have been due to exogenous factors which
counterbalanced in part the problems resulting from the original project.

4.2.1 Alternative Definitions of Vulnerability

The second definition of vulnerability to flooding is simply and solely interpreted as a function of the
characteristics of flooding (eg the floods magnitude, speed of onset etc), and the characteristics of
the population and land use systems affected are either ignored or are only considered as peripheral
matters. Using this interpretation, vulnerability can be determined by a hydrological analysis only.
This definition clearly only implies that there is a flood problem which should be fixed.

The third definition of vulnerability is akin to Lazaruss (1966) definition of stress, as that which
results when coping resources are inadequate to meet the challenge posed by the flood. The
weakness of the first definition is that it implies that a community will have a similar level of
vulnerability whatever the nature of the flood event. This third form of definition leads to a form of
vulnerability analysis which has become an all-encompassing means of assessing risk and social
and economic consequences associated with a hazard (Alexander 1993). In such studies, estimates of
flood probability, the risk of buildings being structurally unsound, and the effects of an event in terms
of estimated property loss and casualties are all measurable and combined to derive a technical
estimate of vulnerability. Vulnerability is viewed as a product of the interaction of the flood event
and some of the characteristics of the affected land uses and population. Penning-Rowsell (Green et
al. 1994) proposed that the following equation be used to define vulnerability of households to
flooding:

Household
vulnerabiliilty
Property and
infrastructure
variables
Social/economic
variables
Flood
characteristics
=
Response
variables
Warning
variables
=
A
H, S, I, C, F
f
S
c
, S
b
, I
t
S
t
, R
o
W
o
, W
t
, W
a
D
e
, D
t
, S
d
,S
t
, W, V, P
j
, R T
r
, R
a
, R
q
, , , ,

where:

A = Age profile of household D
e
= Depth of flooding
H = Health status and/or mobility of
household
D
t
= Duration of flooding
S = Savings of household S
d
= Sediment concentration
I = Household income S
t
= Sediment size
C = Cohesiveness of community W = Wave/wind action (eg coastal or not)
F = Flood knowledge V = Velocity
P
l
= Pollution load of flood waters
S
c
= Susceptibility of building
contents to damage
R = Rate of water rise during flooding
onset
S
b
= Susceptibility of building fabric
I
t
= Time taken to restore
infrastructure
W
o
= Whether a flood warning was
received
S
t
= Number of storeys W
t
= Warning time provided
R
o
= Robustness of building fabric W
a
= Advice content of warning

T = Time taken for assistance to arrive
after or during event


R
a
= Amount of response available
R
q
= Response quality

Vulnerability in the forgoing discussion is implicitly defined at the level of the household or
community. However, ecosystems and national or regional economies may also be assessed in terms
of their vulnerability. Such assessments need to be made using different parameters; the result is that
vulnerability assessments yield a series of overlays, different elements or systems being vulnerable to
different extents to different characteristics of floods. Such vulnerability assessments have the
potential to be used to screen large areas of a country in terms of the priority that should be given to
undertaking more detailed flood management assessments (eg Green. 2000).

4.2.1.1 Implications of Interpretations of Vulnerability for the Choice of Flood
Hazard Alleviation Projects

Under the first interpretation of the concept of vulnerability explained above, the choice of projects
might well involve strategies designed to reduce the populations vulnerability rather than providing
some kind of direct flood alleviation. Indeed, flooding here is interpreted essentially only as a
symptom and not as a diagnosis. Such projects might involve decentralising decision-making and
integrating the flood knowledge and coping mechanisms of local people with those of flood agencies.
Alternatively, appropriate projects might seek to diversify and strengthen fragile local economies
which occupy flood-prone areas, or to train the members of vulnerable communities in how to
prepare for floods and to spread a preventive culture (Parker. 2000). In some cases flood alleviation
projects might be combined with such measures.

Under the second narrow interpretation of flood vulnerability (see 4.2.1 above), which assumes that
flooding mechanisms are the principal problem to be addressed, projects are likely to be selected
which seek to reduce flood magnitude, retard flood generation and so on. But the problem with this
approach is that it may not address the fundamental socio-economic and political causes of flood
vulnerability. The third interpretation of vulnerability, which stresses interaction between the flood
and the population, leads logically towards projects which seek to reduce the challenge presented by
the flood and/or to enhance the resources available to people to cope with the event when it occurs.

4.3 Identifying the Threat

The necessary first step to flood management is to identify the nature and extent of the threat. This
requires that the development of the flood waves be modelled. The simplest form of such a model is
a floodplain map. This may be based on an approximate interpretation of the records of the largest
floods on historic record, or may range up to maps showing in accurate detail the extent, velocity and
depth of flooding for defined return periods, produced from comprehensive mathematical or physical
models. These approaches give a picture of differing levels of accuracy and detail of the flooding
hazard at a single moment in time of a historical or idealised design flood. Conventionally, such
models and maps therefore implicitly assume the second definition of vulnerability because they
exclude all of the characteristics of the populations exposed to the flood.

A second typical limitation of the simpler maps is that they simply draw a boundary around the flood
extent for some flood of historic record or the modelled extent for a flood of a particular return
period. Thus, they are static: they ignore the inherent uncertainties and do not observe the principle
that it is necessary to manage all floods and not just some, since they contain no information about
the threat posed by more extreme floods. This is not so if the flood management specialist is
presented with a set of floods of different return periods, and perhaps of different durations or
seasonal characteristics, based on comprehensive mathematical models.



To be useful for flood management, a different form of modelling and mapping is necessary. This
will show both critical flood features and population characteristics. On the flood side, the
floodways should be identified, particularly out-of-bank flood routes, and areas of passive and active
storage. Although the length of record and other factors will limit the reliability with which the
forms of floods of different return periods can be modelled, focusing on a single event, such as the
100-year return period flood, should be avoided. The objective is to manage all floods and not just
some. For this reason, and because of the necessary uncertainties, banding or zoning is more
appropriate than lines; indeed, drawing a boundary to the flood extent is something that should be
avoided. For management purposes it is the major changes in flood routes in particular that should be
identified, eg if the 500-year return period event will cut across a low area, perhaps an old meander
belt, now occupied by urban development. Although the information will necessarily be incomplete
because of all the uncertainties, an important datum for flood management is whether, for example,
the 500-year flood is going to be significantly different from the 100-year flood.

Those features of the floodplain which will limit flood flows and extent should also be identified.
Thus, both natural and artificial crestlines, such as road and railway embankments, as well as natural
depressions should be indicated. Constrictions on flows such as bridges should also be shown
(Figure 4.1). Even so, such maps will still contain little useful information about the threat posed by
a flood unless they indicate likely depths of flooding and areas where flood velocities will be high.
If the first definition of vulnerability is adopted, then it will simply be necessary to show where the
most vulnerable segments of the population are located. The third definition of vulnerability is likely
to be more useful in terms of management. In this case, it is necessary to indicate those areas where
the combination of flood characteristics, buildings and population result in a high degree of
vulnerability. Again, both depths and velocities are likely to be crucial, but the analysis should be
taken further to indicate areas where structures are likely to fail to provide protection to their
occupiers. Critical installations and those giving rise to potential secondary hazards, such as areas
where toxic or flammable chemicals are stored, may also be indicated.

Figure 4.1: Hypothetical flood hazard map



floodway bypass if flood level
exceeds 15.3m
velocity >4 m/sec
depth <1 metre
geriatric
hospital
railway
embankment:
level 16.2m
factory storing 200
tonnes LPG
active flood
storage
depth < 1
metre
railway
bridge
camp site: depth c 2
metres
passive storage:
depth < 1 metre

The purpose of such a map in its simplest form, is to inform flood management. A layer on the
map may then be used to identify the appropriate management responses: those points such as bridges
and crestlines which need to be watched; points where emergency flood fighting works may protect
the areas behind them; those areas where warning is necessary; which areas should be evacuated in
the event of a flood; where buildings should be discouraged if possible because they lie in a
floodway; and where flood proofing of buildings may be satisfactory because they are only in a
passive flood storage area.

This is only one potential purpose for a flood hazard map. In France, for example, maps define areas
where no building is to be permitted and those where only flood-proofed buildings are to be
permitted, or that is the theory. If flood insurance is available then a ratings map defining areas at
different levels of risk is also required. The latter in particular requires a range of flood events of
different return periods to be modelled.



4.4 Reducing the Challenge

Under the Lazarus model, flood management strategies can be categorised as either seeking to reduce
the challenge the individuals, households and communities must confront or to enhance their coping
capacity. Similarly, these interventions may be physical in form or involve institutional changes.
This differentiation is somewhat different from the usual split between structural, or standard river
engineering options, and non-structural options which essentially cover everything else. As shown
in Figure 4.2, flood warning sits at the centre of the matrix of options, having both physical elements
in the form of rain gauges, weather radar and streamflow gauging stations and an institutional
element which converts the flood forecasts derived through that system into useful flood warnings.
At the same time, flood warnings are necessary if such strategies as contingent flood proofing and
evacuation are to be successfully achieved. Indeed, the likely reliability and lead time that can
realistically be expected of a flood forecasting and warning system can significantly influence the
choice of options to be adopted.

Figure 4.2 Examples of flood hazard management options

Hydrological analysis will identify the flood flows or flood levels associated with particular return
periods, or probabilities, of occurrence. In more critical cases possible variations in precipitation and
runoff over time as a result of changes in climatic change and land use will increasingly have to be
taken into account, as well as changes in the relationship between flows and levels in vulnerable
areas. The different management options available (not all will be feasible in the local circumstances)
change the challenge presented by the flood flow in different ways, as shown by their impact on the
flood hydrograph (Figure 4.3). The chance of managing a flood through mobilising resources is
increased if it develops slowly, so increasing the forecast lead time. At the other end of the spectrum
the steep flashy river in mountainous or arid areas presents the greatest challenge in this respect.

PHYSICAL INSTITUTIONAL/HUMAN
CHALLENGE
REDUCING
COPING
ENHANCING
flood warning
floor raising/house lifting
precautionary evacuation
compensation
counselling
floodplain zoning
refuges for evacuation
flood embankments
insurance
contingent flood proofing
channel improvements


Figure 4.4 represents a simple case; effectively one where a single catchment or sub-catchment
generates the flood wave. Source control, essentially involving many small units of local storage at
source, may be possible in urban areas and has been much promoted. This reduces the runoff that
reaches the river but may be less effective at the height of the rainfall event, because the local storage
may become saturated, particularly if one storm event is closely followed by another. Strategic
storage, involving dams large or small, is usually operated to reduce the peak flows and water levels,
the water so stored being released later on during the falling flood or recession. Therefore, the flood
crest is both slowed and lowered but lasts longer. Such reservoirs operated for flood control are
usually kept at a low level to absorb incoming floodwater. A problem in operating such storage is that
effective operation requires reliable flood forecasts; if a forecast is unreliable then the storage may be
used to absorb to what is forecast to be the peak. If the flood then goes on rising, there is no storage
available to absorb that peak. Again, if a flood peak is followed by an unpredicted flood peak then
insufficient water may have been released to store the new peak. Finally, if the hydrological
modelling of the catchment was inadequate when the dam was built, the dam may have been
constructed with insufficient spillway capacity to safely pass an extreme flood and sluices may have
to be opened in order to protect the dam from failure.

In theory, the flood downstream of a dam should under all circumstances be no worse than if there
were no dam. In practice, this will be true provided that the original hydrological analysis and
subsequent flood forecasts are reliable. There are a large number of newspaper and other reports that
assert that flooding was made worse by releases from a dam, but these reports give insufficient detail
to assess where the problem lies. One explanation is that flood forecasts were erroneous resulting in
operational failure; a second is that with multi-purpose dams, the operators were not prepared to draw
down the reservoir in advance of the flood so as to allow sufficient storage for the flood wave. The
third explanation is then that the spillway design was based on an underestimate of the magnitude of
the extreme flood and emergency releases of water took place. The fourth explanation of the reported
problems lies in human psychology: those living downstream have adapted their behaviour to the
reduced flood experience and are consequently more exposed to those floods that do occur. In
addition, as rational animals we all seek explanations for both the absence of floods and the
occurrence of floods; the absence of floods has been known to be attributed to the presence of dams
that have no intended flood alleviation role and equally it is to be expected that an unusually extreme
flood will be blamed on any upstream dam. A final potential explanation is that the release of water
resulted in a much faster rate of rise in flood levels than experienced with natural floods had lead
downstream residents to expect. But the detailed analyses required to distinguish between these
potential explanations do not appear to be available.

The effect of channel improvements, the building of embankments or flood diversion channels is
simply to raise the flood flow which can be passed without flooding resulting.

Figure 4.4 shows how the extent of the economic or financial losses are likely to vary according to
the extremity of the flood. For both channel improvements and house raising projects, the losses
from all floods will be less than under the current conditions. In the case of channel improvements,
this is because there will always be less water out of bank with the project than there is now, although
in areas like the River Tone in Japan, where maximum flows are hundreds of times greater than
minimum flows, this difference may be negligible. For house raising, the depth of flooding will
always be less with house raising than the depth of flooding now - unless flow velocities in some
floods are such as to demolish the building, losses will always be less than they are now.



Figure 4.3: Changes to Flood Hydrograph by Management Option
hydraulic impacts of management options
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
13579
1
1
1
3
1
5
1
7
1
9
2
1
time
f
l
o
w
base flow
source control
storage
slow
protect

With flood proofing, losses are reduced to zero until flood levels exceed the standard of protection
offered by flood proofing; as soon as this happens, losses will be identical to those which would be
experienced in the same flood if it occurred now. With dikes, losses are reduced to zero until the
dike overtops. Since overtopping can often lead to dike failure, the line is shown as vertical rather
than sloping: once a dike has failed, it makes little difference whether it is the 100- or 200-year return
period flood that causes the flood. Difficulties in evacuating the flood water after the breach has
been closed may also add to flood losses. Dams protect against all floods up to a certain volume and
even larger floods will be attenuated and slowed. Thus there will be zero damage up to the design
flow, and much reduced damage above this as excess floodwater is spilled into the river downstream.
Dams are usually governed by strict national legislation covering their design and inspection, with
failure rates many orders of magnitude less than river embankments. Such failures are extremely rare
and fall outside the scope of flood protection so that, strictly speaking, the curve for dams should be
well to the left of the curve for dikes and in theory lie on the y axis.



Figure 4.4: Schematic Differences in the Loss-Probability Curve by Management Option
Loss
return period
losses
without
project
losses with channel
improvement or
house raising
project
losses with channel
improvement project if
drowned out
losses
with dikes
or dams
losses
with flood
proofing
design standard
of protection

Figure 4.5 then compares the likely risk to life under the current conditions and those prevailing if
different management options are adopted. For clarity, the scales are distorted, it being the shape of
the curves that is important. The locations of each curve are also determined by the particular design
standard of protection offered by the approach in the individual local circumstances. In each case,
the risk to life is formally defined as the risk to life conditional on the flood management option
adopted and excludes the possible reduction in risk that might be achieved by a flood warning and
evacuation.

Whilst the diagram is shown as a plot of the risk to life versus the exceedance probability of the flood
event, the diagram also shows how the risk to life changes as a particular flood develops. The change
of risk as a flood develops is given by the appropriate segment of the line for that management option
from its right hand extreme to the vertical line that indicates the return period of the peak of the flood.

At present, the without project condition, the risk to life increases slowly as the probability of the
flood decreases (and consequently its magnitude increases). At some flood magnitude, and thus that
of a particular return period, the depth of flooding and/or its velocity will exceed a critical threshold
(Section 3.1) and the risk of flooding will increase markedly, particularly when the velocity and/or
depth is sufficient to cause the collapse of buildings.

With house raising or flood proofing, the dwelling provides a safe place of refuge up to some severity
of flooding. However, when flood levels or velocities reach specific levels, this will no longer be the
case and some buildings will collapse or be swept away. At this point, the risk to life will be equal
to the risk under the without project conditions. In addition, by that time or earlier, the conditions
outside the dwelling will be such as to make it impossible to escape unaided.


With a dike, the risk to life is zero until the dike fails. In principle, the dike should only fail when it
is overtopped but in practice, there is a risk that the dike will fail by breaching because it has been
poorly constructed or maintained (Wolff. 1997). When the dike fails, either as a result of
overtopping or breaching, the risk to life rises nearly instantaneously. The velocity of flow through a
breach in particular is likely to be greater than the velocity that would exist under the without project
condition and consequently the risk to life under the with dike condition is shown as being higher
than without the project.

For the dam option, it assumed that above some rate of inflow to the dam an increasing proportion of
that inflow is discharged. Furthermore, in extreme floods, the flood storage capacity of the dam is
exhausted; at this point, the discharge flow from the dam equals the inflow and the dam ceases to
have any affect in attentuating flooding. At this point, the severity of flooding with the dam is
identical to that prevailing under the without project condition. Depending upon the extent of
development downstream, dam spillways are designed to have capacity to discharge inflows of
greater or lesser return periods. Where there is a significant number of people living below the dam,
then the spillway will generally be designed to be able to discharge the Probable Maximum Flood
(PMF); theoretically, the exceedance probability of the PMF is very close to zero. However, if the
dam fails as a result of an extreme flood, the resulting flood immediately downstream will be
catastrophic. Thus, Graham (1999) notes that the flood wave after catastrophic failure could, in some
cases, exceed 30m in height. The risk to life from a catastrophic dam failure attenuates with distance
downstream from the dam as the energy of the flood wave is lost and usually the risk to life has fallen
markedly at a distance 25km below the dam (and a lesser distance in the case of smaller dams).
However, within the area immediately downstream of the dam, Grahams analysis of past floods
leads him to conclude that the probability of death will be in the range of 0.30 to 1.00, with a
suggested probability of 0.75. This probability is likely to be considerably higher than from any
naturally occurring floods, with the possible exception of some flash floods in small catchments.

In addition, and unlike the other flood management options, there is a risk to life from dams under
other conditions as a result of so-called dry weather failure, although that risk may be elevated
during flood conditions that are not in themselves sufficient to cause failure through overtopping.
Finally, if the capacity of the river channel is increased, then there will always be less water out of
bank than under current conditions whatever the return period of the flood. Consequently, the risk
curve is below and to the left of the curve under the without project conditions.

Because these curves are defined in terms of the risk to an individual, they do not change as a result
of any development that is attracted to the area after the adoption of one or another flood
management option.


Figure 4.5: Risk to Life by Management Strategy and Exceedance Probability
risk to life
return period
risk
without
project
risk with channel
improvement project
risk with
dams
risk with
house
raising/
flood
proofing
risk with
dikes

A more realistic situation is shown in Figure 4.6, where a river is fed by a number of tributaries. In
this instance, the flood flow at B depends in part on the flood flow from the river on which A is
located, as well as on the flood on the main stem. A flood from the tributary may arrive at B before
the flood crest from the main tributary (Figure 4.7), with the flood being somewhat attenuated on its
passage down river. This pattern would result if, for example, floods are typically the result of a rain
front moving east to west. Alternatively, the flood crest from the tributary might reach B after that of
the main stem (Figure 4.8). The flood crest at A shows the characteristics of a flood on a rather
flashy catchment, with a short time to concentration and a short flood duration. Conversely, the flood
on the main stem is characteristic of a mature river system with a slow rate of increase and long, flat
flood crest; whilst the peak flow on the tributary is higher than on the mainstem at B, the total
discharge from the mainstem is much greater than from the tributary.

In the worst case, the two flood crests would coincide in their arrival time at B and this is a situation
which is obviously highly dangerous. In the case where the first flood crest that arrives is that from
the tributary, we might seek either to reduce or to delay either crest. We might delay the crest from
the main stem by controlled storage on the floodplain in the form of a detention basin. Alternatively,
we might construct a flood reservoir on the tributary to store the flood crest and discharge it after the
flood crest from the main stem has passed B. Figure 4.9 illustrates the first approach and Figure 4.10
the latter approach; in both cases, an approach has been adopted which results in the same maximum
flood flow at B. In this hypothetical instance, increasing storage on the main stem is quite
problematic: to allow for the passage of the flood crest from the tributary, a large proportion of the
flow on the main stem must be diverted to storage. Diverting the flow in this way uses the fact that
the water level in the river channel is usually higher than that in the detention basin. Pumping will
usually be both unnecessary and uneconomic. In the alternative approach, a flood storage dam on the
tributary (Figure 4.7), the flood crest on the tributary is stored and released only after the crest on the
main stem has passed.



This example is intended only as an illustration of the problems of managing flood flows in complex
river systems and it is not claimed that there is any universal applicability of the conclusions.

Figure 4.6: Flood Management in a Hypothetical Catchment

A
B

Figure 4.7: Tributary Floods First: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B
flood hydrograph
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
13579
1
1
1
3
1
5
1
7
1
9
2
1
2
3
time
f
l
o
w
tributary A
tributary B
mainstem B
total B

Figure 4.8: Main Stem Floods First: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B


Figure 4.9: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B with Flood Storage on the Main Stem
flood hydrograph
0
5
10
15
20
25
time
f
l
o
w
tributary A
tributary B
mainstem B
total B

flood hydrograph
time
f
l
o
w
tributary A
tributary B
mainstem B
total B



Figure 4.10: Flood Hydrograph at Points A and B with Flood Storage on the Tributary

4.4.1 Controlling Runoff

Urbanisation, agricultural land drainage, deforestation and other changes in land use higher up a
catchment may reduce the ability of rain water to drain into the soil and increase the speed and
volume of surface water runoff into existing water courses. This can lead to flood problems lower
down the catchment as well as increasing the flow of pollutants into rivers. Source control aims to
mitigate such problems by recovering the natural hydrological cycle to the greatest extent
practicable, so that water is retained close to its source and allowed to infiltrate into the soil, restoring
ground water, and gradually through the soil into watercourses, thus restoring base flows. These
processes reduce or eliminate sudden surges in the volume of surface water runoff and the quantity of
pollutants carried into rivers.

4.4.1.1 Urbanisation

On undeveloped sites, only 15-20% of the volume of rainfall becomes direct surface runoff that
drains slowly into watercourses. With development of buildings and paved impermeable surfaces,
and the use of conventional piped drainage systems which were aimed at collecting surface water
from roofs, car parks etc and carry it off site to the nearest watercourse as quickly as possible, direct
run off can increase to over 80% of the volume of rainfall (CIRIA. 1999a). Impermeable surfaces
such as roads, car parks and industrial sites may be covered with pollutants which can be washed off.
In the UK, amongst other countries, a series of publications on sustainable urban drainage systems or
urban source control are in preparation for government departments and other agencies by the
Construction Industries Research and Information Association (CIRIA). These include a design
manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland (CIRIA, 1999b), a companion design manual for England
and Wales and a review of UK demonstration sites and best practice in source control (CIRIA.
1999c).

Source control in urban developments aims to control the quantity and quality of surface water runoff
and may also enhance the amenity and wildlife value of a site. The types of techniques recommended
include:

infiltration trenches and soakaways;
permeable or porous pavements for roads and car parks, as used in some UK and French
motorway service areas and supermarkets;


swales or grassed surface conveyance, infiltration and treatment systems which can also serve as
landscape features;
wide filter or buffer strips of any naturally vegetated form: grass or woodland, usually located
between paved areas and the watercourse to slow flows and remove pollutants;
small extended detention basins: grassy and vegetated depressions to hold and treat excess
surface water for slow release;
infiltration basins which hold surface water, allowing it to infiltrate the soil gradually;
retention ponds or permanently wet ponds which retain surface run off and provide biological
treatment through wetland and aquatic vegetation such as reeds.

The use of infiltration techniques is only feasible where this would not pose a threat to ground water
supplies and where there is no question of land contamination.

In the USA, recharge of regional groundwater supplies from downspout diversion programmes (ie
allowing domestic downspouts to discharge to lawns or paved areas instead of being connected to the
sewers) has helped to maintain a consistent flow of higher water quality into urban streams. US
studies have shown that downspout diversion programmes can reduce mean flow volumes in the
sanitary sewer network by over 25% with flow reductions ranging from 25% to 62% for rainfall
depths of between 6mm and 25mm (Kaufman and Wurtz. 1997).

Bordeaux, with a considerable problem of flooding due to urban surface water which could not drain
naturally into its river, adopted a strategy involving carriageway reservoirs, percolation wells and
drainage pits (Balades et al. 1992).

4.4.1.2 Agricultural Land Drainage

Where cultivated land adjacent to rivers has been drained to permit more intensive cultivation of
higher-valued crops, this has usually increased the volume and speed with which rain falling on
cultivated land has reached watercourses with the potential to raise the risk of flooding downstream
and the possibility of pollution of watercourses by herbicides, pesticides and agricultural waste
products. Possible methods for mitigating these risks are to adopt less intensive agricultural
practices and to control water levels to ensure that water is retained on the land; vegetated buffer
strips between cultivated land and watercourses can be used to slow surface water runoff and treat the
water to remove pollutants (Delaney. 1995); infiltration ponds, retention ponds and wetland areas are
other ways in which agricultural runoff can be retained and treated. These may also provide features
for wildlife.

4.4.1.3 Deforestation, Reforestation and Afforestation

Deforestation and the removal of natural vegetation in the upper parts of rivers has been held
responsible for flooding problems lower down the catchments in many parts of the world. This
process has been the subject of intensive study with mixed results. Bosch and Hewlett (1992), on the
basis of world-wide experimental results, concluded that deforestation tends to increase runoff and
peak floods at least in the short term. However, the difficulty of providing transferable predictive
models on the basis of these results indicates that individual catchment characteristics matter and that
many experiments have been poorly designed (Jones. Forthcoming). Chan and Parker (1996) suggest
that increased soil erosion, channel siltation and landslides caused by inappropriate clearfelling and
logging techniques exacerbate the flood problems.

Programmes to mitigate possible impacts of deforestation through reforestation, careful management
practices and riparian buffer zones are possible. Nepal has a national programme of reforestation.
The UK Forest Enterprise and Washington State in the US have policies designed to counter the ill-


effects of forestry. There is evidence, however, that afforestation normally results in increased
evapotranspiration but does not necessarily reduce the flood risk.

4.4.2 Storage

Source control can itself be considered a form of storage but the storage of the flow in rivers can take
place either in the uplands, where the high dam and associated reservoir is the traditional form, or in
the lowlands as a detention basin which is normally largely dry except when required for flood
storage. In some cases, the lakes associated with a river can be used for detention, an important
example being the Dongting Lake in Hunan Province, China. Finally, natural wetlands are important
assets for flood storage (Maltby. 1986) and artificial wetlands are being created for this purpose.

Dams can be of several kinds, principally semi-permeable or wholly impermeable. For example, in
Trinidad wire mesh dams have been used in the highlands: during flash floods, the flood borne debris
is trapped in the wire mesh and blocks much of the flood flow. Outside of the flood period, waters
flow normally through the wire mesh if the debris has been removed. Similarly, in California,
boulders have been used to create artificial rock pools which capture and store the rising crest of a
flood. In pre-Roman North Africa, semi-permeable dams were used to capture flash floods to provide
irrigation water for the subsequent growing season. Inflatable dams have also been used.
However, dams may fail if the flood is extreme and some forms of dam can fail very rapidly. The
consequence can be a catastrophic flood with a wall of water metres high moving at high speed. Such
floods sweep the ground clear in their path until attenuated. Unplanned dams are a particular threat
in this regard: bridges may be blocked by debris and then fail as the water level rises on the upstream
side of the dam. Dams may also fail for reasons other than extreme flood flows (dry weather
failure).

There are a number of problems in operating dams for flood storage purposes. The first is that dams
are rarely used for flood storage alone and the optimum strategy for flood storage and these other
purposes can conflict. For instance, for hydroelectric generation, the ideal is to keep the reservoir full
but to provide the maximum protection against flooding, the reservoir should be in a drawn down
state. The second is that even with sophisticated flood forecasting systems it is impossible to know
the future with any certainty. Thus, if the reservoir is filled completely on the rising crest, the peak of
which will in any case not be predictable with certainty, there will be no capacity left to store part of
a second and perhaps larger crest. Finally, the water stored must be released at some point. In
general, the rate of discharge from the reservoir will not be greater than if there was no reservoir in
the first place. But, the people living downstream will have become accustomed to the new flood
regime produced by the dam and will be unaware of the remaining risk.

Detention basins are usually quite shallow and hence a large area is required in order to provide flood
storage. However, because they are normally dry and in most years will not be required, they can be
put to use in the meantime. Thus, the detention basins of the Lincoln flood alleviation scheme are
farmed (Parker et al. 1987), farmers being paid for the damage to their crops when the basins are
used. In urban areas, detention areas are often used for sports fields. Along the Yangtze, the large
number of detention basins are all occupied so that the detention basins can only be used after the
population is first evacuated.

Quite commonly the method of allowing flood waters into a detention basin is simply to blow a
breach in the protective dike: some dikes are constructed with demolition chambers in place. This
approach has the limitation that it is difficult to control the rate at which the detention basin fills.
Methods offering greater control are sluices which can be opened to allow varying rates of flow into
the detention basin or sections of dike designed to overtop without failure. Once water has been
allowed into a detention basin, it then has to be evacuated after the flood crest has passed.


Natural wetlands can be excellent forms of detention basins (Delaney. 1995) and artificial wetlands
are also increasingly being constructed to store flood waters. Where wetlands were engineered away
in earlier times, we are increasingly re-introducing them artificially, those along the Rhine being an
example. Wetlands are also highly valuable resources for biodiversity as well as fulfilling other
functions (Maltby. 1986). Thus, in the UK, where it is required that one of the options considered
when the renovation of an existing flood alleviation scheme is being appraised is the managed retreat
option, some farmland is likely to be of greater value if it is allowed to revert to its original wetland
condition than when in agricultural use (MAFF. 1999). Wetlands, as well as storing flood waters,
frequently also slow them down, attenuating the flood wave; in tropical zones, evaporative losses
may also be significant (Acreman and Hollis 1996).

Another option considered for the Red River catchment in Canada and the United States was that of
micro-storage, using the agricultural fields between the raised roads as flood storage (International
Red River Basin Task Force. 2000). In that instance, the option proved to be uneconomic, some
1,800km
2
of land being necessary at an estimated cost of nearly $100,000/km
2
in capital costs plus an
additional $5,000 - 20,000/km
2
in annual compensation costs.

A number of factors are important in the choice between the different possible forms of storage. A
critical limiting factor is the availability of a site for the particular form of storage. Secondly, it is
generally held that storage has the greatest effect the nearer upstream it is to the area that it is sought
to protect. Thirdly, storage is most effective if it is controlled, not being utilised too early and if
discharges are also being controlled. The limitation of natural wetlands is then that they typically
flood early as the flood rises; if the flood continues to rise then there is no remaining storage
capacity. In consequence, natural wetlands are likely to have most effect in ameliorating high
frequency floods and to have much less effect on extreme floods (SAST. 1994; Shultz. 1999). A
further limitation is that the worst floods are frequently those that occur after an earlier event has
saturated the ground and left local storage full; again, the ability to control inflows and outflows to
storage are important to making the best use of that storage capacity.

Fourthly, there are economies of scale; the Landerarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser (1995) estimated cost
(DM10) $4.4/m
3
of storage for large retention basins, rising to (DM50) $22m
3
of storage for large
retention basins and experience in France is similar. Shulz (1999) reports that the cost of wetland
restoration or creation falls from $300/acre for small wetlands to $100 per acre for wetlands over 5
acres (12.3 ha) in size.

Control of the discharge so as to lop the peak of the flood flow at critical points downstream is also
generally more difficult with a number of small storage areas (International Red River Basin Task
Force 2000).

4.4.3 Slowing the Flood Wave

In the past it was quite common to shorten the river by cutting off meanders and shortening the length
of the river, the Danube and the Mississippi being well known examples. In part this was undertaken
in order to improve the river for navigation. Now, the trend is in the other direction, restoring
meanders in some cases and avoiding shortening the length of a river. Areas within a meander may
be protected by dikes in order to prevent the river cutting a short route during a flood. The argument
against making artificial shortcuts or allowing the river to take a shortcut in a flood is three-fold.
Firstly, if the river length is reduced, the gradient will be steepened and so flow velocity and flood
flows are increased. In addition, the storage capacity of the live stream is also reduced. For example,
there is a 50km meander on the Yangtze in which the live storage is approximately 2 billion cubic
metres. The second argument is environmental; in general, areas of shallow and slow-moving flows


are more valuable than areas of deep and fast-moving flows. Thirdly, the loss of instream storage
speeds the passage of the flood peak downstream; the time taken for the flood peak to travel from
Basle to Karlsruhe on the Rhine having halved between 1955 and 1977: in consequence, the risk that
the flood peak from the Rhine will coincide with that from the Neckar, Nahe and Moselle has
increased (Landerarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser. 1995).

Thus, on parts of the Rhine, the meanders are being restored, although in most cases where the river
is being restored to a more natural form (Brookes and Shields. 1996) this is for environmental rather
than primarily for hydraulic reasons (Brookes. 1990).

4.4.4 Carrying the Flow

A widely adopted approach has been to increase the capacity of the river channel by widening,
deepening, straightening, or reducing the resistance of the channel. In the 1970s, the term river
improvement was generally used to describe such approaches which generally resulted in the river
becoming little more than a canal and environmentally dead (Purseglove. 1988 ). In particular, for
small watercourses, it may be possible to reconstruct the channel so that the frictional resistance of
the banks and bed are reduced; this was often achieved by building a trapezoidal concrete channel. In
other cases, the banks were stripped of trees, bushes and other plants that create resistance and plant
growth in the channel is regularly removed. In other instances, the bed has been dredged: again this
can cause significant environmental damage.

Bypass channels have been constructed to increase the discharge capacity of the river during floods.
In the past, these were frequently no more than canals: a concrete-lined box designed to carry flows
with the least frictional resistance, one example being the River Lea to the east of London. An early
example is the diversion channel built in 1621 for the river Tone to reduce the flood risk to Tokyo;
the Red River Floodway bypassing Winnepeg is another example. An even more extreme example
has been the habit of covering over the river and converting it to an underground culvert (Barton.
1984). In environmental terms, these options are immensely destructive. More recently, multi-stage
channels which mimic a natural river in their form have begun to be used; for example, the flood
alleviation option eventually chosen for the Maidenhead to Windsor area west of London involves a
bypass channel equal in capacity to the natural channel for the River Thames (Gardiner. 1994). In
normal times, the bypass channel carries only a sweetening flow and is effectively an artificial
wetland. This option was largely adopted because changes to the main river channel were
unacceptable on environmental, amenity and recreational grounds. Some rivers are being restored to
a more natural form (ARSIA/GEOPLAN/CEHIDRO/WASSER WIRTSCHAFT. 1999), bio-
engineering being used for bank protection (Gray and Leiser. 1982), and increasingly
environmentally friendly methods of maintenance are being adopted (Purseglove. 1988).

4.4.5 Separating the People and the Threat

A common strategy employed to reduce the flood threat is to construct barriers of various types
between damageable property and people in flood-prone areas and the source of flooding, whether
this is rivers, lakes or the sea. Such barriers are usually designed to reduce the likelihood of
floodwater spreading laterally across floodplains, but are sometimes in the form of increasing the
vertical distance between the ground floors of properties and the floodplain thereby creating a space
barrier. Whatever the method the strategy is to reduce flood risk by changing the probability of
property being flooded and to reduce the exposure of property and people to floods.

Earthen flood embankments (alternatively termed levees, dikes or bunds) have been widely used for
many years to reduce flood risks in most world regions. For example, by 1812 New Orleans was
protected from floods on the Mississippi river by 150km of levees, and by 155 levees extended along


1 600km of the Lower Mississippi River which is the most flood-prone part of the Mississippi River
basin. The Mississippi Delta Survey report published in 1861 recommended a levee-only
approach to floods a strategy pursued well into the 20
th
century, leading to more and more levees
(Barry. 1997). This policy was reinforced by successive floods and the perceived need to control
them with levees. The US Army Corps of Engineers (1995) claimed that the flood protection works
(which include levees) on the Upper Mississippi prevented an additional $19 billion flood losses in
the 1993 floods, but environmentalists argued that if the floodplains had been left in their natural
state, then the floods would have been of lesser magnitude and the losses due to occupation of the
floodplains would have been low (Changnon. 2000).

