IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v59y2011i1p301-316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determining flood hazard patterns through a combined stochastic–deterministic approach

Author

Listed:
  • B. Mazzorana
  • F. Comiti
  • C. Volcan
  • C. Scherer

Abstract

A sound, evidence-based hazard mapping requires the analysis of stochastic processes taking place at critical configurations (e.g., bridges, levees) in order to reliably determine the spatial patterns of flood intensities and probabilities. Here, we discuss an approach aiming to support an enhanced determination of flood hazard patterns by identifying within alluvial fans and river corridors two main types of spatial domains based on the predictability of their dynamics, i.e., stochastic and quasi-deterministic domains. The former represents critical configurations whose dynamic evolution (e.g., clogging by large wood, failure due to breaching) cannot be realistically specified by deterministic models, whereas the latter refers to the part of the system where the flood propagation can be computed with sufficient precision and accuracy by hydrodynamic models. The applicability of the proposed approach is discussed on the basis of a case study in the Autonomous Province of Bolzano (Italy). Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Suggested Citation

  • B. Mazzorana & F. Comiti & C. Volcan & C. Scherer, 2011. "Determining flood hazard patterns through a combined stochastic–deterministic approach," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 59(1), pages 301-316, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:59:y:2011:i:1:p:301-316
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-011-9755-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-011-9755-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-011-9755-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. H. Apel & G. Aronica & H. Kreibich & A. Thieken, 2009. "Flood risk analyses—how detailed do we need to be?," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 49(1), pages 79-98, April.
    2. Gilboa,Itzhak, 2009. "Theory of Decision under Uncertainty," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521517324.
    3. Sven Fuchs & Magdalena Thöni & Maria McAlpin & Urs Gruber & Michael Bründl, 2007. "Avalanche Hazard Mitigation Strategies Assessed by Cost Effectiveness Analyses and Cost Benefit Analyses—evidence from Davos, Switzerland," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 41(1), pages 113-129, April.
    4. B. Mazzorana & J. Hübl & A. Zischg & A. Largiader, 2011. "Modelling woody material transport and deposition in alpine rivers," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 56(2), pages 425-449, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sofia Melo Vasconcellos & Masato Kobiyama & Fernanda Stachowski Dagostin & Claudia Weber Corseuil & Vinicius Santana Castiglio, 2021. "Flood Hazard Mapping in Alluvial Fans with Computational Modeling," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(5), pages 1463-1478, March.
    2. V. Ruiz-Villanueva & J. Bodoque & A. Díez-Herrero & E. Bladé, 2014. "Large wood transport as significant influence on flood risk in a mountain village," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 74(2), pages 967-987, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. B. Mazzorana & F. Comiti & S. Fuchs, 2013. "A structured approach to enhance flood hazard assessment in mountain streams," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 67(3), pages 991-1009, July.
    2. Nicola Ranger & Falk Nieh�rster, 2011. "Deep uncertainty in long-term hurricane risk: scenario generation and implications for future climate experiments," GRI Working Papers 51, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    3. Crès, Hervé & Tvede, Mich, 2022. "Aggregation of opinions in networks of individuals and collectives," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    4. Basieva, Irina & Khrennikova, Polina & Pothos, Emmanuel M. & Asano, Masanari & Khrennikov, Andrei, 2018. "Quantum-like model of subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 150-162.
    5. Dietz, Simon, 2012. "The treatment of risk and uncertainty in the US social cost of carbon for regulatory impact analysis," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 6, pages 1-12.
    6. Carvalho, M., 2012. "Static vs Dynamic Auctions with Ambiguity Averse Bidders," Other publications TiSEM 1f078e67-88ec-46e3-ae18-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Maximilian Blesch & Philipp Eisenhauer, 2021. "Robust decision-making under risk and ambiguity," Papers 2104.12573, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    8. Heyen, Daniel, 2018. "Ambiguity aversion under maximum-likelihood updating," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 80342, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Fatemeh Jalayer & Raffaele Risi & Francesco Paola & Maurizio Giugni & Gaetano Manfredi & Paolo Gasparini & Maria Topa & Nebyou Yonas & Kumelachew Yeshitela & Alemu Nebebe & Gina Cavan & Sarah Lindley , 2014. "Probabilistic GIS-based method for delineation of urban flooding risk hotspots," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 73(2), pages 975-1001, September.
    10. Takao Asano & Hiroyuki Kojima, 2022. "Choquet Integrals and Belief Functions," KIER Working Papers 1077, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    11. Ranger, Nicola & Niehörster, Falk, 2011. "Deep uncertainty in long-term hurricane risk: scenario generation and implications for future climate experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 37587, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Stephen C. Newbold & Charles Griffiths & Chris Moore & Ann Wolverton & Elizabeth Kopits, 2013. "A Rapid Assessment Model For Understanding The Social Cost Of Carbon," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(01), pages 1-40.
    13. Ikefuji, Masako & Laeven, Roger J.A. & Magnus, Jan R. & Muris, Chris, 2020. "Expected utility and catastrophic risk in a stochastic economy–climate model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 214(1), pages 110-129.
    14. Xiangyu Qu, 2017. "Separate aggregation of beliefs and values under ambiguity," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(2), pages 503-519, February.
    15. M. Ali Khan & Metin Uyanık, 2021. "Topological connectedness and behavioral assumptions on preferences: a two-way relationship," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(2), pages 411-460, March.
    16. Animesh Gain & Vahid Mojtahed & Claudio Biscaro & Stefano Balbi & Carlo Giupponi, 2015. "An integrated approach of flood risk assessment in the eastern part of Dhaka City," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 79(3), pages 1499-1530, December.
    17. Zappia, Carlo, 2021. "Leonard Savage, The Ellsberg Paradox, And The Debate On Subjective Probabilities: Evidence From The Archives," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 169-192, June.
    18. J. F. Rosser & D. G. Leibovici & M. J. Jackson, 2017. "Rapid flood inundation mapping using social media, remote sensing and topographic data," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(1), pages 103-120, May.
    19. Anna Rita Scorzini & Maurizio Leopardi, 2017. "River basin planning: from qualitative to quantitative flood risk assessment: the case of Abruzzo Region (central Italy)," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 88(1), pages 71-93, August.
    20. Khalid Oubennaceur & Karem Chokmani & Florence Lessard & Yves Gauthier & Catherine Baltazar & Jean-Patrick Toussaint, 2022. "Understanding Flood Risk Perception: A Case Study from Canada," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:59:y:2011:i:1:p:301-316. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.