IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v31y2011i2p282-300.html

The Use of Individual and Societal Risk Criteria Within the Dutch Flood Safety Policy—Nationwide Estimates of Societal Risk and Policy Applications

Author

Listed:
  • Sebastiaan N. Jonkman
  • Ruben Jongejan
  • Bob Maaskant

Abstract

The Dutch government is in the process of revising its flood safety policy. The current safety standards for flood defenses in the Netherlands are largely based on the outcomes of cost‐benefit analyses. Loss of life has not been considered separately in the choice for current standards. This article presents the results of a research project that evaluated the potential roles of two risk metrics, individual and societal risk, to support decision making about new flood safety standards. These risk metrics are already used in the Dutch major hazards policy for the evaluation of risks to the public. Individual risk concerns the annual probability of death of a person. Societal risk concerns the probability of an event with many fatalities. Technical aspects of the use of individual and societal risk metrics in flood risk assessments as well as policy implications are discussed. Preliminary estimates of nationwide levels of societal risk are presented. Societal risk levels appear relatively high in the southwestern part of the country where densely populated dike rings are threatened by a combination of river and coastal floods. It was found that cumulation, the simultaneous flooding of multiple dike rings during a single flood event, has significant impact on the national level of societal risk. Options for the application of the individual and societal risk in the new flood safety policy are presented and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Sebastiaan N. Jonkman & Ruben Jongejan & Bob Maaskant, 2011. "The Use of Individual and Societal Risk Criteria Within the Dutch Flood Safety Policy—Nationwide Estimates of Societal Risk and Policy Applications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(2), pages 282-300, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:2:p:282-300
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01502.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01502.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01502.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pieter Jan M. Stallen & Rob Geerts & Han K. Vrijling, 1996. "Three Conceptions of Quantified Societal Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(5), pages 635-644, October.
    2. Sebastiaan N. Jonkman & Matthijs Kok & Johannes K. Vrijling, 2008. "Flood Risk Assessment in the Netherlands: A Case Study for Dike Ring South Holland," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1357-1374, October.
    3. Heiko Apel & Annegret Thieken & Bruno Merz & Günter Blöschl, 2006. "A Probabilistic Modelling System for Assessing Flood Risks," 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. 38(1), pages 79-100, May.
    4. van Manen, Sipke E. & Brinkhuis, Martine, 2005. "Quantitative flood risk assessment for Polders," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 229-237.
    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. Alessio Ciullo & Jan H. Kwakkel & Karin M. De Bruijn & Neelke Doorn & Frans Klijn, 2020. "Efficient or Fair? Operationalizing Ethical Principles in Flood Risk Management: A Case Study on the Dutch‐German Rhine," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(9), pages 1844-1862, September.
    2. R. B. Jongejan & B. Maaskant, 2015. "Quantifying Flood Risks in the Netherlands," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 252-264, February.
    3. Yufeng Yang & Xixiang Zhang & Shuyi Xie & Shanqi Qu & Haotian Chen & Qiming Xu & Guohua Chen, 2024. "Design and Visual Implementation of a Regional Energy Risk Superposition Model for Oil Tank Farms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-18, November.
    4. Rongen, G. & Morales-Nápoles, O. & Kok, M., 2022. "Expert judgment-based reliability analysis of the Dutch flood defense system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    5. Charles Vlek, 2013. "What Can National Risk Assessors Learn from Decision Theorists and Psychologists?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(8), pages 1389-1393, August.
    6. Jongejan, R.B. & Diermanse, F. & Kanning, W. & Bottema, M., 2020. "Reliability-based partial factors for flood defenses," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    7. Tim Bedford, 2013. "Decision Making for Group Risk Reduction: Dealing with Epistemic Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(10), pages 1884-1898, October.
    8. S. Pereira & J. L. Zêzere & I. Quaresma & P. P. Santos & M. Santos, 2016. "Mortality Patterns of Hydro‐Geomorphologic Disasters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(6), pages 1188-1210, June.