A similar controversy of the long-term effectiveness of embankments exists in Bangladesh, where
flood embankments have been the cornerstone flood control plans. Between the 1950s and 1980s
there was enormous government and donor expenditure on constructing embankments along the
countrys major and secondary rivers, but the country remains exposed to devastating floods as
demonstrated in 1987 and 1988. More than 45 million people were directly affected by the 1988
flood and 2 379 lives were lost. After this disaster the Government of Bangladesh accepted the offer
from major aid donors of technical assistance to find a lasting solution to the countrys chronic flood
hazard, and in 1989 the World Bank was invited to co-ordinate the efforts of the international
community to alleviate the effects of flooding in Bangladesh. Initially the Government of
Bangladesh insisted that the countrys rivers must be embanked but the Flood Action Plan which was
adopted was not based on the total-embankment proposal. This decision recognised the shortcomings
of that strategy and the Flood Master Plan incorporates non-structural and well as structural
measures, recognising that eliminating flooding would deprive Bangladesh of a major resource from
the agro-ecological point of view (Brammer. 2000, Thompson and Sultana. 2000).

However, dike systems remain a primary strategy for flood alleviation and with the aid of flood
fighting, many of the dikes on the Mississippi supported a flood exceeding their design capacity (US
General Accounting Office. 1995).

Polders are then areas of land surrounded by dikes, a ring dike. Local protection then usually
consists of a dike ring protecting a small, high-value area within a large floodplain; for example, an
urban area within a largely agricultural area. Summer dikes are dikes designed to provide flood
protection only against frequent flooding and are usually set some distance in front of dikes which
provide a much higher standard of protection.

A significant problem with polders in particular and dikes in general is that they interfere with the
natural drainage patterns within the area protected. In consequence, an area that is notionally
protected from flooding from the main river may still be flooded either from local precipitation or
from minor tributaries flowing through the area. This is variously called local flooding, inland
flooding or drainage congestion. Unless the protected area is adequately drained, there will be
little agricultural benefit from constructing the dike system. It is also difficult to separate out flood
losses as a result of the main river bursting its banks from the crop losses that will occur anyway
because of waterlogging.

A problem with embankments is that they may be destroyed by erosion as the river dynamically
adapts to changing flows. Therefore, bank protection and river training works frequently have to be
undertaken to protect the embanked section of river from erosion. A traditional method of protection
is the use of rip-rap, graded rocks: on one section of the Yangtze, an estimated 133m
2
have been used
over the last 50 years per linear metre of embankment. Geo-textiles are increasingly being used
instead and on smaller watercourses, bio-engineering methods, the use of plants to stabilise the banks,
can be used (ARSIA/GEOPLAN/CEHIDRO/WASSER WIRTSCHAFT. 1999; Gray and Leiser.
1982).



In many countries, whenever a flood occurs, a graded flood fighting response is activated, typically
on the basis of flood levels: the Netherlands, China, Japan and Hungary all have highly developed
systems of this kind. The first level response is to mobilise response and to carry out an inspection of
any dikes or other structures, in addition to the routine inspections that are undertaken. Flood
fighting materials are also stockpiled prior to the flood. If the flood goes on rising, then action will
be taken to reinforce weak points and to deal with such problems as sand boils. The aim in this phase
is to reduce the risk of a breach occurring. Should the flood go on rising so that it threatens to
overtop the dike, then efforts will be made to raise the crest level of the dike through emergency
sand-bagging. In this phase, the military will be involved and mass-mobilisation of the population is
also common. In some countries, those living behind a dike know which are the sections of the dike
for which they are responsible. One consequence of flood fighting, an expensive and disruptive
activity, is that a dike system may pass a flood which exceeds its notional design standard of
protection, as on the Mississippi in 1993.

There are other types of barrier to flooding. Flood barriers may comprise concrete floodwalls, and
these may be used to reduce the flood risk along rivers and at the coast (where they are called
seawalls).

Where an existing system of dikes, walls or barriers is being renovated, the probability of failure of
the present system must be compared to that of the proposed project. The relevant probabilities of
failure include both those of breaching and of overtopping; overtopping simply being a probability of
failure equal to one. Wolff (1997) outlines a methodology for calculating the probability of a dike
breaching and SAST (1994) provides a qualitative assessment, based on the 1993 Mississippi flood,
of those locations where dikes are most likely to fail. In this comparison, the effects of flood fighting
measures must be included. Figure 4.12 illustrates this approach for a benefit-cost analysis of part of
the dike system on the River Yangtze.

Flood proofing is the act of modifying a structure to protect it from flood damage and to keep
floodwater separate from damageable property. In permanent flood proofing, the building is
constructed or re-constructed so as to reduce flood losses. Contingent flood proofing is action taken
shortly before a flood arrives: this can involve closing gates, shutters or barriers across all openings.



Figure 4.11: Comprehensive Flood Management Strategy Adopted on the Middle and Lower
Yangtze River: Dams, Detention Basins, Dikes as well as Flood Warnings and Resettlement



Figure 4.12: Dike Failure Probabilities for an Eexisting Dike System
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
125
1
0
2
0
5
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
DIKES
DIKES + DETENTION
operational

Flood proofing is a physical engineering strategy to counter the physical force of floodwater
(Sheaffer. 1967, Laska and Wetmore. 2000). Structures, such as dwellings, may be modified in a
variety of ways to reduce the risk of floodwater penetration, including by waterproofing walls, fitting
openings with permanent or temporary doors, gates or other closure devices, fitting one-way valves
on sewer lines and by building boundary walls around the house structure. The internal design of
buildings may also be altered to reduce the effects of floodwater penetration. For example, electrical
circuits and sockets may be permanently routed and located at high rather than low levels. In extreme
cases, buildings may be raised on stilts and not infrequently buildings will be built on raised mounds
or with important areas above likely flood levels: all three are typical of indigenous adaptations to
flooding. Further measures may include sump-pumps which begin operating in basements when
water levels rise, and contingency plans and facilities designed to be operated when a flood is
anticipated.

Contingent flood proofing depends upon a reliable flood warning system. For example, for
warehouses contingency plans may exist to raise stored goods to a height above expected flood
levels. Flood proofing may be a designed-in feature of new buildings located on floodplains, or they
may be retrofitted.

Technical advice is required to undertake flood proofing because the hydrostatic pressures created by
floodwaters can be sufficient to collapse walls, especially when floods are relatively deep, or to
penetrate those walls. Equally, depending on the subsoil, flood waters may force their way through
the ground floor and enter the property that way. The science of flood proofing has been developed
to its greatest extent in the United States where various federal agencies provide technical flood
proofing manuals (eg Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1986, 1997, 1998; US Army Corps
of Engineers. 1984, 1996, 1998a). However, at flood velocities above 2m/s and where the product of
velocity and depth is greater than 7, buildings typically collapse with masonry or framed structures
showing greater resistance than timber framed buildings (Black. 1975). Flood proofing, as opposed
to raising buildings, thus has the greatest potential in shallow flooding across impermeable soils.
Dry flood proofing, sealing the walls of buildings so as to make them impermeable to flood water,
is not generally recommended for buildings with basements because of the problems of uplift
(Bundesministerium fur Ruamordung, Bauwesen and Stadtebau. 1996; US Army Corps of Engineers.


1998a). Nor should light masonry buildings be flood proofed above a height of 90cm because of the
risk of structural failure as a result of the hydrostatic forces. Finally, buildings should be evacuated
prior to a flood because of the risk of becoming trapped in the building.

Buildings can be raised on extended foundations, stilts or on fill. Only the latter two options are
feasible where flood velocities are more than negligible. Where flood velocities are significant,
precautions must be taken against local scouring around the foundations of columns and the design of
any columns must take account of the possible effects of debris deposited by floodwaters. The report
by the National Flood Proofing Committee (US Army Corps of Engineers 1998a) contains a table
setting out the conditions under which each flood proofing option is a viable option.

Recently a number of automatic devices have been developed for flood proofing individual properties
or closing gaps in the flood walls. These included floating doorsteps which rise upward as water
enters the property, pulling a water proof fabric upward between them. A second Dutch system is a
hollow glass-reinforced plastic gate which is normally recessed into the ground but also floats
upwards when required.

Resettlement, the relocation of property either from high-risk to low-risk floodplain land, or from
floodplain to flood-free land, is a strategy which is used in extremis, normally when frequent and
severe flooding occurs. In Bangladesh, some rural householders are used to dismantling their homes
as floods rise and moving them by boat to high ground, such as the top of flood embankments. The
homes may then be moved back to their original locations after flooding has subsided. In the United
States, property relocation has become more common. The North American cities of Rapid City,
South Dakota, Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin and Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin have relocated some
properties from the floodplain. Following the Mississippi floods of 1993, federal policies encouraged
flood-damaged property acquisition and demolition (so-called buy-out policies) (Godschalk et al.
1999). In the Gujarat, India, 30 villages have been relocated to higher ground to relieve them from
flooding from the Narmadi and Tupti rivers (Tobin and Montz. 1997), and similar resettlement
projects have been undertaken in eastern Peninsular Malaysia. The scope for such resettlement
policies clearly depends both upon the number of people and properties involved and the availability
of alternative areas to which they can relocate. The normal conditions governing resettlement also
apply.

A related strategy for separating people and property and floodwaters is to seek to regulate and
control floodplain land use. When combined with flood proofing, building standards and other
regulatory and planning mechanisms designed to manage the use of floodplains, and flood warning
systems, the overall approach has been termed floodplain management. In France, there have
been attempts over many years to zone floodplains into red, blue and white zones (Torterotot.
1993): all development is then prohibited in the red zone; flood proofing is required for new
buildings and substantial modification of old ones in the blue zone. Again, in the United States
there is an active Association of State Floodplain Managers, and a condition of the availability of
federal flood insurance is that the community adopt floodplain building codes requiring flood
proofing. Whilst in France, the attempt has been made to introduce land use development controls,
this has not been a feasible option in the USA for constitutional reasons.

Community involvement and participation in raising awareness of the concepts of flood risk and
exposure and in developing ways of reducing the risk is a key component of this approach.
Floodplain management involves defining and mapping the floodplain, assessing the flood risk, and
developing strategies to reduce (i) flood hazard potential for existing properties, (ii) developments
which may be proposed for the floodplain and (iii) the residual risks following implementation of
management measures. Building controls usually include setting minimum floor levels. Floodplain
management also involves recognising the natural values associated with floodplains (eg wetland


habitats, fertile soils and associated vegetation) and protecting these. Useful guidelines on floodplain
management have been published by Emergency Management Australia (1999).

There are many examples in the United States and elsewhere where floodplain management has
reduced the flood problem (see for example May et al. 1996). There is also evidence of non-
compliance with floodplain regulations in the United States (Burby. 1998, Godschalk et al. 1999).
Floodplain management may be effective but it is by no means always so and much depends upon
effective policing to gain compliance with regulations. However, there has been inadequate research
to determine the conditions under which land use controls can be effective in controlling
development on floodplains. It is easier to pass a law than to enforce it and unless that law can be
enforced, there is little point in proposing such a law.

It would seem likely that land use control is most likely to be effective when it is least needed: it will
fail where the development pressures are great. There are two separate problems. The first is that
planning controls are defensive when floodplains are considered. Zoning that prohibited
development of a floodplain would be perfectly successful if there was no pressure for development;
where there is internal or external pressure, land use controls frequently do not work very well.
Either planning controls are ignored and impossible to enforce or they are corrupted. For example,
given that the majority of informal developments take place in violation of land ownership
entitlements, there is little reason to suppose that a zoning system will be more effective in preventing
the occupation of land. Thus, around Lisbon there was a massive invasion of river corridors in the
1960s and in Italy, amnesties for illegal developments are fairly routine practice. Again, for instance,
after Hurricane Andrew hit Florida it was estimated that 30% of domestic properties were built in
violation of existing building codes (Rutrough. 1997). It is not necessary to take too seriously the
novels of John Grisham or Carl Hiaasen to accept that some degree of corruption in zoning decisions
takes place as well. This corruption can be monetary or of influence. In France, where a red zone
where development is prohibited was required under the PER plans, the draft zoning plan for
Montpellier showed the university to be within the red zone. Miraculously, when the final plan was
published, the red zone skirted around the university area (Anon. 1993). Again, following the recent
earthquake in Turkey, it has been estimated that 80% of the buildings in Istanbul were constructed
illegally. Overall, the outcome is likely to be as shown in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Hypothetical Analysis of the Likely Effectiveness of Land Use Planning
(Source: Green and Warner 1999)
External pressure for
development
Internal desire for development
Positive Negative
Strong land use controls unlikely to
be effective
land use controls effective if
local population has power
Weak little development to be
controlled: land use controls
very unlikely to be
maintained
little development and
effective land use controls

Thus, land use controls are most likely to be effective when the majority of those already living in an
area do not see any personal advantage in further development and they can mobilise sufficient
political power to enforce their preferences. Land use controls appear to be somewhat more effective
than this rather pessimistic assessment implies. Pottiers (1998) analysis suggests that in the areas
she studied, the effect of PER was to reduce the number of applications to develop in the designated
flood risk area by about 50%, but not necessarily to reduce the likelihood that planning consent
would then be given. However, in France, getting agreement of the PER and the compromises
involved in drafting the PER, as in the case of Montpellier, have been a major problem (Anon. 1993).


A second problem is one of scale. Where land use and building controls work, they work best with
large-scale developments; they are much less likely to work with small-scale modifications of
existing buildings. For example, in Britain, a significant cause of increased runoff is the conversion
of the front gardens of houses built around 100 years ago to hardstandings for off-street car parking.
Again, the conversion of back garden lawns to paved patios is also a common practice. These works
may increase the impermeable area of a house plot by perhaps 100%. It is not practical to enforce
controls over such small scale developments.

A third problem is the arbitrary nature of floodplain designations. It is common (eg in France, the
USA) to take the 100-year return period flood as the design standard or use it for other purposes, such
as demarcating the floodplain for land use planning purposes. There is, however, no particular logic
in selecting the 100-year return period event for these purposes. Other risks that have the potential to
cause equal losses to the properties exposed typically involve a lower risk. Thus, for instance, in
Britain, the chance that a domestic property will experience a fire to which the fire service is called
out is 1 in 250 pa. On the other hand, the 100-year return period is often more severe than the
magnitude of the flood which is likely to be reliably predictable. The reliability is a function of the
length of the streamflow-gauging record: as a rule of thumb, it is considered that the return period of
the event which can be reliably predicted is about twice the length of record. In England and Wales,
the length of record seldom exceeds 25 years.

Land use control has most to contribute when development is undertaken by companies and then as a
way of internalising the costs of flood mitigation to the developer. Thus, it may be made a condition
of planning consent that the developer either provide localised flood protection or contribute towards
the cost of a project covering a wider area.

4.4.6 Economies of Scale in Flood Alleviation

One reason why development is attracted to floodplains is that the costs of providing infrastructure
such as water supply, sewers and roads are lower for flat land as compared to sloping sites. The costs
of building too are generally lower than on hillsides. Structural flood mitigation measures can be
cheap compared to the additional costs of developing on sloping land especially where the floodplain
site already has development and infrastructure is in place (Chatterton et al. 1993).

There are also potentially significant economies of scale through the provision of structural flood
alleviation compared to the adoption of individual flood alleviation measures such as house raising,
or flood proofing, as shown in Figure 4.13. The cost of channel improvement or embankments is
some function of the length of the structural scheme and unrelated to the number of properties
protected. Indeed, where a structural scheme permits the intensified development of the available
land behind the defences, the cost of the scheme of flood alleviation per property will fall in the
future. Conversely, the total cost of individual flood alleviation measures is a function of the number
of properties so protected. As Figure 4.13 shows, at a certain level of development, a structural
solution will become more efficient than for all property owners to undertake their own flood
alleviation measures, such as flood proofing. There may, of course be other reasons than economic
efficiency for preferring individual measures to a structural scheme, for example the perceived
adverse impact of an embankment or channel improvement scheme upon the local landscape, ecology
and agriculture.



Figure 4.13: Economies of Scale in Collective Versus Individual Flood Response
individual flood proofing
number of properties
total
cost
collective flood alleviation
scheme

Land-use planning provisions and insurance schemes may require individual-property flood
mitigation measures such as flood proofing or individual property raising as a condition of
development and participation in the insurance scheme in certain flood-risk areas. The US Federal
Emergency Management Agency estimates that flood proofing adds an average of 5% to construction
costs. In France, up to 10% of the capital cost is required to be spent on flood proofing in the blue
zone (Torterotot. 1993). This may be competitive with the costs of structural flood defence where
development densities are very low, as they are in the US compared with other parts of the world
such as most of Europe. For high-density developments involving large numbers of properties, a
structural flood defence scheme is likely to be more efficient.

Penning-Rowsell et al. (1987) examined some local protection options for Maidenhead in the Thames
valley. Updated to 1997 prices, the costs of flood proofing each individual property were calculated
as 15,843 ($22 497). Constructing bunds or walls around each neighbourhood was estimated as
resulting in an average cost per property of 2,986 ( $4 240). Finally, the costs of providing bunds
around each of the main built-up areas was estimated to cost 2,222 ($3 155) per property. The
individual protection option requires the construction of some 140km of walling; the neighbourhood
option, some 42km of bunding or wall; and the community option, the building of 26km of bunding.
These figures relate to post-development flood protection and the costs of building flood protection
into the initial construction of a development might be expected to be lower.

In Lismore, Australia, properties are quite routinely raised off the ground on stilts. Penning-Rowsell
and Smith (1987) reported that on a strict benefit-cost test in terms of flood losses averted, this
approach was uneconomic. To justify their investment, residents had to be taking account of some of
the non-monetary costs of flooding.

Both these two examples are for the costs of retro-fitting, but incorporating flood proofing measures
into the original construction should be cheaper. Nevertheless, the economies of scale and low cost
(as a proportion of building construction costs) of structural flood alleviation schemes mean that
flood proofing is only likely to be a viable option when structural flood-alleviation works are not
themselves economically justified.


4.4.7 The Environmental Effects of the Different Options

The intention is therefore that this study should be holistic ..... on the practical grounds that soil and
water problems are so closely interwoven and so pervasive that any single-issue solution may cause
more harm than good by unforeseen interactions and impacts ... (CIGAR. 1997).

In assessing the effects on the environment, a number of principles should be applied:
the catchment as a whole should be considered and not simply the local area where the option is
applied;
the effects on the processes of soil erosion, sediment movement and deposition, as well as on
runoff and river flows, need to be considered;
both the direct and indirect effects of each option should be assessed; and
the assessment needs to be comparative, with the consequences of each available alternative
option being assessed.

In particular, the processes of soil erosion and runoff and river flow regimes and sediment movement
are both too tightly linked to be separated. In addition, groundwater and surface are to a greater or
lesser extent interlinked; thus, the term check dam is sometimes applied to surface water reservoirs
that are intended to retain flood waters in order to recharge aquifers (Jagawat. 1998; Singh. 1998). At
the same time, ecosystems develop around the prevailing water regime. Consequently, changing
either sediment production or runoff production, or changing the flow regime will have effects on
each other, and also on the ecosystems. The impact across the catchment as a whole needs to be
considered, including the deltaic and near-shore areas (Table 4.4).

The socio-economic system is also a system; changes at one point will have ramifications elsewhere,
changing the areas that are developed and the nature of that development. Development on a
floodplain may then reduce the likelihood of development on the uplands which may, in turn, both
increase soil erosion and runoff. Thus, whilst institutional changes such as planning controls on the
floodplain may have little apparent direct effects on the environment, if the effect is simply to decant
development onto upland areas, the environmental impacts may be significant (Barbier. 1989).
Uplands are frequently ecologically fragile and the slopes are frequently unstable. Settlement on
slopes that are currently held together only by vegetation, can have catastrophic consequences in
terms of mudflows and slope failure, the 1999 Caracas flood being an example.

Table 4.4: Catchment Zones and the Importance of Flows of Water and Sediment
Water Sediment
upland runoff generation sediment generation through
soil erosion
floodplain flow regime patterns of sediment
deposition, mobilisation and
erosion
deltaic area river and groundwater flows
determine limits of salt water
intrusion into river and
groundwater
coast building versus
erosion; sediment deposition
on sea floor

Over much of the world, both the rates of soil erosion and runoff production have already been
heavily influenced by human activity, not always for the bad. We thus cannot consider some pristine
wilderness. Climate change will affect even those rivers that are currently little-affected by human
activity and will affect both the hydrological regime and sediment patterns in those rivers. Climate
change is likely to have very damaging impacts on the aquatic environment because of the multiple


impacts including changes not only in flow and sediment regimes but also on water temperature.
Even when greenhouse gas emissions are stabilised, the global climate will continue to change until it
reaches a new equilibrium state and preserving currently-valued ecosystems will pose a major
challenge. Seeking to meet that challenge may involve attempting to hold the current hydrological
and sediment regimes within their current ranges through different forms of intervention.

It is not therefore possible to apply the equivalent of George Orwells Animal Farm principle of
deeming all sediment reductions to be bad or to be good. In some cases, trapping sediment or
reducing sediment loads is desirable; in other cases, it is not. What is desirable now may well also
change as we struggle to contain the impacts of climate change on biodiversity.

Thus, whilst dams such as the Aswan High Dam trap sediment and in consequence the Nile delta is
no longer accreting, a primary purpose of some forms of dam is to trap sediment. Warping dams
are small dams (usually 2-5m) high across gullies which trap silt so creating fertile new agricultural
areas in the form of terraces down the gully (Leung. 1999). Silt arresters are micro-scale versions
of warping dams. Check dams are small barriers which provide a local water resource for
decentralised irrigation, or to recharge groundwater, and also have the advantage of trapping
sediment (Development Alternatives. 1999; New South Wales. 1999). Such small scale dams also
reduce the velocity of the flood waters, reducing erosion of the gully walls downstream, and also
increasing the time to concentration. The area behind the check dams may also be used for farming
outside of the flood season but a flood storage reservoir is necessary for full use to be made of this
land. Thus, Leung (1999) describes the use of check and warping dams on the loess upland
watershed of the Yellow River. This area is some of the most difficult terrain in the world, the thick
loess layers being cut by gullies that may be 200-300m deep and annual soil erosion rates sometimes
exceed 30 000t/km
2
; the deposition of this material further down the Yellow River causes major
problems.

Therefore, the answer to the question of the environmental desirability of the consequences of
particular flood management strategies is: it largely depends on local circumstances. Table 4.5 is
however an attempt to draw general conclusions as to the relative effects of the different flood
management strategies. In particular circumstances, these notes may be highly misleading and in no
way replace the need to make a good Environmental Assessment of the comparative impact of the
different options being considered.

Table 4.5: The Environmental Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Flood Management
Options
Environment
Option Advantages Disadvantages
Runoff control Reduction in flood velocities
and peak flows; reductions in
soil erosion and sediment
generation.
Reduction in low flows.
Reservoirs Potential capture of some
sediment; scale of the
reservoir is important in
terms of both advantages and
disadvantages (eg relatively
small water bodies may be
important for water birds; the
environmental benefit is not
proportional to the size of the
water body).
Potential capture of
sediment; change in flood
regime; see Acreman et al.
(1999) for detail.


Detention basins Depends upon area adapted;
typically this will have to be
in the floodplain and so
disadvantages depend upon
the environmental value of
that site as it is.
Weirs

Increased variety in channel
form which may be
advantageous in some
conditions.
Effects of reservoirs on a
small scale (see New South
Wales. 1999).
Artificial wetlands Ecologically very valuable. Sediment accumulation.
Slowing the flood wave Sediment deposition.
Widening the channel Depends on the form of the
new channel; if a multi-stage
channel then potential
environmental benefits.
For all channel changes see
Purseglove (1988) and
Brookes (1988).
Deepening the channel Generally very damaging and
also unstable in new form so
requiring continuing
disturbance through
dredging.
Reducing channel resistance Generally very damaging;
destroying most ecological
value.
Bypass channel Depends on the form of the
bypass channel; multi-stage
channels offer scope for
environmental gain.
Depends upon the
environmental value of the
land through which the
channel is cut.
Embankments/levees In areas where there is a long
history of embankments and
drainage, very valuable
ecosystems may have been
created in the protected area.
Changes form of river bank
above and below water
particularly where requires
bank protection
Flood proofing None. May encourage settlement in
an ecologically valuable
area.
Resettlement off the
floodplain
May allow the re-creation of
wetlands and re-creation of
natural river.
Resettlement area itself may
either involve environmental
loss or may result in changes
in water and sediment load to
river.

4.5 Enhancing Coping Capacity

The capacity of individuals, households, groups and communities to cope with flooding depends
upon their knowledge, the resources they command and their organisation and power:



knowledge about: how to identify the signs of an imminent flood; how to fight floods; what
to do before, during and after a flood event; the causes of flooding; and appropriate
mitigation measures.
organisation including organisation within households, within neighbourhood groups and
within whole communities as a way of pooling knowledge, skills and resources and planning
and co-ordinating activities to achieve their optimum use and power in relation to other
groups in society.
resources, including their skills and the physical assets and human support that they can call
upon.

Coping capacity can be increased by enhancing any of these elements. Knowledge can be enhanced
through public information programmes provided by national or local agencies or NGOs. The UKs
Environment Agency is mounting a publicity campaign involving radio and advertising, posters and
leaflets. The campaign aims to raise the awareness of flooding and the agencies that deal with it
among the public and to enhance individuals and communities capacities to help themselves in the
event of flooding. Flood hazard management and emergency response agencies can also enhance
local communities coping capacities by involving them in decision making on all matters relating to
flooding and thus enhancing local peoples understanding of the flood problem as perceived by the
managers and the managers understanding of the problem as seen and experienced by local people.
However, in western democracies as well as elsewhere, those responsible for flood hazard
management may be reluctant to share information and decision making about local flood problems
and solutions with local people at all or until managers have selected a preferred option for action
despite local peoples preference for early, wide and continuing consultation on the local problem
(Tunstall et al. 1994). Local NGOs with technical expertise can help communities to understand local
flooding issues by providing technical assistance and by analysing and interpreting technical
information for them as happened in the RIMAC Valley Project (Maskrey. 1989). However,
individual local people and groups within communities often have local knowledge about local flood
problems and mitigating actions that can be taken and community knowledge can also be enhanced
by a process of sharing information.

Strengthening organisation is seen by certain commentators as the key to enhancing the capacity of
vulnerable people to cope with flooding (Maskrey. 1989). Some NGOs such as OXFAM and the
Red Cross are exploring the potential of Community-Based Organisations (CBOs) for mitigating the
effects of flooding. (Maskrey. 1989; Allen, personal communication). Organisational, leadership and
other skills within communities can be enhanced over time by training and experience focused on the
flood hazard and its mitigation. The experience of the RIMAC Valley project indicates that this
process is likely to be a gradual and incremental one which may require the support of an
independent NGO (indeed in the RIMAC Valley this was seen as crucial) but that this confidence and
capacity building can change the relationship between community groups and the state, enabling
them to negotiate effectively with national government agencies for the resources they needed
(Maskrey. 1989).

4.5.1 Emergency Planning and Management

A strategy for managing all floods is required; this strategy will cover flood warnings, flood fighting,
any necessary evacuation, and post-flood recovery. Current thinking is that floods should be included
as part of a generic all hazards emergency planning system rather than hazard-specific plans being
prepared. A clear commitment by national or federal governments to the emergency planning and
management process will enhance to its effectiveness. A major disaster will involve a large number
of national or federal government departments and require their resources to be mobilised. The
commitment of national or federal governments will also encourage regional and local government


and other institutions to take emergency planning and management seriously. Emergency planning
and management has three phases: preparedness, response and recovery (Parker. 1992).

Preparedness involves foreseeing and preparing for potential harmful events by:
drawing up contingency plans;
training emergency planners and managers;
rehearsing the emergency response;
raising public awareness,
educating local people on what they can do to reduce their vulnerability; and
informing people of the location of shelters and evacuation centres and means of evacuation.

The development of warning systems is also part of the preparedness phase. Emergency planning and
management inevitably involve a wide range of different agencies at regional and local level: local
authorities, police, medical and other emergency services, the armed forces, voluntary organisations
and the media. Establishing in the plan clear cut roles and responsibilities, lines of command and
control, and communication and co-ordination among these agencies is an important element in
emergency planning since responses to emergencies by the responsible authorities have often proved
poorly co-ordinated as exemplified, for example, by criticism in the Bye Report on flooding in
England in 1998. However, as important as an emergency plan is building up understanding and
good co-operative relationships between the individuals and agencies that will be involved in the
emergency response so that the plan can be implemented in a flexible but co-ordinated way. This can
be achieved through regular meetings, joint training for emergency management staff, and rehearsals
of emergency planning procedures. An emergency plan is a prepared social network rather than a
document.

There may be a tendency for agencies to double count resources available for use in emergencies or
to be unaware of resources that could be mobilised. Therefore, careful drawing up of inventories of
resources: personnel, transport and supplies, should be a regular part of the preparedness phase.
Emergency planning should be grounded in an understanding of local peoples perceptions and needs
in an emergency situation. Local people are unlikely to wait passively for official advice but will act
on their own initiative. Planning needs to take account of this.

Examples of the kind of activities likely to be undertaken during the response phase include the
mobilisation of emergency personnel and resources, search and rescue activities, the provision of
emergency shelter and emergency feeding arrangements and /or evacuation (Drabek. 1986).

The recovery phase is likely to last the longest. Even in the relatively moderate and short-lived flood
events that occur in the UK, it can take households more than six months to get back to normal. The
recovery phase will involve the clean up operations, and, where possible, the repair of flood damage
and renewal of contents. Where houses have been destroyed or need long-term repairs, the provision
of temporary accommodation in hostels, caravans, tents, or prefabs may be an important element in
the recovery. The restoration of services such as power, water supply and sanitary services, food
supplies, transport, communications and medical services will be other priority activities. Where
land is available and local people are willing to move, relocation out of the flood-risk area may be
part of the recovery process.

On- and off-site emergency plans are essential for dams (Division of Disaster Emergency Services.
1986; Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1985). The public who are at risk must be made
aware of how they will be warned and what they should do if a warning is necessary. There is
frequently a fear by officialdom that the public will panic if they are told that there is a risk. In
practice, the problem is usually the opposite one: of persuading the public that there is a potential
hazard.


4.5.2 Flood Forecasting and Warning

A flood forecast is a prediction of future flooding; this only becomes a flood warning when it is
received by those who need it in a form which they can use. The earliest reported system of flood
warning was a system of horse riders stationed along the Yellow River to ride downstream.

A flood warning system should be a viewed as total system (Emergency Management Australia.
1995) which integrates:

flood prediction and the assessment of likely flood effects;
the dissemination of warning;
the response of agencies and the public in the threatened area; and
a process of review and improvement.

Until recently, greater emphasis has been placed in flood hazard management on the improvement of
the technical flood forecasting element, usually undertaken by a national weather forecasting body or
other national agency, rather than on the complex social processes involved in disseminating
warnings at regional and local level (CNS. 1991; Handmer. 1997; Keys. 1997). However the
dissemination phase has frequently been found to be the weak link in the flood warning chain.

Flood warnings have to be disseminated both within organisations and between agencies with
different responsibilities in flood hazard management and response. In addition, flood warnings have
to be delivered, either directly or indirectly, to the floodplain occupants affected: businesses,
institutions, service providers and residents.

Flood warnings are issued with the overall objective of saving life and property losses, and avoiding
health and stress effects when flooding threatens. Specific objectives are to elicit appropriate
responses from the people and organisations involved,for example:

to alert operational staff to undertake operational tasks such as opening weirs and operating
detention basins;
to alert people at risk to the need to listen for and seek out further information and advice on
the emergency;
to encourage organisations and individuals to alert others at risk to the danger;
as the trigger for flood fighting activities such as dike protection by individuals and
organisations;
to initiate flood proofing activities on individual properties;
to trigger compulsory or advisory evacuation out of the flood risk area;
to trigger removal to a safe shelter within the flood risk area, together with emergency
supplies such as food, water, clothing and essential medicines; and/or
to stimulate property saving activities such as moving livestock, business stock and
household effects to a safe place.

An initial requirement for effective flood warning is that the areas and properties at risk should be
identified by the flood warning agencies through mapping, modelling and past records. A further
requirement for effective flood warning and response is that the roles and responsibilities of the flood
hazard management and emergency response organisations, including the local authorities, armed
forces and emergency services, should be planned for and each must understand their role.

For individuals and organisations to decide to act appropriately on receipt of a warning requires that
people must do the following, assuming the flooding has been forecast successfully:


receive a warning message in time to act;
understand the warning message; this requires the technical forecast to be interpreted in
language that can be understood bythe layperson;
believe the message and believe that there is a personal threat to their household, farm,
business or organisation; research evidence clearly shows that people normally do not panic
on receipt of a warning but that denial, continuing as normal and seeking confirmation are
more common initial reactions. Dissemination systems need therefore to provide means of
confirmation; multiple but consistent warning messages, and messages from a credible source
which contain specific local information are more likely to be believed (Drabek. 1986);
know what is the appropriate response in the circumstances, through previous experience or
public awareness raising campaigns; and
be physically or mentally able to take the appropriate actions.

Flood warning systems are usually and most easily developed to cater for areas where flooding is
relatively frequent where it can be argued they are less needed because the frequently-flooded will
know the signs of flooding and what to do in a flood. It is less common for flood warning to be
successfully provided for more extreme events or for defended areas where the need for warning may
be greater. There is, however a need to have a warning strategy for such events.

CNS (1991) presented a simple linear model for estimating the likely benefits of flood warnings in
terms of likely damage-reducing action taken:

P
f
* P
d
* P
i
* P
a
* P
c

where:

P
f
is the probability that an accurate forecast is made;
P
d
is the probability that the forecast is disseminated;
P
i
is the probability that a member of the individual household will be available to be
warned;
P
a
is the probability that the individual household is physically able to respond to the
warning; and
P
c
is the probability that the individual knows how to respond effectively.

Household time budgets can be used to estimate the PRA coefficient (eg Anderson et al. 1994); a
warning issued when there is no one there to receive it will be ineffective and it is difficult to give an
effective warning during the sleeping hours. The PHR coefficient can be approximated from national
statistics on disability and chronic ill health. For instance, some 1 in 6 people in the USA suffer from
arthritis or rheumatism (US Department of Health and Human Services 1999); in the UK, 18% of the
population have been assessed as having a moderate or serious disability, with 4% of men and 5% of
women having a serious disability (Department of Health. 1997). Of those aged over 85, more than
70% of both men and women have a disability. In addition, the likelihood of a person suffering a
disability is related to their socio-economic conditions. Together, the PRA and PHR coefficients set
the upper limit on the potential effectiveness of a flood warning system but only the PHR coefficient
is fixed.



Figure 4.14: Probability of Successful Response as a Function of Warning Lead Time
Time
Probability

The CNS model has been calibrated for the UK on the basis of empirical research on flood events in
England and Wales affecting residential and commercial property, although less evidence is available
on non-residential property and non-residential estimates must therefore be treated with caution.

In the UK, availability of people to receive and respond to warnings, significant proportions of
elderly and incapacitated households resident in flood risk areas and failure to respond effectively
severely limit the damages avoided to 0.29 of the potential for residential properties (Parker. 1999).
The reliability of the flood warning dissemination system has been shown to be low and variable in
UK research with very few cases in which an official warning reached a majority of those at risk
(Penning-Rowsell et al. 2000); the same result has been found in studies in France (Torterotot. 1992).
Direct warning systems are likely to be more effective than indirect ones which pass through
intermediaries. Indirect systems are likely to take longer and links in the system may fail. Where
warning messages are passed indirectly to the public it may be necessary to build in redundancy
through multiple message passing channels both to reduce the likelihood of failure and reinforce the
message. Local and national broadcast media are an increasingly important and credible means of
flood warning dissemination. Therefore, the establishing of a good understanding between
forecasting and warning agencies and the national and local media is important.

The co-efficients vary with the lead time available (figure 4.14). Sorensen (1988) has estimated, for
example, the proportions of the population who have evacuated an area against the elapse of time,
and Smith and Handmer (1986) have estimated the likely effectiveness of flood warnings as a
function of previous flood experience and warning lead time.

Damage-reducing activity is likely to build up over time as householders confirm and begin to take
the warning seriously. However, it is unlikely that on average residential damage savings from flood
warnings will increase much by increasing warning lead times beyond four hours. This is because
householders are likely to have moved all the easily moveable items within four hours, and tiredness
and lack of secure storage space may put a limit on further damage-reducing action except where
outside assistance is received (Parker. 1991).


Research reviewed by Parker and Handmer (1998) shows that unofficial warning systems
incorporating locally relevant and appropriate knowledge and extensive personal communication
networks are widespread in many different physical and cultural settings as well as in the UK. Parker
and Handmer conclude that rather than working in competition, or serving as alternatives, the
evidence suggests that it is more fruitful to find ways of combining official and unofficial systems to
take advantage of the strengths of both. This requires a willingness on the art of warning authorities
to analyse and design flood warning systems within the local community context blending top-down
with bottom-up methods. Potential advantages of developing flood warning systems with the
involvement of local people are that this will ensure that warning messages are understandable and
appropriate and that dissemination methods meet the needs of local people.

The warning process has also to be understood as a two-way communication process rather than one
of simply disseminating a message telling the public what to do. It also needs to be based upon an
understanding of peoples beliefs about flooding and their expectations of the most appropriate action
to take in a flood. If their expectations are appropriate then the flood warning can simply reinforce
that expectation and stimulate action. Conversely, there can be circumstances where peoples beliefs
are wrong and their expectations are wrong: for example, in the Big Thompson flood (Gruntfest.
1977), people sought to outrun the flood rather than escape it by climbing the side of the valley.

Where beliefs and expectations are not appropriate then action will need to be taken before the flood
to change them. A particular problem is when the public (and institutions) have experience of floods
and have adapted to that risk, but then a flood occurs to which an entirely different form of adaptation
is required. For instance, people may have learnt that they can sit out a flood by retreating upstairs or
to the roof; a more extreme flood will require that they evacuate instead. A second problem is where
they have some level of flood mitigation but then a more extreme flood occurs; in particular, when
there is a risk of a dike breaching, it will often be necessary to either encourage people to evacuate or
to evacuate them. Both the public and the institutions may believe that the dikes have reduced the
risk of flooding to zero. Again, a major problem in the 1998 Easter floods in England was that these
were extreme floods affecting areas for which no flood warning system had been developed (Bye and
Horner. 1998).

A pervasive institutional myth is that in a flood nobody will do anything until they are told what to do
and then they will do what they are told. A flood warning system should not be based on this
illusion. People seek to cope with floods and will not follow official advice and instructions unless
these are regarded as credible. Floods also offset attempts by the public both to communicate with
others, particularly relatives, and to get further information. A not-unusual response to receipt of a
warning is therefore an attempt by the recipient to find out what it means. It is easier to design a
flood warning system that disseminates a single message to many people, such as a siren or a radio
message, than a system that can deal with the requests from the many for more information. In the
future, digital television will enable CEEFAX to carry detailed information, and the expansion of
access to the internet also offers a way to provide detailed information that can be accessed by the
public on demand.

Those disseminating warnings have to trade off the length of warning lead time given against the
certainty of flooding; increasing the lead time and hence increasing the potential effectiveness of the
warning can only be bought at the cost of increasing the uncertainty of the prediction. Figure 4.15
illustrates this process for rainfall-initiated events; similar diagrams can be prepared for snowmelt
and forms of flooding. The available lead time between the earliest possible precursor event that can
be used to predict a flood and the arrival of that flood varies from catchment to catchment. Providing
flood warnings in one of the circumstances when they are most needed, in small, steep flashy
catchments, continues to be very difficult because there is so little time between rainfall and a flood
(Landerarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser. 1995; Obled and Tourasse. 1994). The success of flood warning


systems where there is less than four hours between the precursor event and the onset of flooding is
problematic. Thus, warnings are most likely to be effective on lowland rivers and they are most
problematic on flashy rivers, in the case of dry weather failure of dams, and where other natural or
artificial structures fail. New technology and advances in knowledge are yielding some
improvements (Larson. 1997, Summer. 1997).

Figure 4.15: Data Required in Order to Increase Warning Lead Time
predicted rainfall
recorded rainfall
upstream flows
local flows
elapsed itime
satellite data, weather
radar
telemetered rain
gauges
telemetered stream
flow gauges
direct observation
increasing certainty

4.5.3 Evacuation

Evacuation can be upward or outward; individuals may shelter in a safe place within the hazard area:
a higher floor, a flood-refuge mound, or a typhoon shelter in Bangladesh, where they may be trapped
until the flood waters recede. Alternatively, they leave the area. Evacuation may be precautionary,
executed prior to the onset of a life- or property-threatening event, or take place during the flood, as
rescues, or as aftermath evacuations undertaken when living conditions in the affected area prove
intolerable, for example, through loss of power, drinking water and sewerage services, shelter and
transport mobility. Evacuations may be voluntary or compulsory as for example, in China, where
large-scale evacuations are carried out by the army

Whether upward evacuation is a safe alternative depends upon the nature of the flood and the form of
construction of the buildings. It has the great advantage that it takes much less time to execute than
outward evacuation where evacuating several hundred thousand people may take several days. In
Zeeland, in the Netherlands, a traditional adaptation to the flood risk was the construction of earth
mounds; if the dikes were in danger of failing, the population could seek refuge in these areas. To-
day, cyclone shelters on the east coast of India and in Bangladesh serve the same purpose and are
provided in China as a place of refuge from river flooding. Flood embankments themselves are
similarly used in Bangladesh. Such shelters should be stocked with medicines, food and a safe source
of water supply.

Precautionary evacuation, although appropriate for life-threatening events and for vulnerable groups
such as the elderly, disabled, pregnant and very young, residential and nursing homes and hospitals,
may not be the most appropriate response in all flood events and for all those affected. Rescues
during a flood event may be dangerous in themselves and highly traumatic for those involved
(EUROFLOOD. 1996). Evacuation itself has a human cost depending upon its circumstances and


duration. Families frequently have to split up due to lack of emergency accommodation, or desire to
leave one member resident to protect the home or may become separated. This can cause
psychological and social disruption to family life (Fordham. 1998, Drabek. 2000). Evacuation,
particularly over a long period, can break up communities social networks and support systems and
thus reduce their capacity to recover. Evacuation also disrupts peoples livelihoods, particularly in
agricultural or fishing communities. The research shows that, by preference, people evacuate to stay
with family or friends (Drabek 1986. Schware. 1982). Evacuation centre accommodation may be of
poor quality, overcrowded, socially stressful and carry with it the possibility of disease spreading
(Fordham and Ketteridge. 1996). One problem is that people may flee a flood without taking their
medication with them.

Evacuation rates in flood events and other natural disasters vary greatly and multiple factors are
involved in explaining why people choose to evacuate or not. The literature shows clearly that the
higher the individual interprets the risk to be, the more likely that individual is to evacuate (Drabek.
1986). Drabek (1986) concluded that when warned adequately of approaching natural disasters,
approximately 50% will evacuate upon receipt of official advisories. Clear advisories from credible
agencies which can indicate voluntary or compulsory evacuation also appear to be factors (Drabek.
1986). The ability of the public to evacuate prior to an event is crucially dependent upon effective
and timely warning of the threat. Sorensons studies of US evacuations show the evacuation rates
achieved within two hours to vary from over 90% to less than 30%. Bellamy and Harrison (1988)
have estimated on the basis of past evacuations, the rate at which evacuations can be executed,
although such estimates must reflect the physical locations, site characteristics, access, available
transport and the nature of the threat investigated:

Evacuation rate = 14.12 * population requiring evacuation
0.5

Past experience has been found to affect evacuation behaviour but not in a consistent way: those
threatened may fail to evacuate because of past experience of lesser floods. However, Rosenthal et
al. (1998) concluded that householders and authorities experience of a serious flood in 1993
contributed to effective planning and the smooth, mainly self-achieved evacuation of nearly 250 000
people and many thousands of cattle when dike bursts and flooding threatened in 1995 in the
Netherlands. In that event, an initial evacuation decision in one area triggered a sequence of
evacuations throughout the affected province indicating that the propensity to evacuate is affected by
group interactions and the behaviour of others, neighbours and friends in the local area and wider
community communicated through the media (Drabek. 1986). When people evacuate they commonly
do so as group members, most typically as family units. This needs to be taken into account in
evacuation planning. The research literature shows that families may delay evacuation in order to
evacuate as family units or to account for missing members before leaving (Drabek. 1986)

Key barriers to evacuation are peoples reluctance to abandon their homes, their desire to protect
their property, particularly livestock and other valuable possessions, and fear of looting (Schware.
1982; Tapsell et al. 1999).

4.5.4 Compensation

In many countries, with the notable exceptions of Australia and the UK, it is expected that
governments will compensate or aid the victims of disasters. Thus, the simplest model of society may
be seen as a mutual-protection society, whose members come to each others help in the event of a
disaster. To this aid may be added compensation in cash or kind via international organisations such


as UN agencies, international NGOs, other national governments and NGOs, through national
disaster relief schemes which have been set up in many countries, or through local disaster relief
schemes set up by local government agencies or voluntary relief funds. In many flood disasters in
both developing and developed countries, little or no compensation will be available to those
affected, not least because such compensation is generally only available when a disaster is
officially declared.

An alternative to compensation through relief funds is provided by various forms of insurance
schemes, which were often set up as successors to such funds (5.2.2.1). The role that compensation
and flood insurance plays in flood hazard management varies from country to country depending
upon a number of interrelated factors, including:

whether or not the Government has a duty or a tradition of providing disaster relief;
ideologies which shape the conception of floodplain problems and the response; for example,
how floodplain development, flooding and flood defence are characterised and traditions of
communal or national solidarity or private responsibility (Green. 1999);
the level of flood risk and thence the degree to which the government becomes involved;
the resources and capacity of national government in relation to the potential for losses;
the extent to which government is decentralised and lacking powers over land-use planning
which may lead it to seek to link an insurance scheme to floodplain development control;
the relationship between the government and insurance industry; and
the capacity of a countrys insurance industry in relation to potential, particularly
catastrophic losses and whether or not the country has access to global insurance markets.

The UK government, unlike the governments of most other countries, has never accepted a
responsibility for compensating its citizens affected by disasters. In contrast, the Netherlands
Constitutional Court has held that flood insurance is illegal because the State has a duty to protect its
citizens and to throw the burden of providing for compensation for losses onto the citizens would be
to attempt to avoid this duty and victims are compensated through a National Disaster Fund. Belgium
similarly has a National Disaster Compensation Fund to which victims can submit claims once a
disaster has been declared.

The slowness of compensation processes, organisational and financial problems, corruption charges
and equity issues concerning payments are common problems with relief funds (Fordham and
Ketteridge. 1996 ). Fund organisations do not necessarily have the expertise of insurance loss
adjusters in assessing and processing claims. Such problems lead the Belgian Government to
consider an insurance-based scheme like the French scheme after floods in 1995 (van Hassel and van
Lindt. 1998).

4.5.5 Flood Insurance

The insurance industry is in business to make profits and not to take risks unless doing so will be
profitable. In general, the insurance industry has considered flooding to be an uninsurable risk except
where the government controls the level of risk to which the industry would be exposed. There are a
number of reasons why the industry has generally not been prepared to insure against flood losses.
Firstly, with risks such as fire or burglary, the risk to the individual property is independent of that of
other properties and the individual loss is small relative to the total income from all insured
properties. Consequently, total annual losses are not subject to wide swings. In the case of large
single risks, such as oil rigs or satellites, the individual premium is sufficiently large that the costs of
undertaking a more detailed risk assessment and tailored policy can be justified. The risk accepted
can also be offset by reinsurance. For flood risks, the premium income from an individual property is
relatively small so a detailed risk assessment would not be justified. But because the risk to one


individual property is not independent of the risk to other properties, those in the same catchment,
one flood can therefore result in a large loss. Secondly, the information with which to make a
detailed risk assessment is generally not there anyway. Thirdly, if actuarially fair premiums were to
be set, then it is suspected that few people could afford to pay them: the risk of being flooded even on
a protected floodplain is generally several times higher than of experiencing a major fire.

Therefore, where flood insurance is available it is through some form of public-private partnership
and insurance premiums are generally subsidised either by the tax payer or across the wider premium
pool. Thus, floodplain mapping, necessary if the risk is to be identified, is a cost borne by
Government. Generally, as in France, Spain and the USA, the government bears some or all of the
risk and where the government is not formally the reinsurer, as it is not in the UK, in practice few
governments could leave claims unpaid because of the bankruptcy of the retail insurer. The US
programme is not strictly an insurance programme, although the US government now carries more
insurance exposure one estimate being that its exposure now amounts to $ 520 billion (Wright.
2000) - than the capacity of the global insurance industry. Rather, it is a means by which the Federal
government could induce local governments to introduce building controls (but not land use controls)
in flood risk areas. Constitutionally, land use and building controls are reserved for the States and
therefore the Federal government could not require such controls to be introduced. Secondly, the
theory behind the insurance programme in the USA is that the Federal subsidies to the insurance
programme will be less than the resultant savings to the Federal government in disaster aid
(Czerwinski. 1999).

In France, Spain and the UK, flood cover is subsidised by an additional loading on all purchasers of
insurance. The US National Flood Insurance Program is best seen as a solution to a particular and
unique US problem; the French model is probably more applicable to other countries.

In other instances, the insurance industry is willing to provide cover against the residual risk. Thus,
in Hungary it has been possible to buy cover against the risk of being flooded as a result of a failure
of the dike system. In the Netherlands, such policies were offered for a period but the company
withdrew after the Meuse floods.

Where governments have accepted a duty to compensate their citizens for losses in disasters, there
are two advantages, as in Italy, in contracting out the distribution of compensation to the insurance
industry or to other financial institutions. Firstly, the insurance industry is specialised in processing
and paying out claims whilst governments are not. Secondly, any form of compensation causes
friction amongst the victims and politically it is preferable for a government to be able to blame
problems on another party.

Again, where governments have compensated disaster victims, it may be preferable to shift this cost
from the taxpayers on to the purchasers of insurance. The problem will remain about what to do
about those who are not insured; these are generally the poorer parts of society. It is not possible to
require everyone to purchase insurance, except to cover for the potential losses they impose on other
people (eg third party car insurance), since this is in effect a tax paid to a private company. Recently,
it was therefore proposed that Hungary should adopt a tiered approach. A basic level of
compensation would be paid by the government to all flood victims. A second layer of compensation
could be bought with standard household policies, the risk being borne by an additional charge on all
household premiums. Above this level, any further coverage would have to be bought on the
commercial market (Halcrow et al. 1999).

Although generally flood insurance is essentially an ancillary to flood hazard management, there are
some circumstances where it can reinforce an existing policy. Thus, the Association of British
Insurers has indicated that in some circumstances it will refuse to provide cover (ABI. 1998), in
particular, that it would not be prepared to do so where development is given planning permission


against the advice of the Environment Agency. However, the purpose of this threat is less to prevent
development of the floodplains than to ensure that in any development that does occur, the developers
internalise the cost of flood alleviation.



The financial management of flood disasters: Should governments insure?

Throughout the world, governments incur large expenses following floods and other catastrophes. Especially
in poor countries, the public authorities often experience difficulties in raising funds to repair damaged
infrastructure and to assist the recovery process. This problem is aggravated by the fact that international aid
for disaster recovery is generally only a small percentage of the costs, and there is little private insurance to
cover flood damages.
There are two principal mechanisms available to governments to fund the costs of recovery: financing
instruments and hedging instruments. Financing instruments are arrangements whereby the government either
sets aside funds prior to a disaster or taps its own funding sources after the event occurs. After a disaster,
governments can mobilize their own financing sources by imposing taxes, borrowing domestically or
internationally, or diverting from the public budget. The most common way for governments to raise funds
after a disaster is to borrow from their central bank reserves or to issue government bonds. Governments can
also divert funds from other public programs or impose special disaster taxes after a major flood. Finally, the
public authorities can borrow funds from international lending agencies.
These financing instruments lead to important issues of equity and efficiency. For instance, borrowing may
transfer costs to future generations, and taxes spread the losses beyond those who are at risk. There may also
be financial and political constraints on ex post, financing instruments. Developing and emerging-economy
countries are often constrained in raising their budget deficits or borrowing large sums, and taxes are
politically difficult to implement. In addition, international institutions like the World Bank are concerned
about the large amount of development-project loans that are diverted to finance disaster recovery.
Alternatively, a government can hedge its risk of incurring large post-disaster expenditures by purchasing
traditional insurance or issuing insurance-linked securities, such as catastrophe bonds.

A catastrophe (CAT)
bond is an instrument for transferring catastrophic risk to investors. The investor receives an above-market
return when catastrophes do not occur, but shares the governments losses by sacrificing interest or principal
when catastrophes do occur. These instruments are new, and have been made possible mainly because of new
scientific studies, engineering analyses and advances in information technology. Given the size of the global
capital market (over $US 70 trillion), the average annual, global damage from floods (around $US 23 billion)
could be easily absorbed using these new financial instruments as sources of funds.
Despite their potential, hedging instruments are costly for governments, and their use will depend on the
availability and comparative cost of traditional financing instruments. For this reason, their main role may be
financing disasters that comprise a large proportion of a countrys GDP since after such events the
government will have an extremely difficult time raising sufficient funds from its traditional sources. If a
government has insurance or has purchased CAT bonds in advance of the disaster, this will channel funds
from international capital markets to aiding the recovery effort. The attractiveness of these instruments will
increase if they encourage cost-effective measures for reducing the losses from floods and other disasters, and
one of the greatest challenges to financial risk management is linking hedging instruments with loss
prevention.
Another challenge is presented by the fact that developing and emerging-economy countries will have great
difficulties in paying the costs of ex ante transfers of risk. Since the World Bank and other lending
organizations are concerned about the losses on their investments in these countries by having funds diverted
to disaster relief, innovative financing mechanisms to aid these countries in hedging their disaster risks might
be considered.

Joanne Linnerooth-Bayer
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg



4.5.6 Help and Counselling

In the UK as in other parts of the world, flood victims are largely left to their own devices to
accomplish the clean up and repair and reconstruction of their property and livelihoods in the
recovery phase. The lack of practical help with clearing out damaged contents, lack of practical
advice on how to dry out and restore their property and to deal with insurance or compensation
claims are common criticisms voiced by UK flood victims (Tapsell et al. 1999). The US Federal
Emergency Management Agency and the American Red Cross (1998) produces a manual which
includes advice on what to do after a flood which might serve as a model for guidance for flood
victims in western countries.

Those who need most help and support in the aftermath of a flood are likely to be those most
vulnerable in normal circumstances: the elderly, the disabled and sick, those living alone or isolated
without relatives or friends in the local community to call on for support. Ethnic minority groups
may be disadvantaged during the recovery phase by their lack of knowledge of the system and by
lack of command of the language (Tapsell et al. 1999). UK research has consistently shown that
flood victims attach importance to the support they receive from relatives and friends but it has not
demonstrated that this support has a significant impact on their overall seriousness of the impact of
flooding on their household (Green et al. 1994).

Strong arguments can be made in favour of mobilising community-based organisations to take action
in the emergency response and recovery phases of a flood event. Projects in Nicaragua and
Mozambique illustrate the potential of this approach in certain socio-political settings (Maskrey.
1989).

In the US, it has become well-established practice to offer counselling to those involved in natural
disasters including flooding (National Institute of Mental Health. 1979). However, take-up has often
been low because of the perceived stigma associated with using mental health services (Drabek.
1986). In the UK, counselling was offered to flood victims in Towyn in 1990 and it is becoming
more common to provide such services. Flood victims may feel that others including officials whom
they have to deal with do not appreciate what they have been through and may feel isolated as a
result. This was found to be the case in research into the Easter flooding in the UK Midland, in which
some victims expressed a need for counselling to help them cope with their feelings (Tapsell et al.
1999). In flood events in developing countries, victims may be as or more traumatised, but may see
help with their most basic needs for food, shelter, and health care as priorities and counselling as less
relevant.

4.6 Matching the Solution to the Problem

The three primary principles which should underlie selecting a flood hazard management strategy
are:

public involvement;
appraisal-led design; and
taking a catchment-based approach.

These principles mean that there are no universally applicable solutions. Instead, what is the
appropriate solution will be more or less unique to the catchment in question. What strategy is
appropriate depends upon a number of factors. The five key factors are:

the nature of the catchment and climate, and consequently also the nature of the flood;
whether or not a flood mitigation scheme is already in place;


the nature and intensity of existing uses of the floodplain and of the river itself;
the wider state of development of the country in question; and
the (inter)national and other administrative functional and geographical boundaries.

The strategy adopted will generally involve a combination of options rather than, say, reliance on a
dam or flood warning system alone. The need to consider how to manage all floods, including the
most extreme, increases the likelihood that a multi-option strategy will be adopted. An emergency
plan, flood warning and evacuation will almost inevitably be required to manage the extreme floods.

Figure 4.6 illustrated a catchment where there are flooding problems in two areas: area A on a
tributary draining a steep mountainous area and area B on the lowland floodplain. Area A will be
affected by flashy floods characterised by very short lead times between forecasted floods and flood
onset, high flood velocities and significant debris loads including trees and boulders. If the area is
not developed then ideally it should remain so because floods pose both a significant risk to life and
mitigating that risk will be difficult. Flood proofing buildings in these conditions is unlikely to work
because high flood velocities and associated debris load mean that partial or complete structural
failure of buildings is likely to be a real risk. If at all possible, development should be encouraged to
take place higher up the valley sides although doing so may simply expose the development to the
risk from avalanches or landslides instead.

Flood warnings will be essential but because of the very short lead time that is possible, the likely
reliability of the flood warning system must be expected to be poor. In this instance, evacuation up
the sides of the valley will be necessary and it is unlikely that there will be time to bring in outside
resources to help those at risk to leave the area.

If the catchment has little development, then afforestation, the primary option for source control, will
mean changing the nature of the habitat. More probably, afforestation will not be an option:
normally, in the absence of human activity in the catchment, woods, forests or shrubs are likely to be
the natural habitat to develop. The absence of forests might imply that part of the catchment is above
the tree zone or that tree growth is inhibited by other factors. Where the catchment is already
developed then afforestation is one option; it will be less helpful if the cause of flooding is snow
melt. Nor may it be acceptable in landscape terms: for example, in pre-historic times, the uplands of
the Lake District in England were forested and it was the introduction of sheep farming that created
the present landscape of open moorland. Afforestation here has proved to be highly contentious and
in the Lake District it has been allowed primarily in the valley floors rather than on the open hillsides.

Detention basins will not be an option since these are essentially the lowland equivalent of flood
storage reservoirs. Bypass channels and channel deepening and widening are very unlikely to be
options because of the rocky nature of the substrate, the debris loads deposited by the river, and the
narrowness of the valley. In Hong Kong, essentially a fringe of reclaimed land backed by steep,
rocky slopes, channel improvements have in some cases proved to be the only viable options, but the
cost is very high. In addition, in flashy catchments, the ratio of flood flows to base flows is also
typically very high. It is relatively easier to provide additional capacity equal to a few times the
annual flood flow than to provide capacity equal to tens of times the annual flood flow. The
narrowness of the valley will also mean that dikes will not be an option, only vertical flood walls
being possible.

In this instance, a flood retention reservoir is likely to be an option to be considered. Before a
reservoir can even be considered, there has to be a site where one could be situated and have a
significant effect on the flood hazard at A. This site must be geologically suitable and seismicity,
both existing and any induced by the reservoir, will also need to be considered. If the catchment is
undeveloped, then the number of people who have to be resettled is likely to be low, but may be from


indigenous or ethnic minorities. Conversely, because the catchment is undeveloped, the likelihood is
greater that areas of critical natural capital would be threatened by the reservoir. On the other hand,
if the catchment is developed, then more people will be affected by a reservoir but it is less likely that
there will be any remaining areas of critical natural capital.

Table 4.6: Appropriateness of Alternative Flood Management Options
options undeveloped floodplain developed floodplain
development consider whether development
might be better attracted elsewhere;
recognise value of any existing
wetlands
consider managed retreat
vulnerability n/a consider whether vulnerability is
primarily due to flooding or
whether it is a wider problem to
tackle to which other strategies
might be more appropriate ie
farmers may be ill-placed to survive
crop failure from floods, droughts,
pests.
source control will have to take place higher up the
catchment
will have to take place higher up the
catchment
storage contains natural storage which will
probably be reduced by
development
look at flood detention basins; more
feasible in developed economies
characterised by large farms and
low rural densities than in less-
developed countries where the
opposite is generally true. Where
major effect from upstream areas or
tributaries, consider reservoirs
slow flood wave n/a may conflict with navigation and
other uses
embankments
/walls
if it is appropriate to convert
wetlands to other uses
conventional solution
land use control attractors rather than constraints
may be a more effective approach
too late except at the margin
resettlement n/a may be viable at the margin in
urban areas; in rural areas in
developing economies, the numbers
involved are likely to be large and
there is likely to be little other
arable land available on which to
relocate the displaced population
house raising, flood
proofing
likely to be appropriate if
development will be limited;
development may be constructed on
artificial mounds etc
consider localised protection
around areas of high value (eg
urbanised areas, major industry)
flood warning essential complement to other
strategies

There are likely to be more feasible options in a lowland area than higher up the catchment, not least
because intervention is possible, in principle, anywhere higher up the catchment from the area under
study. There is also more time before the flood crest arrives which makes it more likely that flood


warning and evacuation may work. Table 4.6 summarises the options that may be possible in regard
to area B.

Because the appropriate option, or frequently a combination of options, should emerge from the
examination of the particular conditions, it is impossible to give a comprehensive breakdown of
conditions and the options that are likely to be appropriate. The basic rule is to make a preliminary
assessment of as many options as possible, and to be imaginative in developing new options; thus,
Gardiner (1994) reports that up to 400 options were identified before one option was selected for the
Maidenhead-Eton reach of the Thames. The following listing of the conditions when specific flood
management options are most likely to be appropriate should be understood in the light of this
general principle rather than being interpreted as being prescriptive or exclusionary. It must again be
stressed that decisions involve a comparison of available options and a choice between these options;
no option should ever be considered in isolation.

Source control may be appropriate when:
the quantity and rate of runoff has been affected by human (or other) change over a significant
proportion of the catchment; or
there are soil erosion problems (eg in steep, unprotected and unstable valleys); or
there are also problems of agricultural or urban pollution; or
runoff is too valuable a resource to allow it to be lost to the sea.

Dams may be appropriate when some of the following conditions are present:
a major part of runoff comes from a steep catchment;
the time to concentration is short;
multiple tributaries contribute to the local flood problem and it is important to avoid the flood
crests from the different tributaries being synchronised;
the ratio of flow in an extreme flood to the flow of the annual flood is high; and
the floodplain is heavily developed.

Detention basins may be appropriate when:
a major part of runoff is generated in lowland areas;
there exist parts of the floodplain which are in a relatively low value use such as large scale
farming;
other benefits, in terms of biodiversity or recreation, could be created through the construction of
an engineered wetland; or
multiple tributaries contribute to the local flood problem.

Channel modifications may be appropriate when:
the watercourse concerned is relatively small;
the river has already been heavily modified in the past; and
a bypass channel could be created; or
a multi-stage channel could be created, or the river otherwise restored.

A practical problem with channel modification is that administrative boundaries typically lie down
the centre of the channel and these will either need to be changed or a super-ordinate administration
introduced.

Dikes and flood embankments may be appropriate when:
arable land is scarce (in which case the use of summer dikes and a retreated main dike line
should be considered, as is the practice in Germany and the Netherlands);


the river is in a lowland;
the floodplain is already heavily modified and intensely occupied for essentially urban uses; and
the river is large or where, because of previous development, the river corridor is constricted.

In developed countries, the use of dikes primarily to protect agricultural land can seldom be justified
beyond the standard of protection offered by summer dikes (eg five-to-ten-year design standard of
protection); land drainage of poldered areas is essential for this strategy to yield any significant
benefits.

House raising may be appropriate when:
there are a few isolated and scattered properties on a lowland floodplain.

Flood proofing may be appropriate when:
the properties at risk are historic buildings in urban areas, and where these are closely related to
the river; or
there is a low density of development; and
buildings are of masonry construction; and
built on a suitable sub-soil; and
flooding will be shallow; and
flood velocities will be low.

Localised protection may be appropriate where there are:
isolated high-value communities scattered across a floodplain.

Managed retreat and possible resettlement may be appropriate where:
the area is one of low population density, generally in rural areas (eg the country is highly-
urbanised); or
developments are temporary (eg camp sites, mobile home parks); or
buildings are scattered or of low value; or
there is a very high risk to life (eg in small, flashy catchments), particularly where the likelihood
of successful flood warning is low; and
managed retreat would allow the creation of an important environmental resource such as a
wetland; and
it is possible and economically viable to provide localised protection to isolated high-value
developments.

Flood warnings are appropriate in the following conditions:
always.

They are essential to reduce the risk to life:
when buildings, particularly dwellings, will not provide a safe place of refuge in the event of a
flood;
especially when existing properties are single-storey (including tents and mobile homes) or of
non-masonry construction;
when flood velocities will be high and sufficient to cause the partial or complete structural failure
of some buildings;
when there are transport links across the flood risk area;
on small flashy catchments (including arroyos and wadis in arid regions);
in urban areas where significant activity takes place below grade (eg underground car parks;
metro systems, shopping centres, etc);
below dams;


behind dike lines or in poldered areas; and
in areas frequently flooded and for extreme floods outside those previously experienced.
Evacuation (either horizontally or to flood refuges) should be planned for:
all areas where buildings will not provide a safe place of refuge in the event of a flood;,
particularly below artificial or natural dams;
behind dike lines or natural crest lines and in depressions; and
around hazardous facilities.

Land use controls may be appropriate where:
development is undertaken primarily by developers rather than by individuals (and it is pointless
to mandate land controls where development is primarily informal).

Where land use controls are considered then:
their primary effect is likely to be to transfer some of the costs of flood alleviation to the
developers;
they should be based on a holistic planning process and not solely based upon a consideration of
the flood risk; and
in areas of high development pressure, the use of growth attractors may be more effective than
applying planning constraints.

Flood insurance is:
largely irrelevant to flood hazard management. However, in highly-developed countries, a
public-industry partnership may help transfer flood alleviation costs to developers since, if the
insurance industry refuses insurance cover, then mortgages or construction loans will not be
available.

It has been stressed that the appropriate flood management strategy will be dependent on local
conditions. As an illustration of the resulting differences that are likely to be appropriate, Table 4.7
draws some general conclusions as to the strategic management responses that are likely to be
appropriate in four different floodplains.

This is a working paper prepared for the World Commission on Dams as part of its information gathering activities. The views, conclusions, and recommendations contained in the working paper are not to be taken to
represent the views of the Commission

Table 4.7: Comparative Flood Problems on the Mississippi, Tisza, Thames and Yangtze
Mississippi valley, USA* Upper Tisza valley,
Hungary**
Thames valley, England*** Yangtze, China****
Flood problem Maximum recorded flood flow
70 000 m
3
/s (1927).
2 900 000 km
2
drainage area
Average fall 0.12 m/km.
Rainfall: intense thunderstorms
July-August

Maximum recorded flood flows:
3 360 m
3
/sec on entering
country; 4 700 m
3
/sec on
leaving country.
Drainage area (at upstream
country border = 9 707 km
2
; at
downstream country border =
138 579 km
2
).
Flooding imported from the
Ukraine and dike on
international boundary seeks to
avoid flooding in Ukraine
bypassing dike system on the
river. Three separate flood
seasons: snow melt in spring,
May and Autumn rains.
Flooding can last 50-120 days in
lower part of the Tisza. Ice
floods have been a major
problem in the past. Diked
since the end of the last century,
Emergency flood detention
basins have been constructed.
52% of Hungary is at risk of
flooding.

Maximum recorded flow =
718m
3
/sec (1947).
Drainage area = 9 950 km
2
.

Average fall 1.2m/km.
Greatest floods have generally
resulted from rainfall on ground
that was either frozen or already
saturated, so resulting in high
runoff. Lowland catchment
which is almost exclusively put
to arable or urban use; narrow
river valley.
Floods may last 6 weeks.

Maximum recorded flow = 110
000 m
3
/sec (1870).
Drainage area = 1 000 000 km
2

Average fall 2cm/km (altitude at
Three Gorges 40 metres above
sea level, 1600 km from sea)
Subject to intense rainfall
during cyclone season; very
wide valley and very low river
gradient; tributaries
significantly effect flood crest;
long duration floods (eg 90-120
days).



Local
conditions
Urbanised country with very
low population density
particularly in area at risk
(varying from 3 people/km
2
in
North Dakota to 78 in Illinois);
low economic intensity of use
(from $65,000/km
2
in North
Dakota to $1.8 million in
Illinois; high ratio of arable land
per capita and industrial
farming. Currently, heavily-
managed river with channel
modifications and dike systems,
plus both flood storage
reservoirs and detention basins.
Poor rural area with dike system
providing a high standard of
protection (100-year return
period) but major land drainage
problem. From perspective of
agricultural productivity it
would be more useful to tackle
the land drainage problem than
to maintain the current standard
of protection from the Tisza.
However, expected accession to
European Union will make
current agriculture uneconomic.
Further investment in land
drainage or flood alleviation is
not likely to be a good way of
reducing the populations
vulnerability.
Densely-populated (1 000
people/km
2
) and
relativelywealthy area in a
highly urbanised country. Some
30 000 people at risk. The river
is important in both amenity and
cultural terms, and heavily-
modified, both as an historic
navigation and as an integral
part of the water resource
system. The floodplain is also
heavily used with extensive
areas of past and present
aggregate quarries. Multiple
planning constraints in the form
of designations of areas as of
outstanding natural beauty, as
Green Belt and for other
reasons tended to direct
development on to the
floodplain
Densely-populated area in
densely-populated but still
essentially rural country (and
hence fairly homogeneous
distribution of both population
and industrial activity); national
scarcity of arable land.
Population at risk in excess of
40 million. Existing dike
system is hundreds of years old
in places but offers a very low
standard of protection (eg
against 10-20 year return period
flood).
Both a history and a potential
for catastrophic loss of life
because of the depth of flooding
(4-7 m) to be expected if dikes
breach.

Probable
solution
Managed retreat; reversion of
much currently protected
agricultural land to wetlands or
use of summer dikes to allow
continued arable use; localised
protection of urban areas; small,
isolated urban communities may
be resettled.
Managed retreat, localised
protection and shift to other
forms of investment, which
might include development of
ecotourism.
Dike raising, or deepening or
widening the channel were all
rejected for environmental,
archaeological, amenity or other
grounds. Option adopted
involves construction of multi-
stage bypass channel capable of
carrying the same flow as the
main channel around the town
of Maidenhead.
Managed retreat would either
involve both massive
resettlement or localised flood
dikes; the depth of flooding
expected plus the flood velocity
would probably make localised
protection uneconomic, a
problem compounded by the
density of settlements. Chinas
flood management policy
involves a combination of most


available options. Policy of
raising and strengthening the
existing dike line may be the
best way of buying time until
population pressures ease and
per capita income increases
substantially.

sources: Gardiner. 1994; Framji K K and Garg B C. 1976; Halcrows/FHRC. 1996; Halcrow et al. 1999; Marsh. 1988; Shaw. 1998; US Army Corps of
Engineers. 1995; Vituki. 1998



5. The Role of Dams in Flood Hazard Management

The previous section identified two contexts in which the flood hazard management strategy might
include the use of dams:
in upland catchments; or
in complex rivers where it is necessary to avoid flood crests from several tributaries coinciding.