    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. Sebastiaan N. Jonkman & Matthijs Kok & Johannes K. Vrijling, 2008. "Flood Risk Assessment in the Netherlands: A Case Study for Dike Ring South Holland," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1357-1374, October.
    2. Giuliano Di Baldassarre & Attilio Castellarin & Alberto Montanari & Armando Brath, 2009. "Probability-weighted hazard maps for comparing different flood risk management strategies: a case study," 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. 50(3), pages 479-496, September.
    3. Sergii Skakun & Nataliia Kussul & Andrii Shelestov & Olga Kussul, 2014. "Flood Hazard and Flood Risk Assessment Using a Time Series of Satellite Images: A Case Study in Namibia," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(8), pages 1521-1537, August.
    4. Vana Tsimopoulou & Matthijs Kok & Johannes Vrijling, 2015. "Economic optimization of flood prevention systems in the Netherlands," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 891-912, August.
    5. Arjen Hoekstra & Jean-Luc Kok, 2008. "Adapting to climate change: a comparison of two strategies for dike heightening," 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. 47(2), pages 217-228, November.
    6. 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.
    7. Hou, Tianfeng & Nuyens, Dirk & Roels, Staf & Janssen, Hans, 2019. "Quasi-Monte Carlo based uncertainty analysis: Sampling efficiency and error estimation in engineering applications," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    8. Malecha, Matthew L. & Brand, A.D. & Berke, Philip R., 2018. "Spatially evaluating a network of plans and flood vulnerability using a Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard: A case study in Feijenoord District, Rotterdam, the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 147-157.
    9. H. Moel & J. Aerts, 2011. "Effect of uncertainty in land use, damage models and inundation depth on flood damage estimates," 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. 58(1), pages 407-425, July.
    10. Melanie Kunz & Adrienne Grêt-Regamey & Lorenz Hurni, 2011. "Visualization of uncertainty in natural hazards assessments using an interactive cartographic information system," 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(3), pages 1735-1751, December.
    11. Lindsay Beevers & Lila Collet & Gordon Aitken & Claire Maravat & Annie Visser, 2020. "The influence of climate model uncertainty on fluvial flood hazard estimation," 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. 104(3), pages 2489-2510, December.
    12. Gong, Yu & Liu, Pan & Zhang, Jun & Liu, Dedi & Zhang, Xiaoqi & Zhang, Xiaojing, 2020. "Considering different streamflow forecast horizons in the quantitative flood risk analysis for a multi-reservoir system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    13. Xin Miao & Yanhong Tang & Bao Xi, 2014. "The role of coupling and embeddedness in risk evolution: rethinking the snow event in early 2008, China," 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. 71(1), pages 53-61, March.
    14. Jean-Luc Kok & Malte Grossmann, 2010. "Large-scale assessment of flood risk and the effects of mitigation measures along the Elbe River," 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. 52(1), pages 143-166, January.
    15. Si, Deng-Kui & Li, Xiao-Lin & Xu, XuChuan & Fang, Yi, 2021. "The risk spillover effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on energy sector: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    16. Selene Perazzini & Giorgio Stefano Gnecco & Fabio Pammolli, 2020. "A Public-Private Insurance Model for Natural Risk Management: an Application to Seismic and Flood Risks on Residential Buildings in Italy," Papers 2006.05840, arXiv.org.
    17. Mark C. Quigley & Luke G. Bennetts & Patricia Durance & Petra M. Kuhnert & Mark D. Lindsay & Keith G. Pembleton & Melanie E. Roberts & Christopher J. White, 2019. "The provision and utility of science and uncertainty to decision-makers: earth science case studies," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 307-348, September.
    18. María Bermúdez & Andreas Paul Zischg, 2018. "Sensitivity of flood loss estimates to building representation and flow depth attribution methods in micro-scale flood modelling," 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. 92(3), pages 1633-1648, July.
    19. Xiuquan Deng & Zhu Lu & Xinmiao Yang & Qiuhong Zhao & Dehua Gao & Bing Bai, 2018. "Formation Mechanism and Coping Strategy of Public Emergency for Urban Sustainability: A Perspective of Risk Propagation in the Sociotechnical System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, February.
    20. Alejandra Gijón Mancheño & Peter M. J. Herman & Sebastiaan N. Jonkman & Swarna Kazi & Ignacio Urrutia & Mathijs van Ledden, 2021. "Mapping Mangrove Opportunities with Open Access Data: A Case Study for Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:2:p:282-300. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.