The likelihood of one or more dams forming part of the management strategy will be increased when:
the floodplain is under pressure (eg there is a scarcity of arable land, an essentially rural economy
and a high population density); or
there is a history of intensive activity on, and extensive modification by people of, the floodplain;
and/or
the dam can be used for multiple purposes (when annual rainfall is concentrated over a short
period of the year, or there is high variability in annual rainfall, the case for storing available
runoff is strengthened, although other means of rainfall harvesting need also to be considered
(Bruins et al. 1986; Centre for Science and Environment. 1999; Desai and Ghose. 1998;
Ferroukhi and Chookalua. 1996; Gilbertson. 1986; Jagawat. 1998).

In the case of dams having a flood alleviation role, there are four major potential drawbacks to be
considered:
resettlement;
the risk and consequences of failure;
morphological impact and groundwater effects; and
environmental impacts.

Again, the comparative principle applies: are these drawbacks worse from the option involving dams
than from other available options? For example, if the floodplains of the upper and middle Yangtze
were to be permanently evacuated, some 40 million people would have to be resettled (Hong Qingyu
and Luo Zhang-Yu. 1999); the proposed dike strengthening and raising programme will require 70
000 people to be resettled (the estimates for resettlement for the Three Gorges project range up to 1.2
million people).

Similarly, when considering the risks of failure, no option is likely to be free of risk: settlement
outside of the floodplains not infrequently involves a different form of risk. Thus, in Japan, debris
flows and landslides were killing 130 people and destroying 1 000 houses a year in 1985 (Rivers
Bureau. 1985) and, in general, the choice between settlement on steep hillsides and floodplains is a
debatable one. Figure 4.5 compared the risk to life resulting from the different intervention options;
the designed probability of failure of dams is generally considerably less than that of other options.
Dikes are seldom designed to protect against a more extreme flood than that with a return period of
100 years, whilst dams are, where there is a significant population in the risk area below them,
typically designed to cope with the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) or Probable Maximum
Precipitation (PMP). These are the maximum theoretically conceivable amounts and have a
probability of occurrence very close to zero.

Depending upon the local conditions, the number of people who may die if a dam fails may or may
not be greater than the number who will die if a dike (or another solution) is adopted instead. Dams
and dikes have the common disadvantage of discontinuity: the transition time from safe to failure
can be very short, and the time available to carry out warning and evacuation correspondingly limited
(Figure 4.15).

However, whilst a dam may be designed to safely pass the PMF, it is not unknown for the PMF to be
badly misestimated. A well-known example of such a misestimate was the Warragamba dam, which


retains the main water resource for Sydney (Sydney Water Board. 1985). Recalculation of the PMF
showed that the spillways were drastically under-designed whilst a failure of the dam would result in
widespread flooding in Sydney as well as major water shortages. Again, the Macchu II dam in
Gujarat was built with a spillway capacity of 5 415m
3
/s; overtopping and dam failure caused an eight-
to-ten-metre flood wave to sweep down the valley, killing at least 2 000 people. The dam was
redesigned on the basis of a PMF of 20 925m
3
/s, but before it was rebuilt on this basis, a cyclonic
rainstorm produced 700mm of rainfall in the catchment in a single day. The PMF was re-assessed
upward to 26 420 m
3
/s (Herschy. 1998). Climate change, expected to affect both rainfall and runoff
(Arnell et al. 1994), will mean that some PMFs have to be revised upwards. One countermeasure to
uncertainties about the PMF is then to incorporate fuse dikes as well as spillways in the design of a
dam; the general principle that it is necessary to design for failure is as true for dams as any other
flood management option.

Failure under extreme flood conditions is not the only or necessarily primary mode of failure of
dams. Dry weather failure as a result of foundation or ground failure or of the dam wall itself is a
significant mode of failure.

Reliability engineering approaches to assessing the risk of failure of a dam are increasingly being
applied (Safety and Reliability Directorate. 1985). Nuclear engineers have been keen to assess as
unfavourable the risks and consequences of a dam failure compared with those from a nuclear power
plant, arguing that the probability of failure of some dams is greater than of the failure of a nuclear
power station. Conversely, in the case of the Three Gorges Project, one of the risks assessed was of a
nuclear attack and assessments of the potential implications of terrorist attacks on dams is fairly
common practice (the drawback of such studies is that they simultaneously identify the best ways of
attacking a dam; therefore sources are not cited). In general, the nature of dams is such that a
substantial quantity of explosive is required before much happens.

A second risk is the change in downstream flow regimes as a consequence of the operation of the
dam. In theory, for a dedicated flood storage reservoir, the flow for a given return period event
should be less with the dam than without the dam except for the PMF event when there will be no
difference in the flow. However, this only applies to the rising curve of the hydrograph; the water
stored in the reservoir also has to be discharged. Here there can be a number of problems. Firstly,
that the way the release is controlled can result in a sudden increase in discharge flows; for example,
a gate may be fully opened rather than being opened slowly in stages. The operations manual may
prescribe slow opening but the operations staff may either not know the procedures or ignore them.
The effect is to release a wave downstream. Secondly, as Figure 4.7 illustrated, the result of proper
operation may be a lower but longer flood than would otherwise exist. Thirdly, if a second flood
crest is predicted then in order to draw down the reservoir to provide the capacity to store the second
flow crest, some of the stored water will have to be released over a short period of time. Fourthly, if
the flood forecasting system fails to predict the pattern of flooding then the reservoir may be filled
too soon so that the flood crest is passed through unattenuated because the storage capacity is
exhausted.

On average, however, the flooding downstream of the dam should be less than without the dam.
However, both the river and the downstream population will have adapted to the changed flow
regime. Both may then be poorly adapted to a flood when one does occur.

All physical interventions for flood hazard management have environmental consequences (Section
4.2.5.8), since all are intended to change the natural flow regime in the river and its floodplain in
some respect. In consequence of that change in the flow regime, the sediment regime is also changed.
The environmental consequences of the physical interventions are not limited to the point where the
intervention is made but are also felt up- and down-stream of that point; in some cases, out into the
near shore zone itself. The virtue of institutional interventions is the appearance and perhaps the


reality that they offer a free lunch in this respect. Although the main disadvantage of the institutional
interventions is that we do not yet know how to get them to work well, they should not be assumed
automatically to be environmentally benign; they may be but one lesson we should have learnt is that
our assumptions usually come back to hurt us.


Flood management in China
In China, most cultivable land, which is in any case scarce, lies in the floodplains of the great rivers and
these have been the centres of the development of civilisation. Therefore, there is a very long history of flood
management in China; many dike systems having been first constructed hundreds if not thousands of years
ago. The flood plains are now centres of population and economic activity; some 80 million people live on
the floodplain of the Yellow River. The Yellow River carries very heavy loads of sediment down from the
loess plateaus and the river is consequently very dynamic: over the last 2,500 years, it has undergone 26
major shifts in course and the dikes have been breached on 543 occasions. In places the river is perched 6-7
metres above the surrounding land; and in parts the height of the dikes is 20 metres.
A comprehensive strategy has therefore been developed involving both water and soil control. On the
Loess plateau of the Yellow River, soil and water conservation works have been undertaken over an area of
186,000 km
2
; a reduction of 11% in the sediment load entering the Sanmenxia reservoir has been achieved so
far, with a target of reducing this by 40-50% by 2030 and a programme completion target of the mid-century.
These works include the use of warping and check dams to trap sediment to create fields for cultivation.
A national compulsory tree planting campaign was started in 1981. In the Yangtze basin, in 1989 the
Yangtze Protective Forest Project was approved covering 13 Provinces and an area of 4.1 million km
2
with
the target of providing forest cover to 45% of the area by 2050. By 1997, the forested and vegetated area had
increased by 5%. Overall, the target set for the whole of China was for forest cover of 15-16% of the country
by the end of 1999 with the most recent FAO figures giving a figure of 14% for 1995. A further 5 year $2
billion reforestation plan was introduced following the 1998 flood, together with a reinforced ban on illegal
logging which has been a continual problem.
The scarcity of arable land has promoted development of the unprotected areas of the floodplains and
urbanisation has resulted in expansion of the urban areas over agricultural areas. In 1997, land transfers were
frozen and the State Council called for land use plans to be prepared by local governments. As with
afforestation and deforestation, the practical problem has been that what central government may decree is
not necessarily actually what happens on the ground.
Since 1974, resettlement from the unprotected areas of the Yellow river has been under way; 100,000
people have been resettled since 1987, with resettlement of a further 200,000 planned over the next 7 years.
Along the main rivers, a complex system of flood management has developed directed through a flood
forecasting system. Dams on the tributaries of the Yangtze were operated in the 1998 to reduce the
coincidence of flood crests; in 1998, there were 8 separate flood crests. The Three Gorges Dam will provide
storage capacity of 22 billion m
3
for the main stem of river, reducing the flood discharges on the upper
middle reaches of the river. Similarly, the Xiaolangdi dam will raise the flood protection standard from 1 in
100 to 1 in 1000 on the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River.
Traditionally the main storage has been provided by the natural lakes and the artifical detention basins
along the river itself. In 1988, 40 state approved basins were established on the Yangtze, covering a total
area of 12,000 km
2
. These include a number of detention basins, the earliest dating from 1954, with a total
storage capacity of 47 billion m
3
. However, the capacity of the lakes has been reduced by land reclamation
and sediment deposition, and the detention basins on both the Yangtze and Yellow rivers are themselves
heavily populated, with 6 million people living in those along the Yangtze. In 1998, as a precaution, several
hundred thousand people had to be evacuated from some of the detention basins as it was expected that it
would be necessary to operate them in order to prevent the main dikes from failing.
On the Yellow river, since 1974 a series of flood refuge areas have been constructed to provide places of
safety for 400,000 people, together with their livestock and possessions. In other areas, flood evacuation
routes have been established. Similarly, along the Yangtze, some 1072 flood refuges have been constructed
with a total area of 160,000 m
2
.
A major programme of dike raising and strengthening is now under way along the Yangtze; few of the
main river dikes provide protection against more than 10 year return period flood. The budget for the first
phase is over 10 billion RMB. In 1998, breaches in the main dike were limited to that at Jiu Jiang only by
mobilising almost the entire population to carry out emergency flood fighting.

Zuyu Chen, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing and
Colin Green, Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex University



Rhine Action Plan on Flood Defence

The International Commission for the Protection of the River Rhine was formally established in 1963 by the
governments of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Luxembourg, and the European Commission
subsequently became a member. Its initial primary purpose was the restoration of the water quality of the Rhine
and its tributaries. However, following the floods on the Rhine in 1993 and 1995, and then those on the River
Oder in 1997, the 12th Conference on Rhine Ministers adopted the Action Plan on Flood Defence in January
1998. This involves the spending of some $12 billion over a twenty year period to manage flooding in a basin
where there is an estimated $1500 billion of assets at risk. The plan is based on five principles:

water and land must be managed holistically;
water must be stored in the catchment and along the Rhine for as long as possible;
the river corridor should opened out as far as possible to increase live storage in the river;
it is necessary to learn to live with the risk of flooding; and
integrated, concerted action across the entire catchment is necessary for success.

An additional implicit principle is that the river should be restored to something nearer its natural form in order
to promote ecological regeneration. The targets to be achieved are summarised below.

Dick de Bruin
Rijkswaterstaat and World Bank
Action by 2000 by 2005 by 2020
River restoration (km) 1,290 3,460 11,060
Regulation of use of flood plains
Restore flood plains on tributaries (km
2
) 100 300 1,016
Restore flood plains on main stem (km
2
) 5 21.5 162
Increase infiltration on agricultural land (km
2
) 810 1,880 3,880
Afforestation of farm land (km2) 540 1,250 3,500
Increase infiltration in rural areas
Levies on impermeable areas/creation of compensation areas
Increase infiltration in built-up areas including roads (km
2
) 90 790 2,490
Increase flood storage on tributaries (million m
3
) 4.1 26 73
Increase flood storage on main stem (million m
3
) 33 67 344
Maintain critical flood dikes and adapt level of protection
(km)
530 815 1,115
Flood proofing
Prepare flood hazard maps
Prepare flood loss maps
Improve public awareness
Improve flood forecasting and warning service
Reduction of peak flood levels: 5 cms 25-30 cms 60-70cms
Reduce damages by: 10% 25%



6. Making the Right Decision?

We only have to make a choice when there is a conflict: where the available options are mutually
exclusive. Why the options are mutually exclusive and why, therefore, the conflict arises varies from
decision to decision (Green and Penning-Rowsell. 1999). However, were one option to be so self-
evidently superior to all others, then we would have no real decision to make. It is because that no
one option is agreed to be superior to all others that we have to choose. Thus, the real question is:

how to choose when there is a conflict between the options?

We want to make the right decision where by right we mean choosing and implementing the best
of the available options in terms both of the correct choice being made and the decision being just.
Moreover, the process by which the decision is made must also be right; it has to be seen to be a just
or equitable process. In Agenda 21, public involvement in all levels of decision making was
determined to be a necessary condition for a just decision process, and a recognition of the role of
women as a condition of both the process and outcome being just. A practical condition of the
correct decision being made is that it must be capable of being implemented successfully.

It is generally accepted that pre-conditions for identifying the right option to adopt require:
an appraisal-led process whereby the multiple societal objectives are used to identify that option
which best satisfies those objectives;
a catchment-based approach which takes account of the inter-relations between the proposed
project both geographically across the catchment and between the different functional aspects of
managing the catchment; and
public involvement at all levels of decision making.

Since there remain major problems in techniques to comply with the second two pre-conditions,
discussion of these points is deferred to the next section.

Reasoning is generally seen as the way to determine the right decision to take. Thus, rigorous, logical
argument is used to select the best of the available means by comparing their desirable and
undesirable consequences. Project appraisal techniques such benefit-cost analysis, multi-criteria
analysis and environmental assessment are simply different forms of logical argument by which to
compare the different available options.

Reasoning and project appraisal techniques, particularly benefit-cost analysis (Penning-Rowsell and
Chatterton. 1977; US Water Resources Council. 1983), have been adopted for a number of other
reasons as well. Firstly, the level of complexity involved in many decisions means that two primary
requirements of a project appraisal technique are that it increases understanding of the nature of the
choice that must be made and simplifies that choice to a manageable level. Secondly, the use of
project appraisal techniques increases accountability both by establishing an audit trail and promoting
consistency between decisions. Economic and other forms of analysis are not then primarily about
numbers but about increasing understanding of what the decision involves. We need to understand
what the decision involves before we make it; it is this understanding that is important and not any
numbers that may be generated by the analysis. This requires, as a minimum, that the techniques
themselves be transparent and also that the analysis be published in sufficient detail that it can be
audited by all parties with an interest in the decision.

All of the appraisal techniques are comparative; the consequences of one or more do something
techniques are compared to those of some baseline option. Definition of the appropriate baseline
option is therefore critical and depends on the circumstances (MAFF. 1999). Equally, project


appraisal techniques can only identify the best of the options compared; even the best appraisal of a
range of poor options will not identify a good solution. However, there are no rules which can ensure
that the best option is amongst those compared in a given decision. We have to rely upon the
creativity and experience of engineers to invent new and perhaps better options. But rules have been
proposed to ensure a reasonably wide range of options are considered (MAFF. 1999; US Water
Resources Council. 1983). The most useful of these is to ensure that the decision process is as open
as possible and involves the widest possible consultation. However, where there is an existing flood
alleviation scheme, the option of managed retreat should normally be considered.

Because appraisal techniques are comparative, they involve comparing consequences which may vary
widely in terms of their nature, who is affected and when they occur. Any comparison therefore
involves reducing quite disparate impacts to some common framework of comparison. The way in
which this is done varies between the different techniques of appraisal; in particular, they vary in
terms of what they can encompass and whether the basis for comparison is made explicit or is simply
implicit to the individual analysis. Essentially, the three key dimensions across which consequences
will vary are: what, who and when.

Thus, for example, the question of comparing consequences occurring at different times in the future
is handled in benefit-cost analysis through discounting. The same problem is also faced in Multi-
Criteria Analysis and Environmental Assessments; but there a rather more ad hoc approach is adopted
and assumptions being made are often invisible. One reason for discounting is to determine whether
the capital invested in the project would yield a higher return if invested elsewhere in the economy
and to this question discounting is an appropriate response. However, we may also have preferences
for the distribution of benefits and costs over time and this question is not adequately addressed
through discounting. If we plot the net annual benefits from the project over time (Figure 6.1), then
discounting gives us a weighted measure of the area under the curve, the Net Present Value. There
are an infinite number of such curves which, if a particular discount rate is used, will yield the same
Net Present Value. But if our preferences for the distribution of benefits and costs are determined by
the shape of the curve rather than the area under it, then discounting at best ignores this concern.
Therefore, recent guidance (MAFF. 1999) requires this curve to be plotted; on the basis of this curve,
a reasoned argument may then be put forward for adopting an option which does not have the highest
Net Present Value.



Figure 6.1: The Distribution of Project Net Benefits over Time

A weakness of economic analysis is that it ignores the distribution consequences of projects; the
who dimension. Figure 6.2 shows a local community in which a flood alleviation project is
proposed. If the net benefits of that community and to the nation are considered then there are four
possible outcomes (Table 6.1). The ideal outcome is the win-win option where both the community
and the nation gain on balance. An outcome where both the community and the nation are losers is
obviously undesirable but may occur when other interests have seized control of the decision process.

The first problematic area is that those where the community gains but the nation loses. A local
community may decide to undertake and maintain a flood alleviation strategy; however, the effect of
the strategy adopted may simply be to increase the flood problems downstream. Again, the small
dams being re-introduced as part as a form of sustainable development (Development Alternatives.
1999) are typically multi-functional, with one purpose being to support small-scale community
irrigation. Irrigation schemes necessarily have a negative impact downstream by reducing water
availability. Here, a catchment agency is necessary so that a co-ordinated approach is adopted by the
different communities making up the catchment. In New South Wales, for example, farmers are
restricted to impounding 10% of the runoff as a harvestable right (New South Wales. 1999).

A different problem arises with so-called pork barrel projects: those where national resources are
used to provide a project which yields net benefits to the community but these are not justified in
terms of the national resources expended. The justification, if any, for such projects lies in
redistributional considerations: alleviating poverty.

The final case is where there are national gains but local losses; for example, large numbers of people
have to be resettled to make way for the project. The logic here is to ensure that a sufficient
proportion of the national gains are redistributed to the local community to leave them also better-off
as a result of the project. It will often not be possible to leave them in an exactly equivalent situation
due to, for example, a scarcity of arable land. Where the community has religious or cultural
attachments to the land, no monetary or other form of compensation may be sufficient for the
community to accept this loss.



Figure 6.2: Distributional Impacts of a Project
area where project is to be built
C1
B2
C2
B1
National net benefits = (B1 + B2) - (C1 + C2)
Local net benefits = B1 - C1

Table 6.1: Possible Distributional Outcomes
Local net benefits

National net benefits positive negative
positive win-win situation transfer sufficient of national
gain to local area to make
local net benefits positive
negative find an alternative approach?

In relation to this form of analysis, large dams are typically, but not necessarily, to be found in the
upper right quadrant whilst small scale dams, such as those being promoted by some of development
orientated NGOs (eg Development Alternatives. 1999) are to be found in the upper left quadrant.
However, the critical feature of a dam is not its physical size but the distribution of its benefits and
costs. An explicit assessment needs to be made of the distributional impact of a project and an
appropriate strategy developed in response.

One of the reasons that choices have to be made is because no one option is superior in terms of its
performance against all of the objectives that one or more parties bring to the choice. Choices often
therefore involve conflicts between different parties as well as objectives. Different societies define
differently the overall objective that is to be achieved in societal decision making. The traditional
British model was to determine the public or national interest. This assumed that there is an interest
which is superordinate to individual or group interests and the problem is simply to find out the best
means of reaching that goal. In the USA, the use of the term stakeholder hints that a more
conflictual approach is adopted. In much of Europe, the basis for decision making is often cited as
being communal solidarity and in China, the maintenance of social order is given as a primary
objective. Different societies also bring different approaches to the search for achieving the societal
objective; the approach in the Netherlands has been described as highly consensual whilst in the
USA, with its heavy reliance on the courts, a more adversarial approach appears to be typical.

What is clear is both that there is more to life than economic efficiency and that there may be
important differences in the importance attached to the different objectives by different individuals or


organisations. Over time, a progressively wider range of goals has been argued to be part of decision
making; or, equivalently, attention has been drawn to an increasing range of consequences that ought
to be considered when comparing alternatives. Again, the best strategy for ensuring that all important
objectives, and therefore consequences, are taken into account is to consult widely at the beginning of
the project and to continue to do so throughout the project cycle.

A significant weakness of benefit-cost analysis therefore is that it is limited to consideration of a
single objective, economic efficiency. It is also based upon some strong ideological assumptions
which may limit its relevance to, for example, Islamic societies (Deen. 1990; Nomani and Rahnema.
1994). It quite explicitly excludes consideration of equity issues. The extent to which it can handle
environmental issues is also somewhat problematic in that it is based on a definition of value in terms
of individual wants. The extent to which it can encompass values given for moral reasons, or through
a concern for society, is a matter of some debate, not least amongst economists.

One way then of including environmental issues is as a set of constraints. One such approach is to
adopt the principles of critical natural capital and constant natural assets (Countryside
Commission et al. 1993). In the case of environmental resources deemed to be constant natural
assets, an individual site can be lost provided that an equivalent one is created, preferably in
advance. The policy in the USA for wetlands of no net loss (Heimlich. 1991), coupled to wetland
banking (Heimlich et al. 1999), exemplifies this approach. Where an environmental resource is
considered to be part of critical natural capital, no loss or damage can be accepted except in the
most extreme circumstances. Thus, European Habitats Directive will allow damage to sites
designated under it only when there are both no alternatives and overwhelming social and economic
reasons. However, neither approach offers a way of dealing with conflicts between environmental
resources when, for example, if action is not taken, one environmental resource will be lost or
damaged, but if action is taken, another environmental resource will be lost or damaged.

An alternative project appraisal technique, Multi-Criteria Analysis (Nijkamp et al. 1990), sets out to
allow comparison of the options across as wide a range of objectives as interested parties bring to the
choice. It is a good way of exploring and discussing preferences but a poor way of reaching any
conclusions because too many important parameters are left implicit. Consequently, it generally
suffers from a lack of rigour, typically involving mathematical operations that are not justified by the
level of measurement achieved (Bisset. 1978).

These weaknesses do not reduce its utility as a means of exploring the trade-offs that a choice
involves. Various graphical and statistical techniques can be used to explore the implications of
making different choices. Figure 6.3 illustrates a hypothetical case where several options are being
compared against a number of objectives. Here it is possible to narrow down the options to two:
options B, C and D all perform better against all the objectives than does option A;so, option A can
be eliminated; option C also performs better than option B against all the objectives and so the choice
is between options C and D. Weighting the two options scores against the importance weights given
to each objective implies that option C should be chosen; however, this option does not perform very
well against the most important objective (number 5). Conversely, option C is at least as good as
option D against all except the most important objective. A choice must therefore be made as to
which pattern is preferable; such decisions should never be made by simply looking at the weighted
mean scores of the different options.



Figure 6.3: Multi-Criteria Analysis: the Analysis of Alternative Options
OVERALL OPTIONS SCORES
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
1 2 3 4 5
OBJECTIVE
A
B
C
D

Thus, the different project appraisal techniques have different strengths and weaknesses, no one
technique being superior to all of the criteria that might be applied (Penning-Rowsell et al. 1992).
Therefore a mixture of techniques will often be appropriate.

The appraisal-led approach means that the appraisal process must be matched to the stage in the
development of the design, from simple assessments made at the pre-feasibility stage through to
detailed assessments to confirm the selection of the option finally adopted. It also requires matching
the appraisal to the problem, which may range from developing a flood management plan for an
entire catchment down to a project to manage floods within one small area. For example, an
assessment was made in the Netherlands (Peerbolte. 1994) of the best programme for upgrading
coastal dikes in response to sea level rise. One of the questions at the pre-feasibility stage is whether
it is worth collecting the detailed data necessary before a detailed design can be developed, or
whether the project should be abandoned now. Across catchments it may also be necessary to
determine what areas should be given priority for more detailed study. Thus, a simple points system
was developed for use by the Government of Ireland in prioritising 76 river catchments for more
detailed study.

In such studies, a triage model can be adopted which identifies those areas where detailed studies are
definitely justified; those where they are definitely not; and those which need further consideration
before a decision can be made. For instance, the Government of Hungary recently sought to prioritise
151 flood basins for maintenance and rehabilitation (Halcrow et al. 1999). In doing so, a number of
different criteria were to be considered important including the risk to life from dike breaching, the
economic losses from flooding, environmental or heritage areas at risk of floooding, and critical
strategic economic or transport links. The triage approach adopted is illustrated in Figure 6.4. The
individual basins ratings or other scores on each of the criteria were converted to rank order scores.
The mean rank of each basin and the standard deviation of its rank were then plotted against each
other. If the mean rank and rank standard deviation of each basin were both low then all the criteria
agreed that that basin should be given a high priority. Conversely, if the mean rank was high and the
rank standard deviation was low, then all of the criteria agreed that the flood basin should be given a
low priority. Finally, if the rank standard deviation is high, and necessarily the mean rank is then
towards the average rank, then the different criteria yield different conclusions and a more considered
assessment is necessary to determine what priority should be accorded to those basins.



Figure 6.4: Project Prioritisation by Multi-Criteria Analysis
mean rank and agreement between criteria
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
0 2 4 6 8
mean rank
s
t
d

d
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

r
a
n
k
std dev of rank

What this example also illustrates is that assessment can be defined as a process of converting data
into information where the formal definition of information is that which removes decision
uncertainty (Cherry. 1966); uncertainty as to what option to adopt. When considered in these terms,
the benefit-cost ratio is a measure of our uncertainty as to whether the particular do something is
preferable to the baseline option. Instead of a benefit-cost ratio of one being a hurdle which if
exceeded by a do something option demonstrates that that option should be adopted, it is the point of
maximum uncertainty as to whether the do something option is preferable to the baseline option.
Rather, if the benefit-cost ratio is 0.3 then we can be very confident that the baseline option is
preferable to the do something option and if it is 5 then we can be very confident that the do
something option is preferable to the baseline option (figure 6.5). Finally, if the benefit-cost ratio is
greater than about 12, then this is usually a sign that a fundamental error has been made in the
analysis.

definite
priority
basins
definite low priority
basins


Figure 6.5: Confidence in the Economic Viability of a Project as a Function of the Benefit-Cost
Ratio
benefit-
ratio
15
1
5
0.3
confidence
that
cost ratio is
greater
1
forget marginal do

A second form of uncertainty to be managed (bearing in mind that the formal definition of
information (Cherry. 1966) is that which destroys uncertainty), is between the different available do
something options. Here, an approach which can be useful is to identify the differences in the
parameters to which the individual do something options are most sensitive (Figure 6.6). Whilst the
nature of the uncertainties affecting each parameter may be systemic, such a display may aid in
determining which parameters are of greatest concern and hence upon which it is least satisfactory to
rely upon in choosing the option.

Figure 6.6: Differentiation Sensitivity of Alternative do something Options to Key Parameters
Options
A B C D E
return period of threshold
event

capital costs
maintenance costs
effective scheme life
rate of increase in runoff



Bangladesh The Evolution of Planning For Flood Control

Bangladesh (area 144 000 km
2
) experiences flooding every year on up to two-thirds of its territory.
During the monsoon months (Jun-Sep), when 80% of annual rainfall occurs, the Ganges, Brahmaputra,
and Meghna Rivers bring about 1x10
12
m
3
of water plus 500 Mt to 1500 Mt of sediment into
Bangladesh from the upstream catchment area (area 1.74 million km
2
). Rainfall within Bangladesh
accounts for a further 0.12x10
12
m
3
.

Normal annual flooding provides numerous benefits - common access to the large natural floodplain
fishery, deposition of fertile loam on agricultural fields, and flushing of stagnant water in low-lying
areas. But when the major river flood peaks coincide, unusually high floods can occur, causing
catastrophic losses. Adverse tidal conditions and heavy local rainfall, if also present, aggravate the
situation. Floods are then slow to recede due to the low average gradient (about 5 cm km
-1
), and
drainage system conveyance limitations caused by sediment deposition. In addition to and distinct
from the major river floods, flash floods affect smaller areas of the country that are located on hill
streams and in piedmont areas.

Population has increased from about 70 million in the early 1970s to about 130 million in 2000, with
172 million forecast for 2025, even though population growth has been significantly reduced in recent
years. Over 80% of the population live in rural areas, and over half still depend on agriculture for
livelihood. Increasing population density and agriculture dependence compels people to inhabit flood-
vulnerable areas, intensifying flood impacts and placing severe constraints on flood control options.

To cope with these challenges, over the past several decades water resources planning has evolved in
three phases: national water planning, the Flood Action Plan (FAP), and post-FAP.

In 1964, a national (at that time provincial) water planning approach was initiated with the 20-year
Water and Power Master Plan. Though this Plan did led the way to protecting most of the coastal zone
from tidally-induced flooding, overall it was too ambitious, overestimating public sector capabilities
and overemphasising large-scale surface water interventions. It largely overlooked the countrys
ground water resource, later the key to rapid irrigation expansion.

In 1986, Phase I of the National Water Management Plan (NWP) was completed. This was primarily a
food grain self-sufficiency sector strategy, lacking implementation details. This time around, planners
emphasised ground water development for irrigation, mindful of the weak performance of existing
flood control drainage infrastructure. The Government, concerned about possible over-estimation of
ground water, did not accept this plan. In 1991, NWP Phase II was completed, including a detailed
investment program. It was overtaken by events when severe flooding in 1988 led to the formulation
of the Flood Action Plan.

After the 1988 floods, a debate on how to address the flooding problem began to develop through
various preliminary studies. These proposed interventions ranged from an almost purely structural
once-for-all massive engineering solution, to a mainly non-structural living with the floods
approach. The debate was subsequently short-circuited by a set of eleven principles prepared to guide
future studies; directives from senior levels of Government to proceed despite the unresolved issues;
and also, in part, international commercial interests that favoured structural interventions. The
compromise five-year plan that emerged from this debate was called the Flood Action Plan (FAP).


FAP consisted of regional planning studies, project preparation studies, and pilot projects. FAP was
strongly opposed by local and international NGOs, organised around a coalition of environmental
NGOs that initially raised awareness through public meetings outside Bangladesh. The opposition to
FAP challenged a number of basic assumptions related to structural flood control, among these were:
that flood control was desirable; that the major rivers could be embanked sustainably despite large
sediment loads and alluvial soils; that structural measures were affordable; and that planners could
work in isolation from the people for whom the interventions were intended.

The FAP process gradually produced a consensus on several issues, among them support for a softer
controlled flooding concept in place of the more hard-edged idea of flood control; the need for
greatly enhanced people's participation; and an emphasis on improving drainage through dredging
planned at the river system level. In the end, the FAP did not recommend large-scale works; rather,
it initiated guidelines on peoples participation and environmental assessment.

It is clear now that FAP resulted in a new planning approach. It is now widely accepted that planning
must be participatory and that consultation at all levels is essential to correctly identify development
needs and interventions. Furthermore, greater emphasis on participation has led to the recognition
that as peoples lives are not compartmentalized by sectors, so too must planning be multi-objective
and multi-sectoral.

Other outcomes of FAP included much greater emphasis in the planning process on environmental
and institutional aspects, flood mitigation as an integral part of flood management, acceptance that
flood control should be addressed in a regional context, and that cooperation among riparian
countries is essential.

Herb Wiebe



7. Barriers to Sustainable Flood Management

We can either look forward or look backward. In the developed world, the past is largely a history of
failure in water management and much of the current investment in those countries is devoted to
seeking to recover from the damage done to rivers and catchments over the last 100 years. Looking
backward is only useful to the degree that we learn lessons for the future. The most useful of those
lessons of the past are often about attitudes rather than about the technologies adopted.

Past approaches were characterised by:
heroic solutions a belief that the problem could be fixed, an assumption of greater
understanding as to the nature of the problem than existed, and an optimism about what the
adopted solution could achieve;
beingtechnologically driven the latest innovation was always taken to be the best and
alternatives were frequently ignored;
simple objectives - the objectives considered were narrow;
static analysis a static view of the problem and of rivers was adopted;
a belief that resources were effectively infinite as opposed to being scarce and requiring to be
conserved for the most important purposes; and
representing the interests of those with power decisions were taken by narrow elites which
included politicians, experts and those with money.

These are weaknesses that we can seek to avoid but the limitations of current knowledge will always
be a problem.

A sustainable flood management strategy is one that:
is appropriate to local conditions, including its place within the catchment;
has been arrived at through public involvement;
is based upon adaptive management (Walters. 1997); and
one that can be maintained.

There are, however, a number of major obstacles to be overcome before sustainable flood
management can become a reality. These include:

institutional limitations;
professional roles;
the pressures to export solutions from one country to another, and equally, the desire to import
the most modern solution;
the difficulties of maintaining both physical and equally institutional options;
weaknesses in research;
the difficulties of enabling effective public involvement early enough in the decision process for
this to be effective;
corruption; and
the problems of legitimising the involvement of different voices.


7.1 Institutional Barriers

In order that they be accountable, all institutions must have rules since we require that institutions
perform predictably and consistently their designated role. For the same reason, all institutions must
have both geographical and functional boundaries: these define what they can do and within what
area. Thus boundaries are inevitable but at the same time they are the line along which major
problems occur.

If the area and functional responsibilities of an institution are enlarged then the result is simply to
convert the boundary problem into an internal problem, the institution having to determine how to
split itself up into areal and/or functional responsibilities. In consequence, it is necessary to determine
where to draw both geographical and functional boundaries.

Equally, different institutions will have different appropriate geographical boundaries and these are
commonly the result of historical, cultural, ethnic and other factors. It will rarely be possible to
redraw all administrative boundaries to reflect catchment boundaries. Therefore, the problem is
usually how to obtain co-operation across functional and geographical boundaries.

Figure 7.1 illustrates the different ways in which institutional boundaries have been drawn for
managing dike systems:
across-river;
down-river;
constructor - operator;
bank/dike; and
foundations/dike.

The administrative and community boundaries are frequently developed down the centres of rivers; if
there is to be local involvement and community funding, then the same boundaries will generally
have to be followed. However, the mid-river boundary is one of the most obvious contradictions to
holistic catchment management and there must be some way of ensuring co-ordination across such a
boundary. Similarly, administrative and community boundaries are unlikely to correspond, for
example, to natural hard points at the ends of a dike.

Other types of boundary are introduced by funding practices; quite often in water management, there
is a difference between the institution made responsible for constructing the project and the
organisation who will be responsible for operating and maintaining it. Such a split is particularly
likely when a higher governmental level is providing the capital funding, but not Operations and
Maintenance costs (O & M), or where there is considered to be a lack of adequate expertise at local
level to successfully execute capital works. Designers may therefore pay little attention to whether
the system can be maintained, how it should be maintained, and whether it will be possible to
generate the funds necessary to provide the level of maintenance the project requires. A maintenance
schedule spelling out the actions, their frequency and expected cost should be as much a part of a
project design as the bill of quantities.

In some countries, splits of responsibility between either or both construction and maintenance of
bank protection and the dike have been introduced. In other cases, different institutions have been
allocated responsibility for above water/ground works and those below water/ground. Private
contracting of works also introduces another form of split, one which is formally controlled through
the contract document.



For rivers, such as the Mekong, that form an international boundary, the problem is even more
complicated because the international boundary may lie mid-river or along the Thalweg, and neither
are stationary.

Because there are no ideal boundaries between institutions and their responsibilities, it is essential to
devise ways of bridging the necessary boundaries. Two possible approaches are:
to establish a new super-ordinate institution, such as a catchment management agency; or
to establish a new co-operative institution largely or wholly owned by the existing institutions.

The latter approach is generally more likely to be effective since lower-order institutions frequently
spend a great deal of their time subverting the decisions of a super-ordinate institution and the super-
ordinate institution tends to become a scientific bureaucracy inventing paper plans unrelated to
conditions on the ground.

One of the key rule structures governing institutions is how they may raise and spend money; this rule
is typically set out in the legislation establishing an institution. One consequence of holistic
catchment management is that multi-functional projects will be increasingly common. However,
budgets are frequently single-functional and funding a multi-functional project will frequently require
putting together a coalition of institutions whilst at the same time getting them to agree how the costs
are to be shared. Multi-functional projects require multi-functional funding but increasing the
flexibility an institution has in spending money increases the risk that it will mis-use its budget. The
remedy is to switch away from rules to greater oversight by the legislatures.

Communication across boundaries is generally problematic; the failure of flood warning in the 1997
Red River Flood along the North Dakota/Minnesota border is an example of such breakdowns across
institutional boundaries (Pielke. 1999). Nor was this failure atypical and flood warning systems are
particularly prone to failures in communication across institutional boundaries. However, co-
operation and communication between institutions are necessary if integrated water and land plans,
such as the Dutch Stork plan (de Bruin et al. 1987), are to achieved.


Figure 7.1: The Different Ways in which Institutional Boundaries have been Drawn with
Respect to Dikes
foundations and
underwater works
versus dike structure
bank protection
versus dike
protection
administrative
boundaries are typically
down the centre of the
river
end of dike
section
constructor-
owner

An apparent contradiction at the heart of the criteria for sustainable development, set out in both the
Dublin Declaration (ACC/ISGWR. 1992) and the Rio Principles, is that between holistic, or
integrated catchment management, and public involvement in all levels of decision making.
Integration tends to pull towards multi-functional organisations which cover the entire catchment;
public involvement towards geographically small, community based involvement. This should be
resolved by catchment agencies which are downwardly accountable and which act to promote
agreement between these smaller and more specialised groups as to the overall strategy to be adopted.

A reason for creating institutions and establishing rules is to increase accountability through
routinising decisions: if the rules are accepted and correctly applied, so it follows that the decision is
appropriate. The staff of the institution know where they stand: doing the same thing that has been
done for the last ten years then becomes the safe solution in terms of accountability. The drawback
with routines and rules is then that the same solutions can become applied to all decisions and the
institutions do not adapt to changing conditions, knowledge and concerns. Requiring accountability
thus has the perverse result of stifling innovation and institutional adaptation: rules are necessary for
accountability, and the tighter the rules, the more easy it is for the institution to reply to any criticism
that it followed the rules. Where the rules are open to interpretation, it is easier for the institution to
be criticised after the fact and the usual consequence is then a demand for the rules to be tightened to
reduce the scope for interpreting the rules.

Therefore, accountability by open review rather than over-restrictive rules is preferable and
institutions need to incorporate advisory groups who will bring in diverse perspectives. Both
institutions themselves and society also need to learn that it is acceptable for an institution to say
either that they made a mistake or that they dont know the answer. Decision making is not risk-free;
some mistakes will inevitably be found in hindsight. If an institution focuses entirely on avoiding
making mistakes, it will never innovate.

7.2 Professional Roles



People train in the professions because they want to perform what they believe to be the role of that
profession. In particular, engineers become engineers to build things.

Equally, society has expectations, often quite defined ones, as to the role of particular professions.
These expectations extend on both sides to what the professions do. We would be surprised, for
instance, if an ecologist were to propose a massive dam building programme on the grounds of
employment generation but less so if the same programme were to be proposed for this reason by an
engineer or an economist. Thus, when an organisation appoints a particular specialist to deal with a
problem, the organisation has already prescribed the type of solution that is expected. Thus, when a
problem is handed to an engineer there is at least an implicit expectation that the appropriate response
is to construct some thing rather than, say, to pass a new law or introduce a new tax. However,
engineers are probably amongst the most multi-skilled professionals and they are increasingly
proposing strategies which do not involve building things. This is a development that must be
promoted with engineering training being increasingly orientated to a wider problem-solving
approach into which they draw the expertise of other specialists. Before that expertise can be drawn
in, the need for that expertise must first be recognised and engendering such a pluralistic approach is
part of the necessary training of engineers.

This is rather different from the usual call for multi- and inter-disciplinary working, although that will
result from this approach. Unlike those in many of the disciplines that will be drawn into such an
approach, engineers have the advantage of a problem-orientated approach: we will still want them to
do some thing, but not necessarily to build some thing. The weakness of those in the sciences tends
to be that they want to study some thing and are frequently more parochial in conceptual outlook than
engineers.

Engineers, particularly water engineers, have also developed an ethos of public service. This is
expressed in the form of an approach of determining what the public needs and then building it.
Whilst in this way they put their expertise towards the public good, they also believe that they know
best, because of their expertise, what should be done to promote the public good. This approach
clashes directly with one of involving the public because, for public involvement to be meaningful, it
involves finding out what the public wants. This may be quite different from what the engineer
thinks it needs. Engineering training needs therefore to be orientated towards training engineers to
listen to, learn from and engage in a dialogue with the public so as to assist it in achieving its goals.

7.3 Exporting/Importing Failure

Logically, countries like Bangladesh, China, India and Japan should become the global centres of
expertise in flood management simply because they have bigger problems than anyone else. To
achieve this, they need to learn from the mistakes made by the countries of Europe and North
America rather than to replicate them. The aim should be skip an entire generation of mistakes. This
means that study tours to the developed countries should be concerned at least as much with learning
what mistakes have been made there and what lessons can be learnt, as with identifying examples of
good practice.

However, when giving development aid, governments have tended not only to export the current
flood management practices of that country, irrespective of their relevance to the recipient, but also to
put the interests of national companies ahead of the recipients.

7.4 Financing



The debate as to who should pay for flood alleviation is a somewhat confusing mixture of
ideological, practical and efficiency concerns. The user pays principle is as much a moral claim as
anything else and can conflict with concerns both with equity and economic efficiency. There are a
number of reasons why reliance wholly upon the user pays principle to fund flood alleviation can
conflict with both the latter objectives:
Firstly, flooding is to a greater or lesser extent an externality of land use. In principle, therefore,
any changes in land use which increases the flood risk elsewhere should attract a charge. In some
urban areas, such charges are applied, but it is less easy to charge those who cause an increased
risk of flooding through emissions of greenhouse gases.
Secondly, flood alleviation is technically a public good and so economic efficiency is not served
by pricing some possible users out of the area.
Thirdly, occupancy of the floodplain is only one of the possible externalities of development; the
theory of second best (Lipsey and Lancaster. 1956-57) warns that seeking to correct one form of
market failure where there are many failures can make things worse.
Fourthly, where occupancy of the floodplain has been supported by a planning decision that this
is the best place for intensified development to take place, it makes little sense to then encourage
it to take place elsewhere through differential pricing.
Fifthly, in many countries there is a doctrine of communal solidarity and a belief that a
government has a duty of care to the citizens of that country. Thus, following the recent
earthquake in Taiwan, President Lee Teng-hui said: To take care of the people is the
responsibility of the government, so we will adopt an aggressive attitude and try our best to
respond to this situation (President Lee Teng-hui of Taiwan. Guardian 22/9/99 p15).
Finally, there are equity concerns since sole reliance on the principle would result in the rich
undertaking flood alleviation measures and the poor remaining exposed to flooding.

Therefore in practice what has happened in the past, and largely continues, is that capital costs are at
least partly funded by the central government, the extent of this funding depending on the relative
wealth of the area where the alleviation project is to be undertaken.

There is little successful history of the use of private capital in promoting flood alleviation works.
One obvious problem is that these works have to be funded through what is essentially a tax and
taxation decisions are reserved as the responsibility of some accountable governmental body rather
than of a profit-maximising private company. In the UK, two projects are being constructed and
maintained through private funding. This procedure, the Private Finance Initiative, is essentially an
equivalent of the French concession approach in water supply and sewerage (Rees. 1998). The
Environment Agency will pay an annual sum rather than the works being funded through a specific
local tax on the beneficiaries.

7.5 Maintenance

There are at least three different reasons why projects fail as a result of a lack of maintenance:
Inadequate consideration during the project design of the ability of the managing institution to
raise sufficient income to cover O & M costs;
Inappropriate institutional design; and
Inappropriate requirements in the way of required skills, equipment and materials.

More water-related projects appear to fail from a lack of or insufficient maintenance than for any
other reason. This is equally true of the failures of institutional structures as it is of physical
structures. Emergency plans, for example, need to be rehearsed and the networks of organisations
which will execute them need to be maintained. It can further be argued the cause of insufficient
maintenance of physical structures is a consequence of a failed institutional system.



Too often there is a divorce between the designers of a project and those who then have to maintain
it, the designers failing to consider the O & M requirements of the project and whether they can be
sustained. Operational and Maintenance costs are generally the responsibility of the local
government in the area. The weakness of this approach is that local government may not then
adequately fund O & M activities so that a renovation scheme must be undertaken prematurely, again
largely at the cost of central government. One way of securing funding is designated local taxes on
local communities to pay the costs of O & M, the charges levied by the Waterschappen in the
Netherlands and similar charges in China being examples. Conversely, in most countries, the
Ministry of Finance will have a rooted objection to such an hypothecation of what is essentially tax
revenue. In both those countries, local residents also have a duty to turn out for emergency flood
fighting and/or to provide unpaid labour for maintenance activities. The potential advantage of this
split is that it provides local ownership of the project; where this does not occur, as in some parts of
Bangladesh, local residents may breach dikes because they blame the dikes for causing local flooding
and regard the dikes as being imposed upon them by an alien government.

Institution maintenance is an area for which only limited guidelines have yet emerged (Ostrom.
1990). Reviews of experience in rural water supply where there has been much more experience are
not very encouraging (Black. 1998).

Systems whose O & M requirements are capital-intensive, skill-intensive and rely on imported parts
are inappropriate in countries where capital and skilled labour are scarce, overseas debts restrict
imports, and rates of pay are low in public organisations so that they have a problem retaining trained
staff. The high discount rates typically used in developing countries tend to result in the selection of
low first cost and high O & M costs options over those which require lower O & M costs at the
expense of higher capital costs. However, the critical scarcities are typically in terms of equipment
and skills.

A hypothesis, and it can be no more, is that the adoption in the past of structural engineering
solutions and dams in particular has been a reflection of doubts, justified or not, as to whether
institutional approaches could be maintained.

7.6 Research

In the longer run, better decisions will only emerge from better research. However, in the short run,
there are a number of common problems. Firstly, scientists want to study things whereas decision-
makers have to do some thing. Thus, frequently when the decision-maker asks a scientist what
should be done, the response is that more research should be funded first. Secondly, universities
continue to be centred around disciplines whereas problems obey no such rules. The result is that the
decision-maker has to diagnose the problem to determine what the appropriate discipline is to call
upon. Thirdly, this discipline orientation can result in an inward orientation wherein only the
advancement of the discipline through the acclaim of peers is considered to be the appropriate role of
an academic. This militates both against multi- or inter-disciplinary working, against applied
research, and also the dissemination of research findings to decision-makers. Thus, academics may
feel that it is up to the end-user to find out what the latest research is that bears on the decision. Both
money and prestige have proved quite effective ways of convincing academics of the desirability of a
greater orientation towards the problems of society and the active dissemination of research results to
those who need them.

7.7 Corruption

Corruption continues to be a major problem and one that often influences the choice of strategy
adopted since that strategy tends to dictate both how much money can be creamed off and by whom.


Big engineering works arguably offer most scope for corruption by national or provincial politicians,
and in some countries this has provided a means of campaign financing. Institutional approaches
then have the disadvantage that the scope for corruption is at the local level rather than the national
level.

7.8 Public Involvement

Public involvement is still in its infancy in most parts of the world; the Environment Agency in
England and Wales still, for example, talks in terms of scheme promotion, in effect, of selling its
preferred solution to other bodies. A number of handbooks have been prepared on how to increase
public involvement (Creighton et al. nd; World Bank. 1996). The Landcare movement in Australia
may perhaps be the most successful effort of long-term public involvement to date.

The two key areas remain institutional and informational. If the institutions taking the decisions
remain as scientific bureaucracies, then public involvement is likely to be limited to consultation at
best. Instead, institutions should be accountable downwards rather than upwards; a better model for a
catchment management agency being one where the Board is made up of representatives of those who
live on or use the river rather than one which is responsible to central government and appointed by
it. Whilst it is not clear that we yet know how to achieve real and effective public involvement, the
answer seems to lie in institutional structures and devolving decision power rather than simply
improving communications.

A second problem is that public involvement can only be effective where the public has access to
adequate information. A freedom of information act is not sufficient for this to occur since this will
liberate a large quantity of data and data only becomes information when it is structured. The
requirement is to allow the public to be able to structure what are often large quantities of data in its
own way, since any way of structuring data imposes its own view of the world and its own
framework of discourse. Computing developments may offer a way whereby the different publics
can explore data, and impose their own structure upon it.

A danger exists that the process of public involvement will be captured by specific social groups,
particularly by the richer and more socially empowered members of society. In particular, in most
countries, women are to a greater or lesser extent excluded from such involvement. Future
generations are necessarily excluded from such involvement; so too are those who do not live in the
area at present but might do so under particular conditions, and gain by so doing. At different times,
concerns have been expressed that both Environmental Assessment and public participation can be
used by parts of the local population to maintain the status quo and to exclude others. Where the
public involved is an indigenous group, this may be morally acceptable; where it is the relatively rich
who use the system to exclude the poor, it is less so.

A further perceived problem with increased public involvement is that it is feared that the whole
decision process will slow down if not actually grind to a halt in an interminable process of
consultation.

7.9 Legitimising voices

Involvement in decision making is also power; inclusion of an additional voice in the decision
process will almost certainly be seen by one or more of the existing decision makers as resulting in a
diminution of their power. In consequence, it will be resisted.


Secondly, all those seeking entry to the decision process have to answer for their legitimacy: by what
right are they entitled for their voice to be heard in a decision? At a minimum, they must be able to
demonstrate that they are concerned with the sustainable livelihood of those who will be affected by
the decision to be made.



8. Conclusions and Recommendations

Dams, or rather the storage that can be provided, can reduce flood losses and have an identifiable role
to play in some circumstances.

More generally, it is no use being against one option unless there is a better feasible option. Equally,
decisions are difficult precisely because there is no course of action that is better in all senses than all
other options. It is the nature of decisions that making a decision involves trade-offs between
important objectives or values. In the countries of 19
th
century settlement, the low population
densities, high availability of arable land and low intensity of economic activity usually mean that the
trade-offs are less intense and there are more options available than in the rest of the world. Flood
management in North America and Australasia should consequently be much easier than in the rest of
the world. Generally, however, there are painful trade-offs involved in choosing between flood
management options.

The overall objective must be sustainable development. The widely-quoted Brundtland definition of
sustainable development recognises our duties to future generations; however, Brundtland went on to
assert that sustainable development requires reductions in the present inequalities of wealth between
peoples. Both are necessary conditions for sustainable development. The Dublin meeting and the
Rio conference set out the guiding principles for making decisions so as to achieve sustainable
development as being:

Maximising public involvement at all levels of decision making; and
Adopting a catchment management approach.

When such approaches are implemented then outsiders must accept the decisions that result from the
approach even when they disagree with the decision itself.

Because decisions are complex, the use of decision aids and tools such as benefit-cost analysis and
multi-criteria analysis have an important role to play in clarifying the nature of the choice that must
be made and understanding the critical trade-offs involved. But they are useful only to the extent to
which they promote understanding and enable that understanding to be shared. They are not ways of
replacing deliberative decision making through public involvement; they are simply means of
informing that process.

What then emerges as the best option or the best combination of options for flood management then
will depend upon local conditions. There are no universal solutions, only generalisable principles.

However, in terms of the available flood management options, we appear to be much less capable of
developing sustainable institutions and thus of implementing institutional approaches to flood hazard
management than of implementing engineering works. That 30% of hand pumps in India are
estimated to be out of commission is largely down to the failure to devise or implement appropriate
institutional forms. The conditions under which land use and building controls on floodplain use can
be effective are still to be established but they are unlikely to effective in those areas where they are
most needed: in areas of rapid urbanisation, particularly where much of that development is via
informal settlements. Similarly, flood warnings work best where floods are frequent and where
arguably flood warnings are least needed. Flood warning systems are most likely to fail when
conditions are unusual; for instance, in those extreme floods where they are most needed.

In the long term, restoration of rivers and their associated wetlands to a more natural form is a widely
held objective. In the short term, the developed countries can expect to make more progress towards
this goal than those countries where population densities are high, there is a shortage of arable land


and levels of poverty are unacceptable. Much flood management may then have to be seen as a
holding strategy until the country concerned achieves a level of development that is comparable to
those in countries that are currently considered to be developed.

Climate change will make appropriate water management more difficult in all countries and climate
change is probably the largest threat to biodiversity. If we do not cut greenhouse gas emissions then
in 50 years there will be no biodiversity left to be impacted by flood hazard management and, in some
cases, no country either. We are at present, for example, seeking to restore trout streams whilst there
is a significant probability that in 50 years time, flow and temperature conditions in those streams
will render them incapable of supporting trout. Decisions about the most appropriate flood
management strategy to adopt must consequently both take account of the effects of climate change
and the contribution of the flood management strategy to slowing climate change and then stabilising
the climate.

The specific recommendations were summarised in the Executive Summary.



References

ABI/CGU Insurance, 1999. Flood Appraisal Groups, NPPG 7, - and Insurance, 2nd Edition, Perth:
Association of British Insurers/CGU Insurance.
Abt, S.R., Wittler, R.J., Taylor, A. and Love, D.J. 1989. Human stability in a high flood zone,
Water Resources Bulletin 25(4): 881-890.
ACC/ISGWR 1992. The Dublin Statement and the Report of the Conference, Geneva: World
Meteorological Organization.
Acreman, M. C. 1996. Environmental Effects of Hydro-Electric Power Generation in Africa and the
Potential for Artificial Floods, J.CIWEM 10, December: 429-435.
Acreman, M. C. and Hollis, G. E. (eds.) 1996. Water Management and Wetlands in Sub-Saharan
Africa, Gland: IUCN.
Acreman, M., Barbier, E., Birley, M. et al. 1999. Managed flood releases from reservoirs - a review
of current problems and future prospects, Project R7344, report to DFID, Wallingford: Institute of
Hydrology.
Adams, W. M. 1992. Wasting the Rain: Rivers, People and Planning in Africa, London: Earthscan.
Alexander, D. 1993. Natural Disasters, London: UCL Press Limited.
Allee, D. J., Osgood, B. T., Antle, L. G., Simpkins, C. E., Motz, A. B., Van der Slice, A. and
Westbrook, W. F. 1980. Human Costs of Flooding and Implementability of Non-Structural
Damage Reduction in the Tug Fork Valley of West U.S., Fort Belvoir, VA.: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Institute for Water Resources.
Anderson, M., and Bechhofer, F., and Gershuny, J. (eds.) 1994. The Political Economy of the
Household, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Anon, 1993. Montpellier met a leau sa future universitein 50 Millions de Consommateurs No 265,
October: 22-26.
Appelbaum, S. J. 1985. Determination of Urban Flood Damages in Journal of the ASCE, Water
Resources Division 111. (3): 269-282.
Arnell, N. W., Jenkins, A., and George, D. O. 1994. The Implications of Climate Change for the
National Rivers Authority, R & D Report 12, London: HMSO.
ARSIA/GEOPLAN/CEHIDRO/WASSER WIRTSCHAFT. 1999. PREMO 98 Prevention in the
mountains for protection of the valleys Pisa: ARSIA.
Balades, J.D. Chateau, P. and Madiec, H. 1992. A Means of Fighting Urban Storm Water Overflow:
Compensating Techniques, the Experience in Bordeaux (France), paper presented at the
CONFLO 92: Integrated Catchment Planning and Source Control, Oxford University, Oxford UK,
1 June 1992.
Balfour Maunsell. 1995. River Nene Structures - benefit assessment, report to Anglian Region,
National Rivers Authority.
Barraque, B., Berland, J-M. and Cambon, S. 1994. EUROWATER: Vertical report on France, Paris:
LATTS-ENPC.
Barry, J.M. 1997. Rising Tide, NewYork, N.Y: Simon and Schuster.
Baum, A., Gatchel, R.J. and Schaefer, M.A. 1983. Emotional , Behavioral and Physiological Effects
of Chronic Stress at Buffalo Creek in Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 61(4): 565-
572.
Bellamy, L.J. and Harrison, P.I. 1988. An evacuation model for major accidents, paper presented at
the Conference , Disasters and Emergencies: the Need for Planning, London.
Bennet, G. 1979. Bristol floods 1968: controlled survey of effects on health of local community
disaster in British Medical Journal, August 21: 454-458.
Berga, L. (ed.) 2000. Dams and Floods, Paris: ICOLD.
Berga, L. 1999. Benefits of Dams in Flood Control, paper given at the Workshop on Benefits of
and Concerns about Dams, Anatalya.
Bergkamp, G., Dugan, P. and McNeely, J. (eds.) 2000. Dams, ecosystems functions and
environmental restoration, Cape Town: World Commission on Dams (http://www.dams.org).


Bergstrom, S. and Lindstrom, G. 1999. Floods in Regulated Rivers and Physical Planning in
Sweden, paper given at the Workshop on Benefits of and Concerns about Dams, Anatalya.
Binder, W. R. D., Bunza, G., Engelhardt, W., Jurging, P., Schulter, U. and Wagner, D. I. I. 1994.
Schutz der Binnergewasser, Bonn: Economica Verlag.
Bisset, R. 1978. Quantification, decision-making and environmental impact assessment in the United
Kingdom in Journal of Environmental Management 7: 43-58
Black, M. 1998. 1978-1998 Learning What Works: A 20 Year Retrospective View on the
International Water and Sanitation Cooperation, Washington DC: UNDP-World Bank Water and
Sanitation Program.
Black, A. and Evans, S. 1999. Flood damage in the UK: new insights for the insurance industry,
Dundee: University of Dundee.
Black, R. D. 1975. Flood proofing rural residences, report to the US Department of Commerce,
Economic Development Administration.
Blackie, J.R. and Newsom, M.D. 1986. The effect of forestry on the quantity and quality of runoff in
upland Britain in de L.G.Solbe, J.F. (ed) Effects of land use on Freshwaters. Chichester: Ellis
Horwood. 389-412.
Blaikie, P., Canon, T. Davis, I., Wisner, B. 1994. At Risk: Natural Hazards, Peoples Vulnerability,
and Disasters. London: Routledge.
Blockley, D. 1980. The Nature of Structural Design and Safety, Chichester: Ellis Horwood.
Bosch , J.M. and Hewlett, J.D. 1992. A Review of Catchment Experiments to Determine the Effect
Of Vegetation Changes on Water Yield and Evapotranspiration in Journal of Hydrology 55: 3-23.
Brammer, H. 1990. Floods in Bangladesh 2, flood mitigation and environmental aspects in
Geographical Journal 156: 158-165
Brammer, H. 2000. Flood Vulnerability and Flood Disasters in Bangladesh, in Parker, D. (ed)
Floods London: Routledge.
Brookes, A. 1988. Channelised Rivers: Perspectives for Environmental Management, Chichester:
John Wiley.
Brookes A 1990. Restoration and enhancement of engineered river channels: some European
experiences in Regulated Rivers 5: 45-56
Brookes, A. and Shields, S. F. 1996. River Channel Restoration: Guiding Principles for Sustainable
Projects, Chichester: John Wiley.
Bruijnzeel, L.A. and Bremmer, C.N. 1989. Highland-lowland interactions in the Ganges
Brahmaputra River Basin: a review of published literature, ICIMOD Occasional Paper No 11,
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Bruijnzeel, L.A. 1990. Hydrology of the Moist Tropical Forest and Effects of Conversion: a State of
Knowledge Review, UNESCO IHP Humid Tropics Programme, Netherlands.
Bruins, H. J., Evenari, M. and Nessler, U. 1986. Rainwater-harvesting agriculture for food
production in arid zones: the challenge of the African famine in Applied Geography 6: 13-32.
Bundesministerium fur Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technology. 1995. Research
Conception: Ecological Research in the Elbe Catchment Area, Bonn: Bundesministerium fur
Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technology.
Bundesministerium fur Ruamordung, Bauwesen and Stadtebau. 1996. Planen and Bauen von
Gebauden in hochwassergefahrdeten Gebieten: Hochwasserschutzfibel, Bonn: Bundesministerium
fur Ruamordung, Bauwesen and Stadtebau.
Burby, R.J. (ed) 1998. Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-Use
Planning for Sustainable Communities, Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press.
Bureau of Reclamation. 1988. Downstream hazard classification guidelines, ACER Technical
Memorandum No 11, Denver, CO: Bureau of Reclamation, US Department of the Interior.
Bye, P. and Horner, M. 1998. Easter 1998 Floods. Vol I & II. Report by the Independent Review
Team to the Board of the Environment Agency, Bristol: the Environment Agency.
Calow, P. and Petts, G. E. (eds.) 1994. The Rivers Handbook: hydrological and ecological principles,
volume 2, Oxford: Blackwell.


Cannon, T. 2000. Vulnerability Analysis and Disasters, in Parker, D. (ed) Floods, London:
Routledge.
Caponera, D. A. 1992. Principles of Water Law and Administration, Rotterdam: Balkema.
Chan, N. W. 1995. A contextual analysis of flood hazard management in Peninsula Malaysia,
unpublished PhD, Enfield: Middlesex University.
Chan, N.W. and Parker, D.J. 1996. Response to Dynamic Flood Hazard Factors in Peninsular
Malaysia, Geographical Journal, 162, 3: 313-325.
Changnon, S.A. (ed). 1996. The Great Flood of 1993: Causes, Impacts and Responses, Boulder, Co:
Westview Press.
Changnon, S.A. 2000. The Record 1993 Missippi River Flood: a Defining Event for Flood
Mitigation Policy in the United States, in Parker, D. (ed) Floods, London: Routledge.
Chatteron, J., and Green, C. 1999. Strategic Land Use Planning in Europe and USA: Review of the
Best Practice for the Environment Agency, Technical Report W62, Swindon: Water Research
Centre.
Chatterton, J. B., Green, C. H. and Penning-Rowsell, E. C. 1993. Wentlooge Levels Benefit-Cost
Analysis, report to National Rivers Authority Welsh Region, Enfield: Flood Hazard Research
Centre.
Cherry, C. 1966. On Human Communication, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chow, V.T. 1956. Hydrologic studies of floods in the United States in International Association of
Scientific Hydrology 42: 134-70.
CIRIA. 1999a. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for England and Wales. C522,
London: CIRIA.
CIRIA. 1999b. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems Design Manual for Scotland and Northern
Ireland. C521, London: CIRIA.
CIRIA. 1999bc Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems - Best Practice. C523, London: CIRIA.
CNS Scientific and Engineering Services. 1991. Benefit-cost analysis of Hydrometric Data - river
flow gauging, for the Department of the Environment, Marlow: Foundation for Water Research.
Collins, B.D. and Pess, G.R. 1997. Evaluation of forest practices prescriptions from Washingtons
watershed analysis program in Journal of American Water Resources Association, Vol 35 (5):
969-96.
Committee to Review the Glen Canyon Environmental Studies. 1987. River and Dam Management:
A Review of the Bureau of Reclamations Glen Canyon Environmental Studies, Washington DC:
National Academy Press.
Countryside Commission/English Heritage/English Nature. 1993. Conservation Issues in Strategic
Plans, Northampton: Countryside Commission.
Creighton, J. L., Dunning, C. M., Priscoli, J. D. and Ayres, D. B. 1991. Public involvement and
dispute resolution: A Reader on the Second Decade of Experience at the Institute for Water
Resources, Alexandria VA: Institute for Water Resources, US Army Corps of Engineers.
Czerwinski, S. J. 1999. Flood Insurance: Information on Financial Aspects of the National Flood
Insurance Program, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity,
House of Representatives, Washington DC: United States General Accounting Office.
Daoxi, W. and Siping. H. 1999. Role of Reservoirs in 1998 Heavy Flood Fighting on the Yangtze
River, paper given at the Workshop on Benefits of and Concerns about Dams, Anatalya.
Darby, H. C. 1983. The changing Fenland, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Bruin,D., Hamhuis, D., van Nieuwnhuijze, L., Overmars, W., Sijmons, D. and Vera, F. 1987.
Ooievaar. De toekomst van het rivierengebied, Arnhem: Stichting Gelderse Milieufederatie.
de Groot, R. S. 1987. Environmental function as a unifying concept for ecology and economics, in
Environmentalist 7(2): 105-109.
Deen, M. Y. I. 1990. Islamic environmental ethics, law, and society, in Engel J R and Engel J B
(eds.) Ethics of Environment and Development, London: Belhaven.
Delaney, T. A. 1995. Benefits to Downstream Flood Attenuation and Water Quality As a Result of
Constructed Wetlands in Agricultural Landscapes, American Farmland Trust, Center for
Agriculture in the Environment (http://www.farmlandinfo.org/cae).


Demuth, N. 1999. Integrated Flood Management - The River Nahe Catchment, in Balabanis P,
Bronstert A, Casale R and Samuels P (eds.) Ribamod: Proceedings of the final workshop, EUR
18287, Luxembourg: Office for Offical Publications of the European Communities.
Department of Health. 1997. Health survey for England 1995, London: The Stationery Office.
Division of Disaster Emergency Services. 1986. Dam Safety: An Owners Guidance Manual, Camp
George West Golden CO: Colorado Department of Public Safety.
Dixon, J. A., Scura, L. F., Carpenter, R. A. and Sherman, P. B. 1994. Economic Analysis of
Environmental Impacts, London: Earthscan.
Drabek, T.E. 1986. Human System Responses to Disaster: An Inventory of Sociological Findings,
New York: Springer Verlag.
Drabek, T.E. 1987. The Professional Emergency Manager, Boulder, Colorado: Institute of
Behavioural Science.
Drabek, T.E. 2000. Social Factors that Constrain Human Responses to Flood Warnings, in Parker,
D. J. (ed) Floods, London: Routledge.
Drescher, K. D. and Abueg, F. R. 1995. Psychophysiological indicators of PTSD following Hurricane
Iniki: the Multi-sensory Interview, Quick Response Report #77, Boulder CO: Natural Hazards
Center (http://www.colorado.edu/hazards).
Drijver, A. and Marchand, M. 1985. Taming the Floods: environmental aspects of floodplain
development in Africa, Leiden: Centre for Environmental Studies, University of Leiden.
Duel, H., Glas, P. C. G., Ivens, E. A. M. and Pedroli, G. B. M. 1999. Flood control and ecological
rehabilitation of the Meuse River in the Netherlands, in Balabanis P, Bronstert A, Casale R and
Samuels P (eds.) Ribamod: Proceedings of the final workshop, EUR 18287, Luxembourg: Office
for Offical Publications of the European Communities.
Dunderdale, J. A. L. 1998. Evaluation of FDMM and Guidelines for the Justification of River
Maintenance, unpublished MPhil thesis, Silsoe: Silsoe College, Cranfield University.
Dunne, T. and Leopold,L.B. 1978. Water in Environmental Planning, San Francisco: Freeman.
Emergency Management Australia. 1999. Managing the Floodplain, Guide 3, Emergency
Management Practice, Australian Emergency Manuals Series, Canberra ACT: EMA.
Emergency Management Australia. 1995. Flood Warning: an Australian Guide, Mount Macedon,
Australia: Australian Emergency Management Institute.
Environment Agency nd. Condition Assessment Manual: A Guide to the Visual Condition
Assessment of Sea and River Defence, Bristol: Environment Agency.
Eriksen, N. J. 1986. Creating flood disasters, Water and Soil Miscellaneous Publications 77,
Wellington: National Water and Soil Conservation Authority.
ESRC Global Environmental Change Programme. 1999. The Politics of GM Food: Risk, Science and
Public Trust, Special Briefing No. 5: University of Sussex.
EUROflood. 1996. EUROFLOOD:Evacuation, Technical Annex14 for the Evacuation Module,
Enfield: Flood Hazard Research Centre.
Falkenmark, M. and Widstrand, C. 1992. Population and Water Resources: A Delicate Balance, in
Population Bulletin, Washington DC: Population Reference Bureau.
Federal Emergency Management Agency 1985. Emergency Action Planning Guidelines for Dams,
FEMA 64.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1986. Flood-proofing Nonresidential Structures,
Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1997. Report on the Costs and Benefits of Natural Hazard
Mitigation, Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1998. Homeowners Guide to Retrofitting, Washington
D.C.
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group 1998. Stream Corridor Restoration:
principles, processes and practices, published jointly by the USDA, EPA, TVA, FEMA and US
Army Corps.
Flood Emergency Action Team. 1998. Final Report of the Flood Emergency Action Team
(http://rubicon.water.ca.gov/FEATReport120.fdr).


Fordham, M. and Ketteridge, A.M. 1998. Men must work and women must weep, in Enarson, E.
and Morrow, B. (eds.) Through Womens Eyes: the Gendered Terrain of Disasters. Westport, Ct:
Praeger.
Fordham, M. 1998. Making women visible in Disasters: Problematising the Private Domain, in
Disasters 22(2): 126-143.
Forestry Commission. 1993. Forest and Water Guidelines, Edinburgh: Forestry Commission.
Framji, K. K. and Garg, B. C. 1976. Flood Control in the World: A Global Review, New Delhi: ICID.
Gardiner, J. 1994. Flood control measures in the River Thames catchment in Rossi G,
Harmancioglu N and Yevjevich V (eds.) Coping with Floods, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Gardiner, J.L. 1994. Sustainable development for river catchments, in Journal of Institution of
Environmental and Water Managers, vol 8: 3: 308-320.
Garrido, A. 1999. Agricultural Water Pricing in OECD Countries, ENV/EPOC/GEEI(98)11/Final,
Paris: OECD.
Gaschen. S., Hausmann, P., Menzinger, I., Schaad, W. 1998. Floods - an insurable risk? A market
survey, Zurich: Swiss Re (http://swissre.com).
Gaschen, S., Hausmann, P., Menzinger, I., Schaad, W. 1998. Floods - an insurable risk, Zurich: Swiss
Re (http://www.swissre.com).
Gateley. 1973. The idea of a flood, Flood Hazard Research Project, Special Publication No. 1,
Enfield: Middlesex University.
Gilbertson, D. D. 1986. Runoff (floodwater) farming and rural water supply in arid lands, in
Applied Geography 6: 5-11.
Glickman, T.S., Golding, D., and Silverman, E .D. 1992. Acts of God and acts of man: Recent
trends in natural disasters and major industrial accidents, Center for Risk Management, Discussion
Paper 92-02, Washington, D C: Resources for the Future.
Godschalk, D. R., Beatley, T., Berke, P., Brower, D, J., and Kaiser, E. J. 1999. Natural Hazard
Mitigation: Recasting Disaster Policy and Planning, Washington DC: Island Press.
Graham, W. J. 1999 A Procedure for Estimating Loss of Life Caused by Dam Failure, DSO-99-06,
Denver CO: Bureau of Reclamation, Dam Safety Office.
Gray, D. H. and Leiser, A. T. 1982. Biotechnical slope protection and erosion control, New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Greeley-Polhemus Group. 1992. Guidelines for Risk and Uncertainty Analysis in Water Resources
Planning, IWR Report 92-R-1, Fort Belvoir VA: US Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water
Resources.
Green, C. H. 1995, Vulnerability analysis for flooding: nodes and networks, UK IDNHR meeting,
London.
Green, C. H. 1996. Inondations: gestion des zones inondables et perspectives pour lassurance, in
SCOR Are natural hazards insurable?, Paris: SCOR.
Green, C. H. 1998. Flood hazard management in Herschy R W and Fairbridge R W (eds.)
Encyclopedia of Hydrology and Water Resources, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Green, C. H. 1999. The economics of floodplain use, in Himganga 1(3): 4-5
Green, C. H. 1999. The financial and institutional arrangements for flood defence in England and
Wales, report for the Hungary Flood Study, Enfield: Flood Hazard Research Centre.
Green, C. H. 2000. Assessing vulnerability to flooding, report to Habitat/United Nations
Environmental Programme, Enfield: Flood Hazard Research Centre.
Green, C. H. and Penning-Rowsell, E. C. 1986. "Evaluating the intangible benefits and costs of a
flood alleviation proposal", in Journal of the Institution of Water Engineers and Scientists 40 (3):
229-248.
Green, C. H. and Penning-Rowsell, E. C. 1989. "Flooding and the Quantification of 'intangibles'", in
Journal of the Institution of Water and Environmental Management 3 (1): 27-30
Green, C. H. and Warner, J. F. 1999. Flood Hazard Management: an emergent systems perspective,
paper given at the Stockholm Water Symposium.


Green, C. H., Nicholls, R. and Johnson, C. 2000. A framework for analysis and decision-making in
the face of risks and uncertainties, report to the Environment Agency, Enfield: Flood Hazard
Research Centre.
Green, C. H., Parker, D. J. and Penning-Rowsell, E. C. 1993. Designing for Failure in Merriman P
A and Browitt C W A (eds.) Natural Disasters: Protecting Vulnerable Communities, London:
Thomas Telford.
Green, C. H., Tunstall, S. M. and Fordham, M. 1991. The risks from flooding: which risk and whose
perception, in Disasters 15(3): 227-236.
Green, C. H., van den Veen, A., Wierstra, E. and Penning-Rowsell, E. C. 1994. Vulnerability
Refined: Analysing Full Flood Impacts in Penning-Rowsell, E. C. and Fordham, M. (eds.) Floods
Across Europe, London: Middlesex University Press.
Green, C.H., Emery, P.J., Penning-Rowsell, E.C. and Parker, D.J. 1985. Health effects of Flooding:
A Survey at Uphill, Avon. Enfield: Middlesex Polytechnic.
Green, C.H., Parker, D.J. and Emery, P.J. 1983. The real cost of flooding to households: intangible
costs. Enfield: Middlesex Polytechnic.
Gresent, P. 1996. Essai devaluation de la politique publique de prevention du risque inondation: les
cas des Vals dOrleans et de Tours, unpublished DEA thesis, Paris: Universite Paris
XII/ENGREF/ENPC.
Gruntfest, E. 1977. What People did during the Big Thompson Flood, Natural Hazards Research and
Applications Information Center, Working Paper No.32, Boulder, Colorado: University of
Colorado.
Gueri, M., Gonzales, C. and Morin, V. 1986. The Effects of the Floods Caused by El Nino on
Health, in Disasters, 10 (2): 118-24
Gunderson, L. 1999. Resilience, Flexibility and Adaptive Management - - Antidotes for Spurious
Certitude?, in Conservation Ecology 3(1) (http://www.consecol.org).
Halcrow/FHRC 1996. River Thames Development Since 1800, Report to the Japan Institute of
Construction Engineering, Swindon: Halcrow.
Halcrow/VITUKI/FHRC/EXTERNAL/FOMI/MTA/Koros Valley District Water Authority. 1999.
Hungary flood control development and rehabilitation project, Final report.
Handmer, J. W. and Dovers, S. R. 1996. A Typology of Resilience: Rethinking Institutions for
Sustainable Development, in Industrial & Environmental Crisis Quarterly 9(4): 482-511.
Handmer, J. W. and Smith, D. I. 1983. Health Hazards of Floods: Hospital Admissions for
Lismore, in Australian Geographical Studies 21: 221-230.
Handmer, J. (ed.) 1997. Flood Warning: Issues and Practice in the Total System Design, Enfield:
Flood Hazard Research Centre.
Hausman, P. 1998. Floods - an insurable risk?, Zurich: Swiss Re (http://www.swissre.com).
Heimlich, R. E. 1991. National Policy of No Net Loss of Wetlands: What Do Agricultural
Economists Have to Contribute?, Washington DC: Resources and Technology Division, US
Department of Agriculture.
Henderson, G.S. and Golding, D.L. 1987. The effect of slash and burning on water repellency of
forest soils at Vancouver, British Columbia, in Canadian Journal of Forest Research, Vol 13 (2):
353-355.
Herschy, R. W. 1998. Dams: Failure in Herschy, R. W. and Fairbridge, R. W. (eds.) Encyclopedia
of Hydrology and Water Resources, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Heurta, F. and Horton, R. 1978 Coping behaviour of elderly flood victims, in Gerontologist, 18(6):
541-546.
Hewlett, J.D. and Helvey, J.D. 1970. Effects of forest clear-felling on storm hydrographs in Water
Resources Research, Vol 6: 768-82.
Hibbert, A.R. 1967. Forest treatment effects on water yield, in Sopper, W.E. and Lull, H.W. (eds.)
Forest Hydrology, Oxford: Pergamon. 527-43.
Higgin, R. J. 1981. An Economic Comparison of Different Flood Mitigation Strategies in Australia,
unpublished PhD Thesis, School of Civil Engineering, University of New South Wales.


Hillman, T. 2000. The Ecological role and Impact of floods, in Parker, D. J. (ed) Floods London:
Routledge.
Hofer, T. 1998. Do land use changes in the Himalayas affect downstream flooding? Traditional
understanding and new evidence, in Memoir Geological Society of India, No.41: 119-141.
Holling, C. S. 1978, Adaptive environmental assessment and management, Chichester: John Wiley.
Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems Annual review of ecology and
systematics 4: 1-23.
Hong Qingyu and Luo Zhang-Yu (eds.) 1999. Flood Control and 1998 Flood of the Yangtze River (in
Chinese).
Hudson, J.A. and Gilman, K. 1993. Long-term variability in the water balances of the Plynlimon
catchments, in Journal of Hydrology, Vol 143:355-80.
Hughes, F.M.R. 1997. Floodplain biogeomorphology, in Progress in Physical Geography, Vol
21(4): 501-29.
Huisman, P., Cramer, W., van Ee, G. and Hooghart, J.C. 1998. Water in the Netherlands, Delft:
Netherlands Hydrological Society.
ICID. 1999. Manual on Non-Structural Approaches to Flood Management, Delhi: International
Commission on Irrigation and Drainage.
ICOLD. 1999. World Register of Dams 98, Paris: ICOLD.
IFRCRCS (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies) 1998. World Disasters
Report 1998, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ijjas, I. and Szlavik, L. (eds.) nd. Institutional framework for water management in Hungary:
EUROWATER-CEC vertical report, Budapest: National Water Authority of Hungary.
International Red River Basin Task Force. 2000. Final Report The Next Flood: Getting Prepared,
International Joint Commission (http://www.ijc.org/boards/rrb).
Islam, K. M. N. 1997. The impacts of flooding and methods of assessment in urban areas of
Bangladesh, unpublished PhD, Enfield: Middlesex University.
Jones, J.A. and Grant, G.E. 1996. Peak flow response to clearcutting and roads in large and small
basins, Western Cascades, Oregon, in Water Resources, Research, Vol 32(4): 959-74.
Jones, J.A.A. 1987. The initiation of natural drainage networks in Progress in Physical Geography,
11(2): 207-45.
Jones, J.A.A. 2000. Human Modification of Flood-Producing Processes: the Evidence from
Catchment Studies, in Parker, D.J. (ed.) Floods, London: Routledge.
Juliano, K. and Simonivic, S. 1999. The impact of wetlands on flood control in the Red River valley
of Manitoba, Winnepeg: University of Manitoba (http://www.ijc.org/boards/rrb).
Keys, C. 1997. The total Flood Warning System: Concept and Practice, in Handmer, J. (ed.) Flood
Warning: Issues and Practice in the Total System Design, Enfield: Flood Hazard Research Centre.
Landerarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser. 1995. Guidelines for Forward-Looking Flood Protection, Berlin:
Geschaftsstelle der Landerarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser.
Larson, L.W. 1997. National Weather Service Advanced Capabilities in Flash Flood Forecasting,
in Gruntfest, E. (ed.) 1997. Twenty Years Later: What We Have Learnt Since the Big Thompson
Flood, Special Publication No.13, Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information
Center, Boulder, Colorado: University of Colorado.
Laska, S. and Wetmore, F. 2000. Reducing Flood Loss Potential by Flood proofing in the USA, in
Parker, D.J. (ed.) Floods London: Routledge.
Lazarus, R. S. 1966. Psychological stress and the coping process, New York: Academic Press.
Leach, M., Mearns, R. and Sconnes, I. 1997. Editorial: Community-Based Sustainable Development
Consensus or Conflict? IDS Bulletin 28(4): 1-3.
Linnerooth-Bayer, J. and Amendola, A. 2000. Global Change, Natural Disasters and Loss-sharing:
Issues of Efficiency and Equity, in The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance 25(2): 203-219.
Lipsey, R. G. and Lancaster, K. 1956-57. The general theory of second best, in Review of
Economic Studies 24: 11-32.


Ludwig, H. F., Gunaratnam, D. and Yuming, S. 1995. Environmental impact assessment for
Xiaolangdi Yellow River multi-purpose economic-cum-enviromental improvement project, in
The Environmentalist 15: 45-57.
Maddison, A. 1998. Chinese Economic Performance in the Long Run, Paris: OECD.
MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food). 1993. Flood and Coastal Defence: Project
Appraisal Guidance Notes, London: HMSO.
MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food). 1999. Project Appraisal Guidance: 3 Economic
Appraisal, London: Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
Maltby, E. 1986. Waterlogged Wealth, London: Earthscan.
Marsh. 1988 Thames, River in Herschy R W and Fairbridge R W (eds.) Encyclopedia of Hydrology
and Water Resources, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Maskrey, A. 1989. Disaster Mitigation- a community based approach, Oxford: Oxfam.
May, P. J., Burby, R. J., Ericksen, N. J., Handmer, J .W., Dixon, J. E., Michaels, S. . Smith, D. I.
1996. Environmental Management and Governance: Intergovernmental Approaches to Hazards
and Sustainability, London: Routiedge.
McMahon, T. A., Finlayson, B. L., Haines, A. T. and Srikanthan, R. 1992. Global Runoff -
Continental Comparisons of Annual Flows and Peak Discharges, Cremlingen-Destedt: Catena.
Mileti, D.S. 1999. Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States,
Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management. 1996. Landscape Planning of the river
Rhine in the Netherlands, Lelystad: RIZA.
Mirtskhoulava, T. E. 1994. Flood control in the former USSR in Rossi, G., Harmancioglu, N. and
Yevjevich, V. (eds.) Coping with Floods, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Morris, J. 1994. Les couts entraines par les inondations des terres agricoles en Ile de France
estimation approximative, Silsoe: Silsoe College.
Munich Re 1997. Flooding and insurance, Munich: Munich Re.
Myers, M-F and Passerini, E. 2000. Floodplain management: historic trends and options for the
future, in Parker, D. J. (ed) Floods, Chapter 14; London: Routledge.
Namafe, C. and Slater, F. 1995. Floods: Friends or Enemies?, London: Institute of Education.
Namafe, C. M. 1989. The Dutch Hydro-Agricultural Rice Project in Western Zambia: An
Assessment, paper given at The Peoples Role in Wetland Management Conference, Leiden.
Nature Conservancy Council. 1983. Nature conservation and river engineering, Peterborough: NCC.
New South Wales Government. 1986. Floodplain Development Manual, PWD 86010, Government of
New South Wales.
Newson, M. 1997. Land, Water and Development, 2nd edition, London: Routledge.
Nicholls, R. 1995. Coastal Megacities and Climate Change, in Geojournal, 37(3): 369379.
Nisbet, T.R. 1990. Forest and surface water acidification, London: HMSO, Forestry Commission
Bulletin86.
Nomani, F. and Rahnema, A. 1990. Islamic Economic Systems, London: Zed Books.
Obled, C. and Tourasse, P. 1994. Uncertainty in flood forecasting: A French case study in Rossi,
G., Harmancioglu, N. and Yevjevich, V. (eds.) Coping with Floods, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Office of State Flood Control and Drought Relief Headquarters. 1994. A Survey of city's flood
control in China, Beijing City: National Flood Control and Anti-Drought Headquarters, Ministry
of Water Conservancy.
Oi, H. 1993. Nepal flood disaster, July 1993,in INCEDE Newsletter 2(2) (http://incede.iis.u-
tokyo.ac.jp/Newsletters/2.2/2-2-3.html).
Owen, J. O. 1980. Flood Emergency Plans: Guidelines for Corps Dams, Research Document No. 13,
Davis CA: The Hydrologic Engineering Center, US Army Corps of Engineers.
Parker, D. J., Green, C. H. and Thompson, P. M. 1987. Urban Flood Protection Benefits: a project
appraisal guide, Aldershot: Gower.
Parker, D. J. and Thompson, P. M. 1991. Floods and tropical storms, in The Challenge of African
Disasters, 38-59, Addis Abbaba: World Health Organisation PanAfrican Centre for Emergency
Preparedness and Response.


Parker, D. J. 1995. Floods in cities: increasing exposure and rising impact potential, in Built
Environment, Vol 21, No2/3: 114-25.
Parker, D. J. 1996. International Experiences with Flood Hazard Management: Key trends and
General Lessons, paper presented at 6
th
BRAND 96 European Congress, 25 April, Amsterdam.
Parker, D.J. and Tapsell, S.M. 1995. Hazard transformation and hazard management issues in the
London Megacity, Geojournal, (37) 3: 313-28.
Parker, D.J. 1991. The Damage-Reducing Effects of Flood Warnings, report prepared for National
Rivers Authority (Anglian Region) Regional Telemetry Scheme Appraisal, Enfield: Flood Hazard
Research Centre.
Parker, D.J. 1995. Floods in cities: increasing exposure and rising impact potential, in Built
Environment 21(2/3): 114-25.
Parker, D.J. 1999. Flood Warning Dissemination and Response: Lessons from International
Research in Proceedings of the 34th MAFF Conference of River and Coastal Engineers, Keele
University, 30 June - 2 July, 1999.
Parker, D.J. 2000. Managing Flood Hazards and Disasters: International Lessons, Directions and
Future Challenges, in Parker, D.J. (ed.) Floods, London: Routledge.
Parker, D.J. and Handmer, J. 1998. The role of Unofficial Flood Warning Systems, in Journal of
Contingencies and Crisis Management, 6(1): 45-60.
Paul, B. M. 1984. "Perception of and agricultural adjustment to floods in Jamuna Floodplain,
Bangladesh", in Human Ecology 12(1): 3-19.
Peerbolte, E. B. 1994. Sea-level Rise and Safety, Enschede: Unniversiteit Twente.
Penning-Rowsell, E. C. and Fordham, M. (eds.) 1994. Floods Across Europe, London: Middlesex
University Press.
Penning-Rowsell, E. C., Green, C. H., Thompson, P. M., Coker, A. C., Tunstall, S. M., Richards, C. and
Parker, D. J. 1992 The economics of coastal management: A manual of assessment techniques,
London: Belhaven.
Penning-Rowsell, E. C., Winchester, P. and Gardiner, J. L. 1998. New Approaches to Sustainable
Hazard Management for Venice, in The Geographical Journal 164(1): 1-18.
Penning-Rowsell, E.C., Winchester, P, and Bossman-Agrey, P. 1987. Flood Alleviation for
Maidenhead: an evaluation of three levels of non-structural approach, Centre Internal Publication.
Enfield: Middlesex Polytechnic.
Penning-Rowsell, E. C. and Chatterton, J. B. 1977. The benefits of flood alleviation, Aldershot UK:
Gower Technical Press.
Penning-Rowsell, E.C. and Smith, D.I. 1987. Self-help flood hazard mitigation: the economics of
house raising in Lismore, N.S.W., Australia in Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale
geografie, Vol 78(3): 176-189.
Penning-Rowsell, E.C., Tunstall, S.M., Tapsell, S.M. and Parker, D.J. 2000. The Benefits of Flood
Warnings: Real but Elusive, and Politically Significant, in Journal of the Institution of Water and
Environmental Management, vol 14: 7-14.
Petts, G.E. 1984. Impounded rivers: perspectives for ecological management, Chichester: Wiley.
Pielke, R. A. 1999. Who Decides? Forecasts and Responsibilities in the 1997 Red River Flood, in
Applied Behavioral Science Review (in press).
Pottier, N. 1998. Lutilisation des outils juridiques de prevention des risques dinondation: evaluation
des effets sur lhomme et loccupation des sols dans les plaines alluviales (application a la Saone
et a la Marne), unpublished PhD thesis, Paris: Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chausees.
Powell, B. and Penick, E. 1983. Psychological Distress following a Natural Disaster: a one-year
follow up of 98 flood vistims, Journal of Community Psychology, II: 267-276.
Purseglove, J. 1988. Taming the Flood, Oxford: OUP.
Ras Gharib, Hurghada, Safaga, Quseir, Marsa Alam, Shalatein, Abu Ramad and Halaib 1997. Hazard
Assessment and Mitigative Measures of Flash Flooding on the Red Sea Towns, Egypt, NARSS
Special Publication No. 1, Cairo: National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences (in
Arabic).


Rees, J. A. 1998. Regulation and Private Participation in the Water and Sanitation Sector, TAC
Background Papers No. 1, Stockholm: Global Water Partnership.
Reiter, P. 2000. International methods of Risk Analysis, Damage Evaluation and Social Impact
Studies concerning Dam-Break Accidents, Helsinki: PR Water Consulting.
Reppert, R. 1992. National Wetland Mitigation Banking Study, IWR Report 92-WMB-1, Alexandria
VA: Institute for Water Resources, US Army Corps of Engineers.
Resolve Inc 2000. Participation, Negotiation and Conflict Management in Large Dams Projects,
Thematic Review V.5, Cape Town: World Commission on Dams (http://www.dams.org).
Rivers Bureau. 1985. Rivers in Japan, Tokyo: Ministry of Construction.
Rivers Bureau. 2000. Rivers in Japan, Tokyo: Rivers Bureau, Ministry of Construction
(http://www.moc.go.jp/river/english/bureau/p16.html).
Robinson, M. 1990. Impact of improved land drainage on river flows, Wallingford: Institute of
Hydrology Report 113.
Rogers, P., Lydon, P. and Seckler, D. 1989. Eastern Waters Study: Strategies to manage flood and
drought in the Ganges-Brahmaputra Basin, Washington DC: USAID.
Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. 1994. The new rivers and wildlife handbook, Sandy:
RSPB.
Rutrough, J. E. 1997. Funding major disasters with traditional insurance in Britton, N. R. and
Oliver, J. (eds.) Financial Risk Management for Natural Catastrophes, Proceedings of a
conference sponsored by Aon Group Australia Ltd, Brisbane: Griffith University.
Saad, M. B. A. 1999. The Role of High Aswan Dam towards Nile Flood Control, paper given at the
Workshop on Benefits of and Concerns about Dams, Anatalya.
SANDRP (South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People). 2000. Comments received on the draft
of this report.
SAST (Scientific Assessment and Strategy Team). 1994. Science for Floodplain Management,
Washington DC: SAST (http://edcwww2.cr.usgs.gov/www/sast_aut.htm).
Schmuck-Widmann, H. 1996. Living with the flood: survival strategies of Char-Dwellers in
Bangladesh, Berlin: ASA.
Schware, R. 1982. Official and Folk Flood Warning Systems: an Assessment, in Environmental
Management 6: 209-216.
Sckade, D. A. and Feather, T. D. 1996. Environmental Valuation: the role of stakeholder
communication and collaborative planning, IWR Report 96-R-17, Alexandria VA: Water
Resources Support Center, US Army Corps of Engineers.
Shaw. 1998. Floods: Largest in the USA, China and the World, in Herschy, R. W. and Fairbridge,
R. W. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Hydrology and Water Resources, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Shaw, B. D. 1984. Water and society in the ancient Maghrib: technology, property and
development, in Antiquites africaines 20: 121-173.
Sheaffer, J.R. 1967. Introduction to Flood-proofing, Washington, D.C: US Army Corps of Engineers.
Shultz, S. D. 1999. The Feasibility of Wetland Restoration to Reduce Flooding in the Red River
Valley: A case Study of the Maple (ND) and Wild Rice (MN) Watersheds, Agricultural
Economics Report No 432, Fargo ND: North Dakota State University
(http://www.ijc.org/boards/rrb).
Sikander, A.S. 1983. Floods and families in Pakistan - a Survey, in Disasters, 7(2): 101-106.
Smith D. I. 1990 The worthwhileness of dam failure mitigation: an Australian example, in Applied
Geography 10, 5-19.
Smith, D. I. 1998. Water in Australia, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smith, D. I. and Handmer, J. W. (eds.) 1986. Flood Warning in Australia: Policies, Institutions and
Technologies, Canberra: CRES, Australian National University.
Sorensen, J. H. and Rogers, G. O. 1989. Protective Actions for Extremely Toxic Chemical Accidents,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Sorensen, J.H. 1987. Evacuation due to off-site releases from chemical accidents: experience from
1980-1984, in Journal of Hazardous Materials 14: 247-257.


Sorensen, J.H. 1988. Evaluation of Warning and Protective Action Implementation Times for
Chemical Weapons Accidents. ORNL/TM-10437, Oak Ridge: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Southworth, F. and Chin, S.M. 1987. Network evacuation modelling for flooding as a result of dam
failure, in Environment and Planning A 19: 1543-1558.
Summer, S.G. 1997. Comparison of Deficiencies Associated with the Big Thompson Flash Flood
Event and Recent Flood Events in the Eastern United States, in Gruntfest, E. (ed.) Twenty Years
Later: What We Have Learnt Since the Big Thompson Flood, Special Publication No.13, Natural
Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, Boulder, Colorado: University of
Colorado.
Swiss Re. 1996. Insurance derivatives and securitization: New hedging perspectives for the US
catastrophe insurance market?, sigma no. 5/1996, Zurich: Swiss Re.
Swiss Re 2000. Sigma 2/200 Natural Catastrophes and Man-Made Disasters in 1999
(http://www.swissre.com).
Sydney Water Board 1985. Warragamba Dam Flood Protection Program, Sydney: Sydney Water Board.
Tapsell, S.M., Tunstall, S.M., Penning-Rowsell, E.C. and Handmer, J.W. 1999. The Health Effects of
the Easter 1998 Flooding in Banbury and Kidlington, Report to the Environment Agency, Thames
Region, Enfield: Middlesex University Flood Hazard Research Centre.
Thomas, D. H. and Adams, W. M. 1999. Adapting to Dams: Agrarian Change Downstream of the
Tiga Dam, Northern Nigeria, World Development 27(6): 919-935.
Thompson, P.M. and Sultana, P. 2000. Shortcomings of Flood Embankment Strategies in
Bangladesh, in Parker, D. J.(ed.) Floods, London: Routledge.
Tobin, G.A. and Montz, B.E. 1997 Natural Hazards: Explanation and Integration, New York, N.Y:
The Guilford Press.
Torterotot, J-P. 1992. Analyse des reponse a lannonce de crue et impact sur les dommages dus aux
inondations dans plusieurs region de France, Noisy-le-Grand: CERGRENE.
Torterotot, J-P. 1993. Review of best practise in European strategic land use planning: French
contribution, NRA R and D Project 426, Noisy-le-Grand: CERGRENE.
Trimble, S.W. Weirich, F.H. and Hoag, B.L. 1987. Reafforestation and the Reduction of Water
Yield on the Southern Piedmont since Circa 1940, in Water Resources Research, 23: 425-37.
Tunstall, S.M., Tapsell, S.M. and Fordham, M. 1994. Public Perception of Rivers and Flood defence:
Final Report, Enfield: Flood Hazard Research Centre.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1984. Flood Proofing Systems and Techniques, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1996. Flood Proofing Techniques, Programs and References,
Washington, D.C.
United Nations, Department of Humanitarian Affairs. 1997. Floods: People at risk, strategies for
prevention, Geneva: UN.
United Nations. 1992. Agenda 2 1, New York: UN.
United States Army Corps of Engineering. 1995. Floodplain Management Assessment of the Upper
Mississippi River and Lower Missouri Rivers and Tributaries.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1998a. Flood Proofing Performance Successes & Failures,
National Flood Proofing Committee
(http://www/usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwp/nfpc.htm).
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1999. US Army Corps of Engineers Annual Flood Damage
Report to Congress for fiscal year 1998
(http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwe/flood98/).
United States Army Corps of Engineers nd. The Great Flood of 1993 Post-flood Report
(http://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/Public. Aff..e/HistoricArchives/Floodof1993/fl-l.htm).
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1984. Flood Proofing Systems and Techniques, Washington
DC: USACE.
United States Army Corps of Engineer.s 1996. Flood Proofing Techniques, Programs and References,
Washington DC: USACE.
United States Committee on Large Dams. 2000. (http://www.privatei.com/~uscold.html).


United States Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1986. Flood-proofing nonresidential
structures, Washington DC: FEMA.
United States Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1997. Project Impact Guidebook: Building a
Disaster Resistant Community, Washington DC: FEMA.
United States Federal Emergency Management Agency 1998. Homeowner's Guide to Retrofitting,
Washington DC: FEMA.
United States General Accounting Office. 1995. Midwest Flood: Information on the Performance,
Effects, and Control of Levees, GAO/RCED-95-125, Washington DC: United States General
Accounting Office.
US Army Corps of Engineers. 1998b. US Army Corps of Engineers Annual Flood Damage Report to
Congress for fiscal year 1997 (http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwe/flood.htm).
US Department of Health and Human Services. 1999. Targeting Arthritis: The Nations Leading
Cause of Disability, Atlanta GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp).
Vazquez, M., Dominguez, R. Fuentes, O. and Maza, J.A. 1997. Flash Floods in Mexico, in
Gruntfest, E. (ed.) . Twenty Years Later: What We Have Learnt Since the Big Thompson Flood,
Special Publication No.13, Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center,
Boulder, Colorado: University of Colorado.
Vituki. 1998. Water Management in Hungary at the turn of the Millennium, Budapest: Ministry for
Transport, Communication and Water Management, National Water Authority.
Waelde, L. C., Koopman, C. and Spiegel, D. 1998. Dissociative and posttraumatic reactions to the
Northern California flooding of 1997, Quick Response Report #104, Boulder CO: Natural Hazards
Center (http://www.colorado.edu/hazards).
Wagret, P. 1967. Polderlands, London: Methuen.
Walters, C. J. 1986. Adaptive management of renewable resources, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Walters, C. 1997. Challenges in adaptive management of riparian and coastal ecosystems in
Conservation Ecology 1 (2) (http://www.consecol.org).
Ward, R. 1978. Floods: A Geographical Perspective, London: MacMillan.
Water Resources Department. 1996. Water Resources in Japan, Tokyo: Ministers Secretariat,
National Land Agency.
White, G. F. 1945. Human Adjustment to Floods, Research Paper No. 29, Chicago: University of
Chicago, Department of Geography.
White, G. F. 1964. Choice of Adjustments to Floods, Research Paper No. 93, Chicago: University of
Chicago, Department of Geography
White, G.F., Calef, W.C., Hudson, J.W., Mayer, H.M., Shaeffer, J.R. and Volk, D.J. 1958. Changes
in urban occupance of floodplains in the United States, Research Paper No. 57, Chicago:
Department of Geography, University of Chicago.
Wind, H. G., de Blois, C., Kok, M., Peerbolte, B. and Green, C. H. 1997. Uncertainty in flood
damage assessment: when does it matter? in Casale, R., Pedroli, G. B. and Samuels, P. (eds.)
Ribamod: River basin modelling, management and flood mitigation, Luxembourg: Office for
Official Publications of the European Communities.
Wittfogel, K. 1957. Oriental despotism, New York: Pergamon.
Wolff, T. F. 1997. Geotechnical Reliability of Levees in Burnham, M. W. and Davis, D. W. (eds.)
Hydrology & Hydraulics Workshop on Risk-Based Analysis for Flood Damage Reduction Studies,
SP-28, Davis CA: US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center.
Wolman, M. G. and Leopold, L. B. 1957. River flood plains: some observations on their formation,
Geological Survey Paper 282-C, US Geological Survey, Washington DC: US Government
Printing House.
Wooley, D. 1986. An economic and historical perspective of flood damage: the viability of
structural solutions, Special Publication No. 15, Procs. of the 10th Annual Conference of the
State Floodplain Managers, Strengthening Local Flood Protection Programs, June 17-19,
Pittsburg, Boulder, Co: Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center.


World Bank. 1996. The World Bank Participation Sourcebook (www.worldbank.org
//html/edi/sourcebook/sbhome.htm).
World Bank. 1997. Project Appraisal Document for the Xiaolangdi Multipurpose Project Stage II,
Report No. 16274-CHA.
Wright, J. M. (ed.) 2000. The Nations Responses to Flood Disasters: A Historical Account,
Knoxville: Association of State Floodplain Managers.
Wright,K., Sendek, K.H., Rice, R.H. and Thomas, R.B. 1990. Logging effects on streamflow at
Caspar Creek in northwest California, in Water Resources Research, Vol 26, 1657-67.
Yevyevich, V. 1992. Floods and society, in Rossi, G., Harmancioglu, N. and Yevyevich, V. (eds.)
Coping with floods, NATO ASI Series, 3-9, Dordrecht: Kluwer.



Appendix I: List of Contributing Papers to the Assessment
of Flood Control and Management Options Thematic
Review

Note: materials from these contributing papers were incorporated directly into the text and annexes or
provided necessary background information for the authors of the thematic.

J van Duivendijk Assessment of Flood Management Options
ICOLD Draft Bulletin - Dams and Floods



Appendix II: Submissions for Thematic Review IV.4

The WCD is committed to an open and consultative process. To broaden the scope for participation and input from all interested groups and stakeholders
the Commission invited submissions on all aspects related to its work programme. As they were received, submissions were classified according to the
area(s) of the work programme to which they are relevant. Therefore the submissions used here are those that have been identified as applicable to the
Thematic Review (IV.4) on Flood Control and Management Options.

Submissions arrived in parallel to the drafting process of the WCDs reports. Those listed here are the 10 submissions specifically for TR IV.4 which were
received by 31 March, 2000. Also note that submissions are not numbered sequentially.

Every submission has been read carefully. Some are informed individual perspectives on which the WCD can not mediate. For example, there are some
submissions that seek the endorsement of the WCD, and the WCDs mandate is neither to adjudicate nor to mediate on specific dams or disputes.

Therefore, the submissions received for Thematic Review IV.4 have been used as background information. All submissions have informed the WCD as to
the different positions on the dams debate. A few submissions only included an abstract or an outline for a presentation at one of the consultations with
insufficient detail to be included.

Author Serial # Title
Khan T A OPT 026 A Note from Bangladesh on the Importance of Large Dams in the South Asian Region
Mishra D K OPT 028 North Bihar Floods and the Proposed Dams in Nepal
Acreman M OPT 056 Managed Flood Releases From Reservoirs a review of current problems and future prospects
Petrascheck A
Saad M B A
UN-ECE
OPT 061
OPT 061
Flood Risk Management The Swiss Experience
The Role of High Aswan Dam Towards Nile Flood Control
Can L T OPT 117 Dams and Water Resources in Vietnam
Kim S OPT 118 National Water Resources Planning in Korea: Experiences and Perspectives
Wright J M OPT 130 The Nations Responses to Flood Disasters: A Historical Account
Mishra D K OPT 133 Floods Despite Dams
ICID OPT 140 Role of Dams for Irrigation, Drainage and Flood Control ICID Position Paper

Countries from which Submissions were Received for TR IV.4


Country Total
Bangladesh 1
India 1
Korea 1
Nepal 1
Switzerland 1
Egypt 1
Vietnam 1
USA 1
United Kingdom 1
General 1


Appendix III: Review Comments received on Thematic
Review IV.4

The WCD is committed to an open and consultative process. To broaden the scope for participation
and input from interested groups and stakeholders, the Commission invited specialists, centers of
excellence and WCD Forum members to prepare comments on the thematic drafts. Comments on the
Assessment of Flood Control and Management Options thematic draft of 25 November 1999 were
received from January to March 2000. The comments were incorporated to the extent possible into
subsequent drafts of the thematic. However, to provide readers with a complete record and an
indication of the varying perspectives all comments received are included in this appendix to the
report.

Every comment has been read carefully. Some are informed individual perspectives on which the
WCD can not mediate. For example, there are some comments that seek the endorsement of the
WCD, and the WCDs mandate is neither to adjudicate nor to mediate on specific dams or disputes.
Others may go beyond the scope of the individual thematic review.

The comments are separated into Appendix sections relating to the specific draft that they refer
to. Section numbers referred to in individual commentaries will have changed in this final
version of the report.

Comments on Draft of 25 November 1999

a) Arthur Askew
Gabriel Arduino

World Meteorological Organisation
b) Louis Berga

Committee on Floods and Dams, ICOLD, Spain
c) Dinesh Mishra

Barh Mukti Abhiyan, India
d) Alessandro Palmieri

World Bank
e) Himanshu Thakker South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), India

f) Gilbert White

University of Colorado, USA
g) Herb Wiebe

Consultant, Canada
h) Philip Williams

Consultant, USA
i) William Smith World Bank
j) Hans van Duivendijk

Consultant, The Netherlands

a) Comments by Arthur Askew, 27 January 2000


My colleague Gabriel Arduino has studied the text in some depth and I have looked through it in a
more general fashion. We are very pleased with what we have read and would congratulate the
authors on a good piece of work.

As is mentioned, the draft 'is an incomplete draft containing both omissions and errors and so instead
of providing you with detailed comments we would prefer to make some general comments and send
you (under separate cover) some material that could be used for finalizing the report.

One feature of the draft which we welcome is its objectivity. No preference is given to any particular
alternative for flood management and both the beneficial and the damaging aspects of floods are
considered. This will make the report very valuable for achieving a better understanding of floods
and the measures that can be taken for their control and management.

The "Introduction' has yet to be written. On occasion it is wise to leave this to be the last so as to be
sure that ft fits with the subsequent text. However, in this case it would be helpful to have had at
least a first draft of this part so as to guide us as reviewers as to the objectives and targets audience
of the report. We would certainly suggest that an "Introduction be added before the text draft is
issued.

We would also offer some general comments on the Executive Summary. It is currently in the form
of some 50 bullet points, which are truly a very useful summary of the technical content of the report
and should certainly be retained. As stand-alone comments, they raise a number of questions and
some of them would benefit from a little more elaboration or cross-referencing to the main text.
However, executive summaries are usually intended to be read by udecision makers, w'no have no
time to read the whole and/or may have limited technical expertise on the subject in hand. The 50
bullet points are too many and too technical for this purpose. What is the Commission's policy an
executive summaries? We would strongly recommend writing a one-two pages text that is readable
by decision makers and even the general public, while keeping the bullet points as some sort of
annex to that summary.

As mentioned above, I am sending you under separate cover, the following materials for use in
further work on the text,

Guide to Hydrological Practices
Chapter D.I.3 of the WMO Technical Regulations
International Glossary of Hydrology
Crash Report
Paper presented in Scientific sub-forum of the IDNOR

b) Comments by Louis Berga, 2 February 2000

The paper is in general a good work, but it is very theoretical and does not present a global vision of
the problem of the flood as a natural hazard, nor its incidence on the world. It is very descriptive.

If the objective was that of analysing the role of the dams in the flood management, this has not been
complied with. The floods are studied and analysed, but there is very little description and discussion
with reference to the dams within the structural solutions.

So, in the Executive Summary, of the 51 points which it contains, only in 3 points the word dam
appears and in some case in a collateral manner. When the cases in which it could be appropriate are
described (small basins, tributaries), it is done without any reference to the real applications, since in
diverse basins the determining factors can be very different.


In the point 1.4 The evolution of dams in flood hazard management, the data on the total number
of large dams and number of flood mitigation dams are mixed. The definition of large dams is not
that which actually exists. As far as the World Register of dams, statistics are given of the year 1988,
and not of the last register of the year 1998. The number of dams which serve in a significant manner
for the flood alleviation is: 1) The 8% of the dams which are single purpose, and 2) The 39% of the
multipurpose dams which represents that around 20% of the existing large dams have a relevant role
in flood mitigation. The percentage is not therefore so small.

In the Figure 4.1 (page 47), among other things are missing the options of reservoirs and detention
basins.

In the point 4.2.4.2, Storage, no mention is made of the reduction of failures of dams in the last
decades, and neither is mention made of the efforts and standards every day more demanding for the
dam safety. It also says that the dams are rarely used for flood storage alone, when in reality the
number of flood mitigation dams is significant, and in the last decades has experimented a strong
increase. It does not cite any reference nor data of real cases of operation of dams and downstream
flood damage reduction.

Chapter 5, which refers to the role of dams in flood hazard management, is very incomplete, it
needs to be developed very much more. The contexts are erroneous, and only four potential
drawbacks are detailed which do not refer to the flood mitigation dams, but are general, with
erroneous concepts such as the downstream protection for the PMF. From my point of view it is not
very scientific or technical and nor is it assumable. No real case is developed.

In Chapter 8 of Conclusions and Recommendations there does not exist any reference to the dams,
and to the advantages and inconveniences of other structural and non-structural measures. It is limited
to giving very general principles of the water management and of the flood hazard management,
some, in my opinion, erroneous, such as the effectively of the planning and land-use patterns, which
are considered in general as one of the non-structural measures, most efficient for the flood hazard
reduction. It lacks a development of an integrated approach of the diverse measures.

To sum up, it is a paper which treats well the theme of the floods, although very theoretically and
with many local examples, but the relation between dams and floods are undertaken in a very
marginal manner. (Although it has already been mentioned that Chapter 5 is incomplete).

Perhaps the title would be better as Assessment of flood mitigation and management options.

Commentaries On Specific Points.

Page 2. The most floods are in some way human induced, ... in this case by constructing a dam
or forming a reservoir.
It is not correct, the greater part are natural hazards.

Page 4. Arrange statistics.

Page 6. Discussion on the GPD very confusing.

Page 7. There are other Floods very much more impacting and severe. (Mitch, Venezuela,
Yangtze, Mississippi 93, etc.). Choose significant examples.

Page 26.The benefits on increased business, are very disputable and economically false.


Page 35.The risk of death is low. Depends on the zone. In general it is not so.

Page36.Higher cancer rates. Debatable and not universally proved.

Page37.The protection in the face of floods is in many cases superior to the 100 years, and not only in
the Netherlands.

Page 40. The concept that all floods must be managed is confused, as it could be given to understand
that all floods can be mitigated in a very good and effective manner. Perhaps it would be better to
indicate that apart from a determined flood, emergency action plans should be implanted in order to
reduce to the maximum the loss of lives.

Page 41.Ideal flood to manage, Ideally, the response - is very theoretical and does not
transcribe the diversity of the real situations. In general, the probability of the floods in the basins
of a country are not independent and therefore not additive.

Page 47.The classification of universally accepted measures is in structural measures and non-
structural actions. The examples, which are given, are very theoretical, and therefore it is not possible
to generalise their results, which will be specific in each case.

Pages 49 and 50.The hydrological safety of dams (PMF, 10,000 years) is confused with the flood
protection of downstream damages.

Page 51. Figure 4.4. It is not return period but the inverse. It is not risk to life.

Page 78. The basic principle of the integral approach of structural and non-structural measures is
lacking.

Page 81. The dams can be or cannot be appropriate in many other cases, and not only in small and
steep catchment and multiple tributaries. A resume and some recommendations are lacking on the
diverse measures. Every case is different.

Page 86. Yangtze. China. Massive resettlement.It is not viable, nor is it in the flood management
policy.

Page 91. Benefit-cost analyses. Consideration of human life?

Page 105. Include the necessity of integrated approach of measures. Do not eliminate zoning for the
corruption, but put advantages and difficulties. Clarify the concept to manage all floods

Also the draft is incomplete, as in some sections, are lacking texts, box and figures.

c) Comments by Dinesh Kunmar Mishra, 11 January 2000

Page 3. Para 3/4/5 are repeated from page 2.
The first para on page 4 is also a repetation.
Page 10.1.2.3 Non-structural Approaches: There is a strong urban bias when floods are considered
as a problem faced by people. The response to the flood problem also suffers from the same problem
since most of the persons who matter are from urban background. Needless to say that the
prescriptions written for limiting floods, whether structural or non-structural, suffer from this bias. A


city dweller engineer, with no roots in the villages, cannot appreciate the problems faced in the
villages.

Page 13. 1.3 The Cultural Construction of Floods and Flood Hazard Measurement: Para-3.
There is a growing trend in India to blame Nepal for releasing waters into the rivers debauching in to
Bihar plains whereas no such controls exist in Nepal. If there are any control structures in the form of
barrages over the Kosi and Gandak rivers, these are all handled by the Bihar engineers. This ill will is
more due to the ignorance of the people affected downstream, and politicians and the ignorant press
take advantage of the situation.

Page 14. Para-3. The proportion of dams which are declared.. The Hirakud dam on the Mahanadi,
in Orissa, the Damodar Valley Corporation dams on the tributaries of the Damodar, and some of the
dams in the Narmada basin are reported to have some flood cushion. Thus in the case of Indian dams,
the provision of regulating floods may not be very significant but it is, surely, not zero percent.

Page 16 para 3. Afforestation reduces. The afforestation is an important issue in the South Asian
countries. Whenever a downstream country blames the upstream country for floods, it also blames the
u/s country for the deforestation on her soil. It would have been better if the issue is detailed more.

Page 24. Para-3. Options for reducing the flood risk. What is true for Alexanda, is also true for
most of the places on the countryside of the embankments along the rivers in the Ganga-
Brahamaputra basin in India.

Page 42. What is vulnerability and who is vulnerable? There are about 16,000 km long
embankments along the rivers in India. Those living on the country side of the embankments suffer
from a false sense of security but live under a continuous threat from the breaches in the
embankments. There are people living within the embankments also and are exposed to threats of
floods annually. As far my information goes, there are 338 villages located within the embankments
of the Kosi with a population of about 800,000. The Mahananda embankments have trapped 66
villages and the Bagmati embankments have entrapped 95. Their combined population will be to the
tune of 300,000. All these rivers pass through Bihar in North India.

The situation then is very complex. If the embankments survive, those trapped within the
embankments will suffer inundation and if they do not, they will spell a doom on to those living in
the countryside of the embankments.

With some modifications, the same thing can be said about most of the structures that are built to
mitigate floods.

Page 48 Para 3. With flood proofing The statement that with dikes, losses are reducing to zero
until the dike overtops. This statement is highly misleading and should be deleted.

The dikes, even if they stand erect, do not reduce the losses to zero. The waterlogging that is caused
in the countryside of the embankments is a loss to those who should be free from floods subsequent
to the construction of dikes. To cite an example, about 1,82,000 ha of land is waterlogged outside the
eastern Kosi embankments in Bihar, India, according to official sources. In the countryside of the
western embankment of the same river, 94,000 ha of land is waterlogged below 44.19 contour line
and an additional 34 000 ha is waterlogged above the same contour line. An area of 110,000 ha is
trapped between two embankments. All attempts to clear the waterlogging have, so far, failed.
Similar conditions exist in other embanked river basins too.



In case of ring embankments that are constructed around the islands in the coastal areas of India and
Bangladesh, in the Bay of Bengal; similar conditions and risks are involved. The area encircled by the
ring embankments and supposedly, protected against floods, is often in a much worse state than the
unprotected riverside.

A dike causes sedimentation within the embankments and raises the bed level of the river. The bed of
the Kosi River is rising at a rate of 12.03 cm per year in its lower reaches. The basic function of river
is to drain out the rainwater from its catchment. The rivers that are embanked reverse this function
and start spilling water into the catchment due to breaches in the dikes or due to waterlogging. When
a river is not allowed to function as a river, it is a great loss to all concerned. This happens even when
the dikes do not breach.

Page 50. Para 2. The dike failure is also caused due to the failures of slopes. In case of repairs of the
dikes during the flood season, there is no earth available to carry out routine maintenance works, the
laborer then scratch the embankment itself for earth making the slopes steep. This may also happen if
the maintenance is irregular and careless.

Page 56. Deforestation, Reforestation and Afforestation. I still feel this needs more elaboration.

Page 67. Emergency Planning and management. There is a great dilemma here. My experience in
the Ganga-Brahamaputra basin in India suggests that people must be reached in case of emergencies
and there is no denying the need for a relief program. But, a very nicely planned and executed relief
program pushes the debate of a long tern solution back by many years and a badly planned and
managed relief program diverts the debate on to the discrepancies of the program and the real debate
never takes place. In suits everybody that the real issues are not touched and the relief becomes a
habit. This happens quite often because flood is one such disaster that repeats itself and many times,
in the same place. A vested interest develops amongst all the organisations that are concerned with
the disaster because it is easier to rise money by raising the passions amongst the donors. The real
issues are relegated to background and this is done not by the victims of the disaster but by those who
are supposed to mitigate them.

Page 76. 4.2.5.5 Flood insurance. Para 4. Where governments have accepted. In Bihar (India), it
had been customary to blame the rates and foxes for the failure of the embankments because these
creatures dig holes in to the body of the embankments that leads to their failure. For sometimes,
people accepted it as the reason but when it became routine and the victims were not amused by the
reasoning, the buck was passed on to the anti-social elements who cut the embankments.

Page 104. Para 3 and 4. Involvement of public is a tricky suggestion. This can succeed only if the
public understands the intricacies and the helplessness of the technologies. There is a price tag
attached to whatever technology we adopt for the mitigation of floods. This price has to be paid,
come what may, either over a time or a space. Unless the society understands these finer points, the
slogan mongers will rule the roost. Now who will educate the society and how, that the society will
be mature enough to take decisions for itself. The engineers often say that they will do what the
society tells them to do and this is what, precisely, that they dont do. Society can, at best, tell them
that it needs protection from floods. The society will never be in a position to say that they should do
it by, say, inter-basin transfer. Involving a society which is not aware of the implications of
technology will always remain eyewash. This is more so when the engineers are used to mistify
technologies and spare no opportunity in telling the common masses that the lay person cannot
understand science and that they should not walk in to the experts domain.

This necessitates a need for a continued and rigorous public education over the concerned issues and
we do not have a ready answer to this question. But in the absence of such a campaign, any effort will


not yield desired results. This education campaign should be carried out in the language that the
common person understands and would involved presentation of science in a lucid form. Given that
most of the flood affected people are illiterate, the challenge is bigger. The apprehensions that the
show would be cornered by the professionals or the specific social groups will hold well, till then.

General: There is the question of the perception of the solution to the flood problem by different
actors, namely, the politicians, the engineers, and the public. Generally, the politicians have their own
game plan and understanding of the situation. They may or may not know the after effects of the
projects. Even if they are aware of the aftermath, they pose innocent and always tell people that they
have engaged the best available persons to do the job. They interact with engineers and public. The
engineers do not interact with public and do not report to it. They are aware of the aftermath of the
project, but are not in a habit to make those things public. The public feels that all its problems will
be solved subsequent to the construction of the project. It related more freely with the politicians but
rarely talks to the engineers and it is a very rare thing that the public will get an opportunity to meet
the politicians and engineers together.

Any project is implemented under this backdrop only. Eyebrows are raised when the aspirations of
the public are not fulfilled. By this time the whole team of politicians, engineers and contractors
changes and the people are left to fend for themselves. It will be impossible to come out of this web
unless an awareness campaign is launched on a massive scale to educate the public that will include
the politicians, engineers and the common man.

d) Comments by Alessandro Palmieri, 22 January 2000

1. Firstly, I should say that I found it a very thorough and comprehensive report which provides
a well-balanced presentation of the various options for flood management. I was particularly
interested in the sections on the non-structural approaches to flood alleviation; it is useful to have
these subjects, and the various source references, brought together in one volume. The authors, from
Middlesex University, are very well regarded in the UK flood scene. I cannot comment on their field
experience in developing countries.

2. It would be very useful if, in the final editing, the report could be made user-friendly to allow
the practitioners to apply it in their daily work. In its current draft version, the report is rather heavy
reading. The final report/manual could have a preface or introduction to the theme and be formatted
to be readily applicable. Perhaps it should have qualitative and quantitative examples of real life
solutions and results and be more specific on good practices.

3. The authors give the impression not to trust the applicability of the current mathematical
models to flood analysis. If they refer to the modalities by which the results of mathematical models
are applied, I agree that there is ample room for improvement. Good practice in flood analysis
involves referencing any model result to land use, the distribution of vulnerable infrastructures, the
existence of emergency preparedness plans, etc. Should the authors refer to the actual accuracy of the
mathematical models currently available to the industry, I would like to submit that such accuracy is
considered to be better than 20-30% (ref. European project CADAM). Such accuracy, which refers to
both water levels and time to peak of the flood wave, implies however adequate calibration. Aspects
of modeling requiring improvement include: hydraulic roughness, effect of point structures,
propagation in highly urbanised areas, two-phase flow (water and debris, mudflows), an others.

4. The authors mention several times the need to consider all floods, not only one. In flood
analysis practice, it is customary to consider one or more flood levels (generally with 1:100 or 1:200
year return period), and I agree that this may not be conservative with respect to more severe flood
levels. However, flood events are, by their own nature, stochastically distributed and it is not simple


to conceive the simulation of the effects of an entire distribution of floods. I believe that the
methodology proposed by the authors in this respect needs clarification.

5. As regards the treatment of dams, I think the report undervalues the role that dams play in
flood attenuation as part of a properly designed flood management scheme. Part of the problem is, I
think, a misconception that all dams have a 'designed probability of failure' (Page 88). I would agree
this was true of previous design methods, and is probably still true in some parts of the world, but the
modern approach is now to design for the 'probable maximum' condition, or at least its near
equivalent, which is effectively a 'no failure' condition, also to upgrade those older dams that do not
meet this standard. Also, the report is wrong in stating (on page 89) that 'for a dedicated flood
storage reservoir the flow for a given return period event should be less with the dam than without the
dam except for the PMF event when there will be no difference in the flow. Clearly, if there were no
difference in the flow for the PMF (i.e. design) event, then there would be little purpose in having the
dam.

6. The recommended holistic approach (pages 10-11) is well described. The emphasis on the
appropriate mix of structural and non-structural measures is in line with the current approach to flood
mitigation and dam safety management. The resulting flood mitigation plan should always be
custom designed (as stated by the authors) and, I would add, periodically re-evaluated. I would
stress the importance of establishing community networks as a resilience enhancing tool. However,
it should be realised that that is a long process involving awareness raising and, essentially,
education. Building partnership with NGOs for the tasks listed on page 44 is crucial. Really
committed, representative NGOs can be extremely effective in establishing community networks
starting from properly prepared vulnerability maps.

7. I was surprised that the report does not give more prominence to flooding caused by
hurricanes and tropical cyclones, in view of the recent devastating loss of life caused by, for example,
Hurricane Mitch in Central America and the Orissa cyclone in the late 1999. So far as I can see,
these events do not seem to have even received a mention, though possibly they are not regarded as
being predominantly flood disasters. It would have been interesting to have seen in the first chapter a
list of the principal statistics of some of the World's most recent serious flood disasters (the IDNDR
has a good listing of such events in their web-site).

8. In December 1999, I suggested to the WCD, to include El Cajon dam (Honduras) among the
case studies. The reason being the performance of that reservoir during hurricane Mitch. Since I have
seen no reference to this recent fact in the report, I consider relevant to repeat here that note.
Francisco Morazan (El-Cajon) dam is a 234 m high arch dam, impounding a reservoir of 7085 million
cubic meters. It is a multipurpose dam constructed, not without hard technical problems, with the
support of the Bank. The hurricane passed over the catchment of the reservoir. Upstream of the dam,
the damage was substantial. The incoming flood to the reservoir was estimated in 9800 m3/s (500
years return period or 70% of the PMF). The reservoir level prior to the passing of the hurricane was
13 m below full supply level. Within 70 hours this level had risen by 16 m and some 1500 million m3
had been retained. As a result of this flood control, the maximum discharge experimented
downstream of the dam was only 1200 m3/s. According to the dam safety officers, the sudden
increase of the reservoir level did not cause serious damage to the dam and seepage from the 600000
m2 grout curtain sealing the reservoir did not increase appreciably. Downstream of the dam, a 10 km
long, narrow gorge exists, at the end of which two intensely populated alluvial plains open up. These
plains are separated one from the other by a 5 km long, narrow stretch of the river Umuhia. If a water
discharge of 9800 m3/s would have been permitted to flow in such a morphological setting, an hardly
conceivable disaster-in-the-disaster would have occurred. I have no detailed information about the
population in those areas, although I understand the number is in the order of the tens thousands. One
could argue that, the single service provided by the El-Cajon reservoir in that circumstance could, on
its own, fully justify the construction of that dam. It is sad to notice that the only article on the


subject that I found was titled: Latin America: hurricane Mitch nearly topped a huge dam (World
Rivers Review, Vol. 13, No. 6, December 1998, p.7).

9. A similar case of outstanding flood mitigation by a large reservoir occurred in Yemen. When
a World Bank team was preparing the Emergency Flood Rehabilitation project ( July 1996) the
Marib Dam which was completed in 1990 plaid an important role in protecting the downstream areas
around Marib. A flood wave of about 250 Mm3 was safely absorbed by the reservoir without
actuation of the spillway thus avoiding considerable devastation to the low downstream areas.

10. The above examples (together with others) testify that flood mitigation is not like power
generation, whose benefit can be quantified and forecast in clear dollar terms. The greatest benefit of
a reservoir, as regards flood mitigation, is that it is there when it is needed, at the discretion of
hurricanes, storms, cyclones or whatever. This kind of "added value" is poorly understood in most of
the cases. Problems of conflicting operation can exist, however the examples quoted above testify the
opposite.

11. The report is at pains to bring out the beneficial effects of some flooding, as well as the
disbenefits. In fact it draws a distinction (page 12), somewhat confusingly, between 'flooding', which
is a benign event that happens every year, to which the recipients are well adapted, and 'floods' which
cause devastation and destruction. But in the table on page 26 which lists the benefits of floods, I
think the authors go a bit over the top, in listing as beneficiaries mainly the traders and others that
benefit from the community's misfortune. Such people may be financial beneficiaries, but as a
community, everyone suffers economically.

12. With the notable exception of Bangladesh, generally the report is focussed on flooding in
temperate climates, presumably because most of the collected data and reports are generated from
countries in the temperate zones. Because of this, I am not sure that the report deals adequately with
the rather different features and circumstances of floods in other parts of the world, particularly in the
arid zones such as the Middle East, Central Asia, Southern Africa, etc. The features of arid zone
floods that I think should perhaps have received greater prominence are their 'extremes' in terms of
variance from the 'normal', which makes an adequate response strategy particularly difficult to
formulate, and the fact that sediment load, and its impact on the geomorphology of the region, is
normally a major, if not the predominant feature of such floods. The flooding in the Nile basin in
northern Sudan in, I think, 1987, which affected a remote mainly rural community, is a case in point,
also the May 1998 flooding in the Black Sea coastal region of Turkey. Another important factor is
that the water itself, probably the most valuable commodity in the region, will be lost and may not be
replenished again for many years.

13. Finally a few specific remarks.
! Pg. 35-36: the overtopping (without dam failure) of the Vajont dam (Italy, 1963) was caused by a
rock slide, not by a flood.
! Pg. 57: problems to operate dams for flood storage: O&M plans and EPP (emergency
preparedness plans) serve this purpose (ref.: World Banks OP4.37).
! Pg. 66: preventive measures should also be mentioned.

e) Comments by Himanshu Thakkar, 13 March 2000

the problem which has arisen in Orissa is due, in the main, to the efforts which have been made
towards its protection. Every square mile of country from which spill water is excluded means the
intensification of floods elsewhere, every embankment means the heading up of water on someone
elses land The problem in Orissa is not how to prevent floods, but how to pass them as quickly as


possible to the sea. And the solution lies in removing all obstacles which militate against this
result. To continue as at present is merely to pile up a debt which will have to be paid, in distress
and calamity at the end.

The 1928 Report of the Orissa Flood Committe

1. The paper has many remarkable qualities, including about the sources (except floods due to dams
and embankments) and descriptions of floods. About Flood Control and Management options too,
the paper provides many new insights. Following comments are largely in the light of experience
of flood control in India.
2. In table 1.1, among the types of floods following need to be added: Floods due to dams (either
due to failure of dams or due to sudden release of large amount of water), floods due to
embankments, due to drainage congestion (could be due to ill designed canals, roads, railwaylines
or embankments), rising water tables due to irrigation, seepage caused by canals, natural dam
break floods in hills as in Himalayas).
3. On page 3 it is mentioned that flooding in downstream regions can be caused by excess water
release from dams, but this needs much more elaboration.
4. The definition of Non-Structural Approaches given in first few lines under section 1.2.3 (page
10) is not a very correct representation. The general approach of proponents of Non structural
solutions has been that structural solution generally are not appropriate, cost effective,
sustainable or viable in the first place. Hence, best option to flood problem is in finding source
control and drainage based solutions and to cope with the floods that come inspite of such efforts.
5. Is it appropriate to list increase in business after damages due to floods as beneficial impacts of
floods as the paper does on page 26, Table 1.3 and again on page 33, Table 1.5?
6. The first para under 3.2.1 on page 35 mentions death of 300 persons in Oct. 1999 due to floods.
Here are some figures from India: As per Indias official Central Water Commission (figures
generally understated), on an average 1504 people have died due to floods every year between
1953 and 1994 with the highest figure being 11,316 in 1977. In 1998, in Eastern UP alone, over
2000 deaths were reported due to floods.
7. The statements on page 40 (last para before section 4.1) that It is no use concentrating our
understanding upon refining our knowledge of the past, such as to past flood losses and past
return floods, if the future is likely to be different could have unacceptable implications. Even if
future is likely to be somewhat different, it would still be useful to learn lessons from past
experience of floods and flood control measures. The actual performance of dams and
embankments, the impacts of drainage and afforestation catchments can be very helpful for
future.
8. The statement on page 41 that Thus, dike systems may be designed with weak points so that
failure is likely to occur at the most manageable point could have dangerous implications. This
means that some people or properties (of some people) are more expendable than those of others.
In iniquitous and nontransparent situations like those in India, such recommendations would give
an instrument in the hands of the powerful to have the weak points of dikes where the failure
would affect the poorer people only (this is already happening in some places already).
9. In the Schematic differences in the loss probability curve by management option (Figure 4.3 on
page 49), the losses with dikes or dams peaks at the same position of return period and the peaks
are also identical. This is not likely to be the case. The peak due to dike failure would occur
before that due to dam failure, but would generally be lower in magnitude.
10. The statement on page 50 (first sentence in second para) that with dikes, the risk to life is
approximately zero until the dike breaches is not correct. Here it is assumed that only the main
river but the tributaries are also embanked and that the river is embanked throughout its length in
the floodplain. But this is not generally the practical situation. Moreover, the waterlogging caused
by the (generally) inadequate drainage provided in a dike also leads to losses and many times risk
to life too.


11. In the same para, it is further stated that the dike breaches, which may include by
overtopping, at which point the risk will probably be greater than it is now because the velocity
of flows are likely to be greater. The dike could also be breached due to piping or even
intentionally broken by authorities or by the people trapped inside the dike. Moreover, the risk
would be greater not only because flows are likely to greater but also because of the suddenness
of the floods, due to sand casting and as the floods of whole or large part of the river would be
concentrated at the point of breakage. The velocity of the floods is also likely to be greater in
high silting rivers, since the riverbed would have become higher than the surrounding areas, as it
has already happened at a number of places in North Bihar. In such a case, the flood would also
reside longer in the flooded area as river with raised bed level would take much longer time
(sometimes months) to evacuate the water from the lower area.
12. Here it needs to be mentioned that the people protected behind the embankment also suffer
much more as they have lost the traditional knowledge and tools of coping mechanism that they
had when they were living next to rivers. For example, we found during the Eastern UP floods in
1998, largely most damaging due to breaches in embankments, that the people in the surrounding
area did not have boats and most had also forgotten the boating skills. Thus, in an area where
people had great boating skills previously, boats had to airlifted from far off Calcutta. The
administration itself, most callous under the impression that they are protected from floods,
also did not have any boats.
13. Similarly, in the following paragraph, it should be stated that the suddenness of the flood from
the dam (either due to failure or due to sudden release of water) would cause much greater
damage than otherwise.
14. Figure 4.4 on page 51 (for comparison of likely risk to life under different management options)
shows that the risk to life is lowest with channel improvement project. This is certainly not true
in case of highly silt-laden rivers like those from Himalayas. It is very doubtful if channel
improvement would be economically feasible or technically viable. The only experiment of
channel deepening tried out in Bangladesh has reportedly failed badly as the silt removed from
the river and dumped along sides (taking too far would be very expensive) soon came back to the
river.
15. The problem with the analysis that accompanies Figure 4.5 on page 52 is that in reality, for
example, the Himalayan rivers has too many tributaries and proposing a dam on even some of
them would be not only very expensive proposition, it would also be a temporary solution as the
silt would soon fill up such dams.
16. The following comments are largely dependent on flood related experience in India and
surrounding countries.
17. The paper needs to give much more importance to source control measures and to drainage
related issues. Lack of drainage, particularly in flood plains is the biggest factor leading to floods
and resultant damages. It has very significant effects on the kind and nature of floods and its
impacts. Agricultural work, the canals, the roads, the railways and of course the embankments,
when made without proper drainage leads to very damaging and prolonged floods. It is true that
proper drainage has the effect on speed of runoff into rivers. However, when lack of drainage
leads to waterlogging and floods, it is better to provide drainage and then tackle floods in the
rivers, as far as plains are concerned.
18. Similarly, the paper rightly mentions the importance of source control. However, more
elaboration of this would be useful. For example, if direct run off can increase to over 80% of the
volume of rainfall, as mentioned on page 55, it would be useful to have more exhaustive
treatment of this issue. Moreover, the issue of deforestation and afforestation (page 56) are
important, as is the issue of kinds of forests.
19. Indian Experience: As Roy (1998) has noted, in spite of the various flood control projects in
India, the flood damage clearly appear to be increasing. More seriously, more and more croplands
are getting affected in the floods. The trend of damages due to floods shows increasing trend over
the last fifty years. Also, newer areas are getting affected. In the nineties, areas like Andhra,
Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Rajasthan, which were not in


traditional flood prone areas are also getting flooded. (Here it should be noted that statements like
relative to GNP of that country, economic losses from floods appear to have held constant over
the past fifty years made on page 5 of the draft paper are not very useful.)
20. The draft paper says (page 4) that many times there are tendencies on the part of governments to
exaggerate the damages due to floods. However, as Roy (1998) notes, there is also a tendency on
the part of officials to understate the damages due to floods. The real damages to houses, crops,
cattle are frequently much higher than what the government reveals.

Flood control, drainage and anti-waterlogging works are closely related to irrigation. Schemes have
therefore to be formulated in an integrated manner so that measures taken in one place do not
accentuate the problem in neighbouring areas.

Indias Fourth Five Year Plan, 1969

21. Source Control and Drainage: This is applicable to hill areas, where source control in terms of
afforestation and kind of afforestation has very significant effect on soil erosion, land slides and
related flooding problems. The paper does discuss these issues though not to the extent necessary.
It is important to go into this issue in a greater length as mismanagement here leads to ill
conceived promotion of dams for water requirements and flood control in the plains. It needs to
be emphasised that proper (for example, broad leaf forests as against pine forests in Himalayas)
kind and extent of forests in hills not only reduces the runoff and erosion, it leads to more
regulated releases in post monsoon period. To what extent this effect is a subject at the moment
largely dependent on conjectures and debates, but the point to note is that this issue has many
dimensions. In case of highly silt prone catchments like those of Himalayas, this is a very
important issue.
22. High silt and low silt rivers: That leads to another significant shortcoming of the paper. The
paper does not go into the differences in floods (and hence options) when rivers have high or low
silt. Options like dams and embankments have much less relevance when the catchments are
highly silt prone and rivers bring larger amounts of silt than otherwise. This aspect is not at all
noted by the paper. What is happening in Ganga-Brahmaputra flood plains in Uttar Pradesh,
Bihar, Bengal and Assam in India and Bangladesh is a case in point.
23. Embankments in case of High Silt Rivers: To elaborate a bit, when the heavily silt laden rivers
are embanked, the silt tends to accumulate in the riverbed, slowly raising the level of riverbed
over a period of time. This reduces the carrying capacity of the remaining space between
embankments and also raises the bed level of the river, sometimes above the land surrounding the
riverbed. Such rise in riverbed levels totally destroys the rivers basic capacity to act as drainage
channel.

Because of haphazard construction of embankments and non maintenance of key embankments, the
experience has been a continuous breaching of embankments which were supposed to protect large
areas. Thanks to these breaches, the damage in protected areas is much more substantial than what it
could have been had the areas not been protected.
National Committee on Backward Area,
Report on Chronically Flood Affected Areas (1981)

24. Another embankment related fact (in case of highly silt-laden rivers) to be noted is that when you
embank the main river (and its bed level rises above those of tributaries), the tributaries are no
longer able to drain their water into the main river. Hence either you need to provide sluices to
drain water from the tributary to the river (sluices to be opened when water level in tributaries is
higher than the water level in main river). However, as the bed level of the main river rises with
silt accumulation, the sluices no longer function. In silt laden regions, the sluices do not work


even in normal conditions. Hence it is proposed that you need to embank the tributaries. And then
sub tributaries. This could be a very costly proposition for a country like India.
25. Moreover, it needs to be noted that embankments are essentially flood transfer mechanisms and
not strictly flood control mechanisms. By embanking a certain portion of the river, you
essentially transfer the floods to downstream regions, which if not embanked will only face more
severe floods.
26. Embankments in India also take away a very large amount of otherwise productive and useful
land out of agricultural or other use. People who thus lose out are rarely, if at all, resettled. To
give just one example, in case of Kosi river in North Bihar, over 800,000 people (over 300
villages) have lost lands between the embankments. These people were promised resettlement
(even by Indias first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru) but never given resettlement (to see this
story visually, see Dui Paatan Ke Beech Mein (literally meaning between devil and the deep sea),
a documentary film made by Arvind Sinha and made public only in Feb. 2000 by Oxfam India).
Now most of these people are still staying between the embankments and shift to the top of the
embankments when river is in floods.
27. People who are thus trapped between the embankments (and this has happened in case of large
number of rivers in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal) would see their interest in low flood
levels between the riverbeds. For people outside the embankments, on the other hands, it is
important that all possible floods are carried between the embankments. Thus, embankments lead
to social classification between those protected and those unprotected.
28. When flood level rises in rivers, the people trapped between the embankments many times breach
the embankments to save their crops, houses and other property, flooding the area outside
embankments. This leads to inevitable conflicts between the people on both sides of
embankments.
29. In some cases, however, people staying on two sides of the embankments are not in conflict with
each other. This happens when embankments are constructed on both sides of the rivers in high
rainfall plain area when drainage conditions are not adequate. Thus, the waters tend to
accumulate outside the embanked areas, thus creating waterlogging conditions, destroying all
possibilities of successful agricultural crops. The conditions are worsened when canal irrigation
is provided (as it has happened in Gandak and Kosi commands, for example) without giving any
or adequate attention to drainage. In such situations, people living on both sides of the
embankment feel waterlogging conditions and both see embankments as the culprits and both
cooperate to break the embankment.
30. Embankments also stop the spreading of high value silt in the flood plains. In cost benefit
analysis of any proposition for embankment, the value of such silt and its stoppage by
embankment has to be taken into account.
31. Another aspect that the paper does not take into account is the fact that when embankments break
(and they are bound to break as break proof embankments are yet to be created. In case of highly
silt laden rivers from Himalayas, they would break sooner than in case of low silt rivers), they not
only bring fast, high intensity and flash (sudden) floods, they also lead to huge amounts of sand
casting. After the 1998 floods in Eastern UP, one of the worst in that region, we were amazed to
see over 1100 Ha (as per Govt. estimates) of land being sand casted with sand depth ranging right
upto 10 ft. Such sand casted lands are useless for the owners for agricultural purposes for many
years to come. (Independent Peoples Commission on Floods in East UP, 1999)
32. The politics of breaking and repairing of embankments and the financial allocations and
misappropriations thus involved is a totally different story and is well described by the film
mentioned above, among other places (for example, see Tiwari 1999). Tiwari notes, The bogey
of floods was, and still is, being used to generate kickbacks for a nexus of politicians,
bureaucrats, engineers and contractors in the state. Kilometers of embankments have been built
but the flood prone area in the state has only increased and so has the misery of the people. This
is not story about floods in Bihar. This is a story about how an entire society has been corrupted
by money meant to build embankments for flood control.


33. The story of effectiveness (or lack of it) is told by the following figures: Bihar, in 1952 had 160
km of embankments and 25 lakh ha of flood prone area. By 1998, the length of embankment in
that state had gone upto 3465 kms and the flood prone area had gone upto 68.9 lakh ha, a more
than 175% increase over the 1952 figure (see for example, Mishra June 1999). At all India level,
the area liable to floods has continuously increased seven fold from less than 6 million ha in 1956
to 40 million ha in 1997 (Roy 1998). (Above discussion is also relevant in view of discussion in
WCD paper on page 59 and beyond. That discussion unfortunately, does not differentiate
between high silt and low silt rivers.)
34. The reference (page 62) in the paper to resettlement in Gujarat needs clarification. Firstly, Tapti
(or Tapi, as it known locally) and Narmada are two separate rivers in Gujarat. In which areas has
the said relocation done and when, with what purpose and effect would be useful to note.
35. In India too (page 73), at the time of floods, embankments are many times used for shelter as they
are the only dry spots in the area. This is what we noticed when we visited flood affected areas in
Eastern UP in 1998.
36. Dams and Floods: The paper does not go into the past performance of dams where flood control
was mentioned or not. There are two issues of relevance here. One is: How have the dams that
have flood control as one of the objectives actually performed vis a vis such an objective. The
second issue is what have been the flood-related impacts of other dams that do not have flood
control as an objective. Both these are significant issues.
37. As an attached file shows, India has some thirteen completed dams that have flood control as one
of the objectives. Let us look at performance of some of these dams. Hirakud dam on Mahanadi
River in Orissa State is one of these dams, completed in 1957. Satapathy (1993) have recorded
that though there has been some moderation in intensity of floods due to the dams, the frequency,
duration and the damages after the floods have only increased after the dam than the situation
was before the dam.
38. The paper does make some very general comments that dams are bound to reduce the floods in
downstream areas (for example on page 15). However, the paper does not adequately go into the
issue of floods brought in the downstream regions even when dams do not break. These are
mostly due to unannounced, sudden release of large quantity water from the dams. This has
happened in case of dams that have proclaimed flood control benefit and those that do not have.
In India, this has been recorded in case of Bhakhra dam in Punjab (in 1978 and again in 1988), in
case of Hirakud dam in Orissa (1980), in case of Damodar dams in West Bengal (1978), in case
of Ukai dam in Gujarat (1999), in case of under construction Sardar Sarovar Project (1994)
among others (Thakkar 1997).
39. The paper says (page 39) that there is no published evidence on ecological impact of a large dam
collapse. As far as Indian dams are concerned, there is some evidence of damage due to failure of
Tigra dam in Madhya Pradesh in 1917 (over 1000 people killed), due to failure of Panshet-
Khadakwasla dam in Maharashtra in 1961 (29 people killed), due to failure of Nanaksagar dam in
Uttar Pradesh in 1967 (over 100 people killed) and failure of Machu dam in Gujarat in 1979
(over 1500 people killed). Disaster struck the Indravati dam under construction in Orissa state in
1991, when at least 17 people died. In Oct. 1981, a Gopinatham dam in Karnataka burst, killing
47 people (Thakkar 1997). For example, regarding the Panshet disaster, the evidence is recorded
by Sulabha Brahme and Prakash Gole, Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, Poona, 1967.
40. Another related issue is the floods brought by the breaching of large canals that take water from
large dams and resultant disasters. Breaching of Bhakhra canal in Punjab in 1999 is a notable
example of this.
41. Issue of Disaster Management Plans in case of dams is mentioned on page 67. In India, the
disaster management plans are either never made or, if at all made in rare cases, are not shared
with the people. Thus, killing the very purpose of making such plans.
42. The flood related experience in case of Farakka barrage on Ganges in West Bengal in India is
described in a submission by SANDRP to WCD, titled: A Report on the Impact of Farakka
Barrage on the Human Fabric. The report can be obtained directly from SANDRP or from
WCD.


43. How the nature of floods in post dam period changes can be seen from the case of Hirakud dam
in Orissa in Eastern India (CSE 1991). Statistics show that the proportion of medium and long
duration floods have increased after the dam than was the case before the dam. The average
duration of floods have gone up from 1.61 days in the pre dam period to 3.17 days in the post
dam period. It is well known that longer duration floods are more damaging.
44. The political economy of dam building is another issue that comes across strikingly in case of
Hirakud dam. The people in the coastal region of Orissa, experiencing frequent floods, wanted
flood protection but did not want implied submergence to happen in their area. Hence politically
weaker tribal people of upstream areas had to experience submergence to save the relatively
influential coastal Orissa people (DSouza 1998).
45. The paper makes a wrong statement (page 14, below the Table 1.1) that the proportion of dams
which are declared as having some flood alleviation function is 0% in India. If we look at the list
of dams compiled by Indias Central Board of Irrigation and Power in its 1987 publication (CBIP
1987), we see that at least 13 completed dams in India mention flood control as one of the
purposes. The list is attached as an excel file.
46. The conflict between operation of dams for flood control and hydropower generation also applies
to the conflict between flood control and irrigation (page 57). That paragraph also needs to
mention that in post dam period, the discharges are more often sudden, bringing more damages
on downstream areas. This has happened in many cases in India, as mentioned earlier.
47. Some General Comments: A very crucial aspect of flood control options, namely
environmental and social impacts is left blank by the authors. Without going into these very
crucial aspects it is difficult to arrive at any decision about flood management options. Both the
structural options of flood management, namely dams and river embankments have very serious
social and environmental impacts, particularly in India. Displacement of people, silt/ sand
deposition and fisheries are some of the relevant issues. Sustainability of the measures is another
important issue. Lakhs of people have been forced to live within embankments in India (8 lakh
people just in case of Kosi embankments in North Bihar) as they were never properly (in most
cases not at all) resettled.
48. Most of the examples in the paper come from Europe and some from USA and China/Japan. The
paper has very few examples from Asia outside China and Japan (from these two countries,
limited examples, largely from structural perspective are given), from Latin America and even
from Africa. The socio-economic situation in these regions is much different than in Europe and
hence very different options would be valid here than what the experience of Europe may
suggest.
49. The paper does not touch the political economy aspects of choice between various flood control
options. Similarly, equity issues are not looked into.
50. The paper does not describe the past performance (projected vs actual) of various flood control
options. Particularly with respect to large dams and embankments, this is necessary. Unless
future options assessment is informed by past experience with flood control measures, we will be
missing out a very crucial issue that this paper should have gone into.
51. While writing about matching options on page 81, it should be noted that source control is
generally appropriate in almost all cases. As far as dam as an option is concerned (this also
applies to section 5 on page 88), there differentiation needs to be made between high silt and low
silt rivers. Also it should be noted that dams as a single purpose flood control instrument are not
favored by economics generally. When flood control is one of the options along with other
options, flood control almost always takes a backseat.
52. When it is mentioned that dams may be appropriate in case of multiple tributaries to avoid the
flood crests from the different tributaries being synchronised, is it suggested that a dam will be
necessary on all tributaries? In real world, a river generally has many tributaries. The option of
dam for flood control, thus seem only as a theoretical one. Practical experience shows that dams
are no real options for flood control. In section 5 (page 88), high siltation rate should also figure
in potential limitations.


53. The comparison of various options with respect to Yangtze (page 88) is quite unrealistic.
Evacuation of flood plain is almost never an option. The comparison should be more realistic and
comprehensive.
54. On page 91, while mentioning preconditions for identifying right option for flood control/
management, one precondition should be that all structures (roads, canals, railway-lines,
embankments, settlements) in the flood plain have scientific drainage and that source control
options have been exhausted.
55. In Figure 6.2 on page 95, issues of sustainability and equity (whose protection at whose cost)
should also be parameters while choosing among available options.
56. The internal contradictions due to the character of neoclassical economics (page 97) should lead
to the recommendation that such economics cannot be considered appropriate decision making
tool when sustainable development is the goal.
57. Breach of dikes by local residents in Bangladesh as mentioned on page 102 also happens in
Bihar, East UP and Bengal areas in India.
58. Some additional recommendations that can figure on page 105-6 are:
The O & M plans/ finances/ institutions role must be transparent for it to be effective.
The works to be taken up post flood (even like dike repair) should be subject to participatory
options assessment process.
Source control and proper provision of drainage are preconditions before flood management
options are looked at.
For future projects to be useful, transparent post facto evaluation of past projects/ efforts is a
must.
59. On page 81 it is also mentioned that detention basins may be appropriate when floodplain has
low value use such as large scale farming. But such a situation does not exist countries like India
and farming is not a low value use for people.
60. Again on page 81, while mentioning enabling conditions for channel modifications and
embankments, it should be mentioned that this may be appropriate only when the river is low silt
river.
61. It is not clear if the authors of the paper had benefit of SANDRP submission on Flood related
issues around Farakka project in India, DK Mishras paper presented at the WCDs South Asia
Public Hearing (SANDRP 1999a) and various other such relevant submissions to WCD
(SANDRP, 1999).

References

DSouza Rohan 1998, The Deltaic Rivers of the Bengal Presidency: The Political Economy of Flood
Control in Colonial Orissa, unpublished PhD thesis, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

Central Board of Irrigation and Power Oct. 1987, Large Dams in India, CBIP, New Delhi

Centre for Science and Environment, 1991, Floods, Flood Plains and Environmental Myths, The
Third State of Indias Environment Report, CSE, New Delhi

Independent Peoples Commission on Floods in East UP, 1999, The Troubled Waters: A Report on
the 1998 Floods in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, Oxfam, New Delhi

Mishra Dinesh Kumar, June 1999, The Embankment Trap (and many other articles) published in June
1999 issue of Seminar magazine, published by Seminar publishers, New Delhi

Roy Dunu, April 1998, Floods: The Death of Water, unpublished essay, New Delhi


SANDRP, 1999 A report on the Impact of Farakka Barrage on the Human Fabric, SANDRP, New
Delhi (A submission to the World Commission on Dams)

SANDRP 1999a, Dossier on papers presented at WCD South Asia Consultation, SANDRP, New
Delhi

Satpathy Sadhana, 1993, Floods and Flood Control Policies: An Analysis with reference to the
Mahanadi Delta in Orissa, Centre for Development Studies, Trivandrum, India

Thakkar Himanshu, Sept. 1997, The large dam disasters in India, unpublished, SANDRP, New Delhi

Tiwari Manish, (Nov. 30, 1999), Breach of Trust, published in the Down to Earth, Vol. 8, No. 13,
Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi

f) Comments by Gilbert White, January 2000

I have received, and read with much pleasure, the draft of 25 November, 1999 on The Assessment of
Flood Control and Management Options that arrived on 17 January.

I understand that you do not require a detailed review of all factual statements in the draft, but, rather,
a judgment of the general validity and utility of the organization, and the validity of the approach and
appraisal it presents. Thus, I have not attempted a thorough assessment of what it offers of experience
in Bangladesh, China and Poland.

I have not attempted to comment on the general statements in the Executive Summary inasmuch as
they are drawn from more detailed text.

The Nature of Flood Problems (1-4) focuses on types of flood, and pays almost no attention to types
of floodplain, such as alluvial and coastal.

Measures of the World's Flood Problem (4-6) focuses on types and volume of estimated losses, and
does not give estimates of benefits of floods - environmental and economic.

The Four Generations of Flood Hazard Management (8-11) seems to largely ignore, until p. 11,
public policy emphasis on management to make "wise use of flood plains", (and not reduction of
flood losses) taking into account the full range of social and environmental effects. This was a basic
feature of the policy advanced in the United States (House Document 465) in 1966 and stimulating
the first major U.S. Presidential Order on flood plains. It is significant that the most recent appeal by
the U.S. Association of State Floodplain Managers is entitled "Wise Floodplain Management-
Creating Environmental and Economic Peace of Mind". The "Four Generations" as currently written
is misleading in dealing with the so-called third generation, as though it was exclusively non-
structural. The text is, however, more balanced in dealing with options (91-102). Perhaps there is a
valid description of the "Third Generation" but I don't know it.

In reviewing the history of flood management and the role of dams there is no clear recognition of a
physical limit on the number of suitable dam sites, or that as early as 1950 in the United States the
Presidents Commission on Water estimated that for that reason by the 1970s the construction of large
dams would begin to fall off in the U.S.



In this connection, other reports of the Commission no doubt make explicit reference to the waves of
scientific studies of the environmental and social effects of man-made lakes (e.g. SCOPE) that
developed in the 70's and 80's.

The general approach of and methods of facilitating appraisal of options seems to me basically sound
and deserves to be encouraged (40-107).

At many points it would be desirable to include reference to experience with specific applications of
the suggested methods. I realize that Scudder and Wescoat have been exchanging ideas as to a report
on the need for and improved methods of appraising the full effects of specific water programs, and
although the number of thorough studies is small, some should be cited. For example, it would seem
important to give a range of findings for:

a. the relation between flood damage and times in hours in which warnings and emergency
measures are practicable (67-72);
b. the proportion of losses that can be prevented by advance flood proofing (61-62).

The assessment of the appropriateness of flood proofing is not consistent with experience (82).

Assessment of environmental consequences (38-39) is inadequate.

The above covers major points from the first review.

It would be useful to cite current evaluations of the effectiveness of options. For example, In the U.S.
currently there are appraisals of:

a. the repetitive losses covered by flood insurance (Conrad)
b. the actual effects of the Federal insurance program criteria - positive and negative.
c. alternative flood-dependent uses of flood plains
d. the consequences of national disaster relief, as increasing rather than decreasing
vulnerability (Platt, et al Disasters and Democracy)
e. reasons why the Galloway report on the 1993 Mississippi floods has been largely
neglected.
f. FEMAs canvass (in press) of natural and beneficial uses of floods.
g. the Florence post-flood experience in illuminating how social response may be counter
productive.
Overall, the general approach seems to me sound and forward-looking, and to deserve strengthening.

Gilbert F. White

g) Comments by Herb Wiebe, 19 January 2000

As requested, I reviewed the referenced draft document. The comments I have follow:

General
1. Perhaps because the introduction is missing, there is no clear statement of what the
purpose of the document is.
2. Related to the above, it seems the authors have not been clear on who the intended
readers of the document are. Consequently, it suffers from inconsistent levels of detail
and highly variable levels of technical information. For example, much of the
discussion on Flood Production in Section 2.1 would indicate that the readers are


generalists or non-practitioners. On the other hand, there are concepts presented in
the document that are reasonably technical in nature.
3. The document is unnecessarily long for the amount of information that is
communicated. My view is that clarifying the purpose and the readership would result
in removal (possibly to annexures) of sections of the document.
4. There is inadequate discussion of operation and maintenance of flood management
interventions. The assumption/statement that this issue is first and foremost a function
of financial resources could be challenged.
5. While the material in Chapter 5 is a positive start to a discussion on how to promote
public involvement in the decision making process, it requires more elaboration.
Particularly in the context that dams, which have a [recent] history of strong public
opposition for a variety of reasons, are being proposed as a viable strategy for flood
control and management.

Detailed Comments
6. The definitions in Section 1.1 would be more appropriately placed in an annex or at the
front of the document (with acronyms etc.). Table 1.1 might more appropriately be part
of Chapter 2.1 related to the discussion on flood production.
7. The [inconclusive] discussion on the merits of GDP to measure flood impacts at the
national level seems inappropriate. If there is a defensible alternative, it should be used
and the debate on the merits of the two alternatives placed in an annex.
8. Section 1.2 suggests that there were four generations of flood management. It is
arguable that non-structural approaches were a separate stage. I am unaware of any
instance in which a non-structural approach was adopted as a strategy at any reasonable
scale over any substantial time frame in isolation of structural measures. However,
assuming the authors are correct, specific examples should be provided as was done for
the earlier stages.
9. For section 1.2.1, a more prevalent example of indigenous flood adaptations in
Bangladesh is that regardless of where dwellings are constructed on the flood plain,
they are raised on platforms that are higher than the normal flood. In some places
such as in the northeast region, these platforms exceed 3 m in height.
10. Also in Section 1.2.1, the statement that Experience suggests that as modernization
takes place indigenous approaches are eroded might more accurately state that
indigenous approaches are inadequate.
11. The last paragraph of Section 1.2.1 seems incomplete or at least the point is not clear.
12. Section 1.2.4 , the second example illustrating the emerging holistic analysis is, I
believe, a misinterpretation and draws a questionable conclusion that loans make
people more resilient to the effects of floods. It seems that the current conventional
wisdom is that local communities and including individuals dont compartmentalize
their lives and means of livelihood. Thus, flood management is not relevant in isolation
of other issues that may (or may not) include transport systems, domestic and potable
water supplies, irrigation, sanitation, etc. The point is that interventions need to be
stakeholder driven and flexible if there is to be any meaningful participation and
ownership. Credit may or may not be part of the solution.
13. Chapter 3, Figure 3.1. In addition to the factors mentioned that affect flood impacts
(that is depth, duration, loads, and velocity) timing is also a consideration particularly
in the context of agricultural impacts.
14. The discussion on vulnerability, section 4.2 seems out of place in a Chapter that is
presenting Flood Management Options. It may be better placed as section 1.5.
15. In general, the discussion on the various flood management options could be less
descriptive (for example Dams can be of several kinds; principally, semi-permeable
..) and provide more analysis on their strengths and weaknesses as well as the issues
associated with their application.


I would propose the following as a general framework for the process of for assessing options and
deriving decisions. This is consistent with current practice in many countries and, to the extent that
the political system reflects the desires of its constituents, leads to outcomes that are in accordance
with the desires of the majority. The discussion on assessing options, built around this framework
may also have more structure.

h) Comments by Philip Williams, 25 January 2000

This draft paper does not address the central question that the WCD needs to evaluate. How do dams
affect flood hazards? Unfortunately the review hardly seems to deal with the subject of dams at all :
the word dams appears in only 3 of the 50 summary points in the executive summary. Instead what is
presented is a somewhat unfocussed and inconclusive discourse on flood management. Rather than
spend the time reviewing 113 pages of mostly not particularly relevant material, I will present a
summary of the flood management questions the WCD needs to address. However I am compelled to
comment on some particularly erroneous or unsubstantiated statements lest they influence the WCDs
thinking. I would not recommend the WCD spend any more time attempting to revise this report.

Conclusion 2. This conclusion is a good articulate statement of past engineering thinking about river
ecosystem management and is completely contrary to modern ecologic thinking. It is absolutely
incorrect. I have provided a paper entitled Reviving Living Rivers to the WCD at the Bratislava
hearing on this topic.

Conclusion 6. I find the statement that no flood management strategy is more appropriate than
others to be extraordinary coming from an institution that has previously been known as an advocate
of integrated flood management as opposed to pure flood control. There is no recognition in this
report of how an ideology of pure flood control was promoted by river engineers, including dam
building agencies like the US army corps of engineers, how in the 1930s this ideology triumphed over
advocates of flood hazard management, and how this ideology was then exported to other countries,
supplanting their traditionally developed flood management practices. Only in the last few decades
has the US realized its mistake in attempting only to control floods, meanwhile dam building
interests continue to perpetuate the simplistic deception that dams protect people by controlling
floods. See my article Flood control versus Flood management Conclusion 9. This statement, and
others in the report, implies a bias towards uncritical acceptance of technocratic authority instead of
objective analysis of its claims. Nowhere is there evidence that flood control measures that
supplanted traditional adaptations to flooding can cope better with extreme flooding. This statement
Political Decision
Economic Analysis
Environmental
Analysis
Social Analysis
Agricultural
Analysis
Engineering
Analysis
Fisheries Analysis Cultural Analysis


is contradicted by a cursory review of the farcical flood benefit claims of projects such as:the Nagara
river dam in Japan, a prime example of how western flood control ideology displaced traditional Edo
river management; or an explanation of the real reasons why the world bank was forced by
Bangladeshi NGOs to curtail the FAP in spite of the ambitions of western flood control engineering
firms ; or the 230000 dead in the Banqiao dam failure in China where an even more extreme
communist version of flood control engineering had displaced 2000 years of sophisticated traditional
river management.

Flood Management Questions WCD needs to address:

The central question of how dams affect flood hazards has an important corollary question that must
be addressed in the WCDs ecosystem paper: How do dams affect flood processes that are essential
for sustaining river ecosystems?

There are five areas that need to be investigated in order to address the central question:

A. How do dams affect flood hydrology?- changes in flood magnitude, duration, timing, frequency,
stage if operated perfectly can dams store enough water to protect against all floods in practice
how are dams actually operated during floods and what is their proven effectiveness can flood
control reservoirs be reliably relied on to reduce flood flows to the rates for which they were
designed is there enough operating history worldwide to justify the claim that flood control dams
are proven technology for protecting against extreme floods what are the magnitudes of floods
caused by dam failure or acts of war can reservoirs be consistently operated to time flood peaks
on tributaries of major rivers what are the causes of misoperation of flood control reservoirs
during major floods and how do these failures affect downstream flood peaks can flood control
operation result in very rapid rates of rise or fall in river stage that cause levee collapse can flood
control reservoir releases create extended flood periods of high river stage that can cause levee
collapse can large reservoirs or cascades of dams accelerate flood peaks causing greater floods
downstream can river stage upstream of reservoirs increase due to backwater effects.
Are all these factors routinely considered in planning flood control dams or calculating their
benefits
In dam design is it assumed that flood control operation will be perfect 100 percent of the time

B. How do dams affect geomorphic processes thereby increasing flood hazards
Do dams cause downstream river channel changes that can cause bank erosion and undermine
levees, or raise flood levels due to aggradation
Do dams cause river bed aggradation upstream of reservoirs
Do reservoirs capture sediments thereby causing shoreline erosion in estuaries, river deltas and
coastal shorelines. What has been the extent of these losses worldwide due to dam construction.
Does the depletion of sediments in estuaries, deltas, and shorelines due to dams make these areas
more susceptible to storm surge flooding and inundation due to sea level rise.
In actual experience is there a history of continued encroachment in downstream floodways that
constrains flood releases and downgrades a flood control reservoir s capability

C. How do dams affect human occupancy and use of flood prone areas do dams encourage the
perception that downstream areas are protected from floods when flood risks remain are land use
controls enacted to limit land use below flood control dams appropriate to the level of protection
they actually provide where downstream levees form an essential part of a flood control system
below a flood control dam, what is the residual risk to floodplain development encouraged to
locate behind the levee are land use controls effective in controlling occupancy of floodways
downstream of dams does the presence of flood control dams lead to neglect of other important
parts of flood management infrastructure.



D. Are flood benefits accurately determined for flood control dams do flood benefits realistically
assess the change in flood frequency, stage, over the lifetime of the dam recognizing long term
channel changes and reservoir sedimentation, and increasing risk of failure as dams age. are post
flood benefit estimates of dam owners accurate estimates of the long term benefits. Do they reflect
the actual incremental damages likely to occur during a major flood to induced development in the
floodplain are dam projects planned to allow people to live in the active flood control reservoir
zone do dam operators actually follow operating procedures during major flood emergencies are
dam operators frequently prevented from operating according to plan during major floods due to
equipment or spillway failure is there a conflict between use of reservoir space in multipurpose
dams between flood control need s and other uses in multipurpose reservoirs are operations
modified to successively downgrade flood control operational effectiveness in favor of power and
irrigation once the dam is built in the event of misoperation or dam failure who is liable . Are
these costs routinely incorporated in benefit cost analysis in typical benefit cost analysis has it
been the practice of dam building agencies to systematically exaggerate benefits by attributing all
the benefits accruing to the whole flood control system to the flood control dam instead of the
incremental change in benefits
Do dam proponents accurately or honestly represent the flood benefits to the public.
Are people living in the path of a dam break flood routinely informed of the risk.

E. Are alternatives adequately addressed
Is it accurate to refer to flood control, by itself as a flood hazard reduction strategy when it does
not deal with land use, perception of flood risk or institutional infrastructure
Are flood management alternatives such as land use controls, insurance, flood warning,
evacuation, flood proofing or flood refuges fairly evaluated in dam planning
Does approval of a flood control dam divert funding and reduce the incentive to implement a
comprehensive flood hazard reduction program.

i) Comments by William Smith, 10 March 2000

There is a lot of good common sense in this paper.

When people write about floods they tend to forget that the purpose (and main benefit) of river
embankments is to prevent normal seasonal floods from inundating cities and farms that have been
there for centuries. Without levees, places like New Orleans and Wuhan would be inundated every
year. Here is a piece I have adapted from something I wrote on floods in China:

In recent years, reports of floods throughout the world have stimulated a debate on strategic
approaches to flood control. Some observers find fault with the way things have been done in the
past. Severe damages experienced on some of the worlds great rivers has thrown into question the
performance of flood control works and the strategies underlying their design. It has been argued
that rivers should not be confined because this eliminates the flood plains that can act as natural
flood control reservoirs. Critics also observe that levees are harmful to flora and fauna, and deprive
farmland of sediment.

Unfortunately the options for leaving rivers undeveloped was foreclosed centuries ago in most
countries. Throughout history, rivers have been the main transportation routes and communities
were attracted to the river banks and floodplains which had much of the best farmland. So,
inevitably, there was a demand for flood protection. The levees in place on many rivers protect vast
areas of land every year from the normal floodsprotection against extreme floods is not their only


purpose. These benefits that are realized year in and year out are sometimes overlooked by the critics
of flood control.

On flood insurance:
In developing countries, the governments sometimes provide short-term relief for those rendered
homeless by floods and other natural disasters, but they do not compensate for material losses.
There is generally no national flood insurance and little in the way of private disaster insurance. This
is in contrast to the USA where the rising cost of taxpayer-funded relief and compensation led to the
creation of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in 1968. The NFIP relieves the federal and
local governments of the burden of compensation for flood losses by making flood insurance
financially viable. Flood insurance is available only for communities with a federally approved
flood ordinance and for those who comply with the ordinance. An ordinance typically establishes
flood zoning and tells people what they can and cannot do in a flood plain.

In most of the developing world flood zoning of agricultural land use or private enterprises would
probably not be economically or financially justified. In lowland floodplains, damage generally takes
the form of loss of production (mostly agricultural) rather than destruction of physical assets. This is
because the flow velocities, except where there is a breach, are low and the damage is mostly from
inundation. Over the years, the farmers have adapted their land use to the pattern and frequency of
inundation (most of the time due to direct rainfall over vast areas). For high-value annual crops, the
returns are so high that farmers will accept the risk of farming in flood-prone areas. For low-value
grain crops, the loss is relatively small and can be recouped in several flood-free years. Factories are
sometimes shut down by floods, but the owners generally take care, where possible, to place
electrical equipment and other sensitive equipment above flood levels. In effect, therefore, farmers
and enterprises are self-insured.

j) Comments by Hans van Duivendijk, 15 December 2000

Introduction

I have now read the aforementioned paper and my worries and expectations, as expressed in my
memo of 1
st
October, to my regret, have turned out to be correct.

No doubt the paper contains a lot of interesting and valuable information but 75 % of it is irrelevant
to the matter at issue. This only tends to divert the reader and it makes reading rather time-
consuming and boring. However, it is better that I substantiate this critiscism in some detail. I will do
this by making some general observations, followed by comments page by page.

1 General

The paper presents an endless list of facts and figures, and of references to other papers (mostly
originating from the authors themselves). It would appear that the aim was to present an overview of
all the papers produced by the FHRC in the course of the years. Accordingly, references to UK-
situations prevail.

The art of writing a thematic paper, in my opinion, is to leave out irrelevant or superfluous
information. The authors have not made an effort to do this.



Though there is a lot of very valuable information in the paper, it misses focus on the issue at stake:
dams and floods and why build dams and not something else. As such it is more of an inventory made
from a sociological viewpoint of other peoples papers (see f.i. pages 81, 82) than a firm strategy
about what to do in case of flooding. What, for instance, is the interest of knowing why people
choose to evacuate or not (p. 83, 84)?

There is nowhere a quantitative comparaison between various types of flood mitigation. Discussions
on design matters either are missing or not to the point.

Sometimes, statements contradict each other. Compare in this respect page 20 vs. pages 75-88 on
non-structural measures and pages 50 and 73 on flood maps.

Specific comments

CHAPTER 2

Page 10, Table 1.1
The Table is unnecessarily detailed in the sense that it lists all kind of floods which have nothing to
do with the topic to be discussed. What, for instance is the relevance of sewer/urban drain flood and
burst water mains in relation to dams? Surely, the order of magnitude of urban drain floods or sewer
floods is not the same in terms of flood volume as that of river floods and, consequently, solutions in
both cases are completely different from each other.

Page 12, end of first para of 2.1.1.
The reference to Bangladesh concerns flooding caused by cyclones. This is a type of flooding which
has nothing to do with rivers or more precisely with WCD. Note in this respect that the table on page
14 (rightly) makes the distinction between flood and tropical cyclone.

Page 14, 2nd para under table
The percentages are nonsense as they are based on a situation without or with limited flood
protection. In fact the Netherlands are very well protected against floods and are therefor less flood
prone to river floods or flooding due to storm surges than the UK.

Page 16
The box is much too long.

Page 17 (centre)
In Bangladesh not some dwellings but most dwellings are constructed on man-made (not: higher
ground) earth mounds. Only the dwellings which are not placed on earth mounds are dismantled.

Page 18, last para
Here it should be mentioned that living in a delta of river(s), like Netherlands or Bangladesh, always
requires some form of flood protection (not flood control) and, also that this can be very effective.

Page 19, first para
The definition of non-structural approaches is more a matter of wishful thinking than correct.

Page 20, first para
The reference to the (non-)effectiveness of non-structural approaches in the US. does not necessarily
have to be applicable to many other world regions, see also comment on pages 76-88.

Page 21, first para


Apart from the suggested distinction between floods and flooding in Bangladesh (which I never heard
of in my 25 years of working on and off in that country) the important factor local rainfall, which
causes most of the flooding, is not mentioned.

Page 22, Section 2.4, first para
Contrary to what is stated weirs in stream do not create some storage capacity.

Page 22, Sectio 2.4, second para
The pedant might not argue, etc because (at my instigation) the World Register of Dams (1998) on
page 15 clearly excludes as dams flood protection embankments along rivers, and coastal
barriers,.

Page 24, first para
For 25 km2 read: 25 km
3
.

Page 24, second para
The graph presented here, as well as its interpretation, seems useless.

CHAPTER 3

Page 27
The Box about flooding in Venice is of no interest here as it has nothing to do with the aims and
concerns of WCD.

Page 30, centre
The reference to terps, the raised earthmounds constructed in Zeeland as flood refuge areas is
wrong. There were in fact in the past flood refuge areas in the province of Zeeland, Netherlands but
these are not the terps. The latter you find in the northern province of Friesland and they were (and
are) raised earth mounds used for permanent occupation. The terps were much larger than the flood
refuge areas in Zeeland. Terps as well as refuge areas were constructed in order to cope with storm
surges at sea. It had nothing to do with rivers.

Page 31
The significance of the song on this page is lost on me.

Page 32
The so-called char dwellers in Bangladesh living on sandbanks and on flood plains of the major rivers
are definitely not living on marginal land and do not consider themselves in a worse position than
people living elsewhere, to the contrary!

CHAPTER 4

Page 36

The graph shown is not very useful, it concerns only areas somewhere in the UK.

Page 37 and 38


The data on flood losses presented on this page would appear to be less relevant for the purpose of
this Thematic paper. The same applies to the text and graph on the next page. What does this have to
do with dams?

Page 39, third para and page 41, Section 4.1.2
Land drainage as described here has nothing to do with floods. Land drainage is in fact important for
flooded areas as a way of getting rid of the flooding at an early date but that has not been described
here.

Page 42, Table 1.4
For the same reason as above this table should be deleted.

Page 45, para 4.2.1
Thousands of people in Bangladesh killed? My figures are 900 in 1987 and 1100 in 1988.

Page 45, fourth bullet point
The Vaiont dam never failed. The disaster concerned a huge land slide in the reservoir which caused
a large wave overtopping the dam.

Page 45, last bullet point
What is the significance of such details as given here?

Page 46, last para
What is the relevance about stress after a flood (should read: flooding)? May be that you have to do
something to prevent flooding but that conclusion is not drawn.

Page 47, Tabke 1.6
The table is interesting in another context but here it serves no purpose.

CHAPTER 5

Page 50, fourth para
I do not agree to this fine-tuning. Drawing flood outlines on maps gives a fair impression to the
layman what can be ecpected in case of e severe flood. All this talk about uncertainty no doubt is very
scientific but that is not what engineering is about. No engineering works ever try to define or
establish structures or measures which for the full 100 % satisfy the aims under all circumstances.

The statement in the sentence starting with For example is valid for most types of flood protection
or control and not just for channel improvements.

Pages 51 to 55
The discussions about vulnerability are highly theoretical and do not contribute to the purpose of this
thematic paper in any way. The statements in Section 5.2.3 are interesting but belong elsewhere
(Section 5.2.6, where it is described how to tackle a flood problem and to select a solution).

Page 59
The statement dams protect against all floods until they fail, etc is completely incorrect. First of all
the degree of protection given by a certain dam differs from flood to flood. Secondly, failure of a dam
is exceptional as can be seen in the relevant litterature.

Page 60


The discussions on this page completely ignore the fact that the risks to life in case of a dike failure
can be seen by everybody living near it,( including the authorities) and that all kind of non-structural
measures are specifically aiming to reduce this risk to life ( like flood fighting, evacuation, flood
warning) and that these actions in most cases are highly successful.

Pages 61 to 64
The texts and figures on these pages could be made much more clear if more attention would be
given to captions and definitions (now the letters A and B sometimes represent a location but
elsewhere a tributary, a main stem or an area, see also in this respect the reference to Figure x on
page 88 in Section 5.2.6).

Pages 65 and 66
It is all very interesting but the measures described usually do not solve a flooding problem. There
impact on floods is small ( see f.i. page 66 near the bottom: afforestationdoes not necessarily
reduce the flood risk).

Page 67, fifth para
The possibility to use statistics, derived from historical flood series, for multi purpose reservoir
operation ( see contribution Van Duivendijk, Section 3.1 and Fig. 8) is completely ignored.

Page 68, Section 5.2.4.3
It is important to make a distinction between a fixed meander (in Netherlands all meanders are
fixed) and a free meandering river (like the rivers in Bangladesh and many other countries). In the
latter case the hardship for the peasants loosing their land because of this meandering is much greater
than in the case of floods.

Again, a typical UK- situation is described. The actual function of bypass channels ( i.e. increase of
the discharge capacity of the river system during floods ) is not mentioned.

Though the statements in this para are in principle correct, one should add that the heavy rainfall
inside Bangladesh during the flood (i.e this flood water is arriving from outside the country) season
precludes the success of an embankment scheme: The embankments would keep the flood water
inside a pre-determined flood plain but would not stop the rain from inundating the protected areas.

Page 70, fourth para, line 5,6
Geotextiles are not used instead but allow the thickness of the protective rock layer to be
considerably less than in the old situation.

You cannot compare seawalls with flood walls. Seawalls are first and for all deemed to stop wave
run-up and overtopping by waves.

Page 71, Figure 4.11
This figure is not clear without saying what the figures along both axes actually mean.

Page 72, para Resettlement
Third line read:many rural householders.
What is the difference between resettlement, as described here, and evacuation as described on page
83?



Here the use of flood maps is advocated but on page 50 this was criticised!

Page 73, fouth para
The name of the author is Hiaasen.

Pages 73/74
Table 2.1 does not demonstrate anything other than normal human behaviour, so leave it out.

Page 74, middle of page
It is not usual to take a 100 year return period flood, etc (may be it is in the UK).

Page 75, first para
The figure mentioned was not attached.

Pages 75 to 88
This in fact is all about non- structural measures (i.e.Section 5.2.5) but the expression is not used as
such, neither is the presentation always to the point or is a logical set-up being followed. Note also in
this respect that on page 20 these non-structural measures are considered to require rethinking. It
shows that the authors of the paper either just quote others peoples opinions without further thinking
or have individually different opinions about the issue or do not co-ordinate their contributions.

Page 89, third para
Nobody is looking for this kind of wisdom. Surely this thematic paper is not a manual for engineers
how and where to situate a reservoir!

Page 90, below table
Nowhere in this text it is said how you are going to arrive at a solution. It is just an endless discussion
about different features which may have a bearing on the solution to be selected.

Page 91, various
Under the heading dams the important condition multi purpose is not mentioned.
The function of both dams (meant is: reservoirs in mountainous areas) and detention basins is
storage. This is not mentioned.
The function of channel modifications/ dikes and flood embankemnts is first of all increase in
discharge capacity. Also this is not mentioned.
The statement: In developed countries, the use of dikes.protection offered by summer dikes,
etc. is not correct. Probably is meant developing countries
House raising is mentioned separately but it is just a form of flood proofing.

However, in general it must be pointed out that Section 5.2.6 contains a lot of valuable material.

CHAPTER 6

This Chapter is indeed very incomplete (as stated in the heading of this chapter). Therefor only a few
comments:

Page 97, first para
Two reasons for selecting dams for flood control are not mentioned:
Combination with other uses (i.e. multi purpose);
Necessity in many cases to combine storage measures with measures to increase discharge
capacity of the river system.



Page 97, third para
The potential drawback the risk and consequences of failure is nonsense. The risk that a long flood
embankment somewhere is overtopped or collapses is far greater than that of a dam whose design is
based on the one in 10 000 year flood.
Failure of the rock base of the dam is not a common cause of failure.

This kind of qualitative discussion full of if and however gives the impression that the author(s)
are not willing to discuss the issue in an objective manner.

CHAPTER 7

In this Chapter no effort is made to compare the various options for flood control/protection with one
another. The contents are therefor not relevant for the purpose of this thematic paper.
Nevertheless a few comments:

Page 100, first para
What has the role of women to do with flood control?

Page 101, bottom
What is the significance of the remark about upgrading coastal dikes in the Netherlands?

Pages 102 to 105
The very vague discussions on these pages do not serve any purpose and do not make the reader any
wiser. Only the last para on page 104 merits to be retained.

Page 107, last two paras
Though I agree with the conclusion regarding the approach to boundaries, I note that this conclusion
is not valid in the case of international boundaries.

CHAPTER 8

Also this Chapter does not serve any purpose in this Thematic paper.

CHAPTER 9
Typically: not a word about dams and their relation to other types of flood control.



Assessment Flood Control

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Assessment Flood Control

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

WCD Thematic Review

Options Assessment: IV.4

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen