IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa05p314.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Thinking about Big Floods in a Small Country - Dutch Modelling Exercises

Author

Listed:
  • Albert E. Steenge
  • Marija Boèkarjova

Abstract

In this contribution we discuss new developments in Dutch thinking about the increasing risk of big floods. A first issue concerns the choice of methodology. Today several ones exist to assess the consequences of big natural catastrophes. These methodologies differ significantly in background philosophy, objective or scope. In the U.S., for example, several market-based approaches have been presented recently, focusing on short run disequilibria. Certain preferences seem to exist, depending on country and type of catastrophe we wish to study. Nonetheless, by and large the debate is still open, depending on what the country or region views as its major problem. It is questionable whether market-based approaches are fruitful for a small country with a large state influence, such as the Netherlands. Probably it is better to start from the notion of specific types of network disruptions in a highly developed and densely populated country. In this paper, we focus on the interdependencies between production and consumption activities. This leads to an investigation based on Input-Output (I-O) methodologies. A big flood then causes a series of disruptions in the existing production and consumption networks. Our paper addresses the point that I-O as it stands is not very appropriate. The basic problem is that I-O models stress interaction and equilibrium, while here we have to deal with disruption and disequilibrium. In our contribution, we model the consequences of a disaster where a part of the existing economic networks fails temporarily or forever. Several situations can be distinguished: after the disaster, many suppliers will have lost their customers. Vice versa, it also may be impossible to satisfy existing demand because the supplying firms cannot deliver any more. This means that the economy suddenly has to decide on the way its now restricted resources should be distributed. In fact, a major decision is asked for. Economic policy needs to steer the distribution of the available goods in intelligent ways between various categories of buyers and suppliers. In a pure market economy decisions made most likely will be different from those made in a heavily regulated country like the Netherlands. Our research is based on the basic hypothesis underlying I-O models, i.e. the need to distinguish between two major categories of destination, ‘final consumption’ (such as households, investment demand, government demands, exports), and ‘intermediate demand’ (basically all inputs into the industrial core of the country). Outcomes will be different according to the choices being made. One reason is the presence of multiplier effects, which reflect current interactions. A choice in favour of final demand will alleviate problems of the affected groups, but at the same time will increase inter-industry imbalances, and imply a heavy role for supporting import. The choice is not straightforward, and involves complex interrelations and interactions. In this paper we use regional I-O tables in combination with GIS-based techniques. In the empirical part of the paper we discuss the consequences of a large dike break in the central part of the country.

Suggested Citation

  • Albert E. Steenge & Marija Boèkarjova, 2005. "Thinking about Big Floods in a Small Country - Dutch Modelling Exercises," ERSA conference papers ersa05p314, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa05/papers/314.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam Rose, 2004. "Economic Principles, Issues, and Research Priorities in Hazard Loss Estimation," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Yasuhide Okuyama & Stephanie E. Chang (ed.), Modeling Spatial and Economic Impacts of Disasters, chapter 2, pages 13-36, Springer.
    2. Sam Cole, 2004. "Geohazards in Social Systems: An Insurance Matrix Approach," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Yasuhide Okuyama & Stephanie E. Chang (ed.), Modeling Spatial and Economic Impacts of Disasters, chapter 6, pages 103-118, Springer.
    3. Harold C. Cochrane, 2004. "Indirect Losses from Natural Disasters: Measurement and Myth," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Yasuhide Okuyama & Stephanie E. Chang (ed.), Modeling Spatial and Economic Impacts of Disasters, chapter 3, pages 37-52, Springer.
    4. James A. MacMillan, 1998. "Regional Economic Impacts of Sustainable Development Activities: The North American Waterfowl Management Plan Introduction," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 46(1), pages 17-35, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Iman Rahimi Aloughareh & Mohsen Ghafory Ashtiany & Kiarash Nasserasadi, 2016. "An Integrated Methodology For Regional Macroeconomic Loss Estimation Of Earthquake: A Case Study Of Tehran," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 61(04), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Irfan Ahmed & Claudio Socci & Rosita Pretaroli & Francesca Severini & Stefano Deriu, 2022. "Socioeconomic spillovers of the 2016–2017 Italian earthquakes: a bi-regional inoperability model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 426-453, January.
    3. Jonkman, S.N. & Bockarjova, M. & Kok, M. & Bernardini, P., 2008. "Integrated hydrodynamic and economic modelling of flood damage in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 77-90, May.
    4. Naqvi, Asjad, 2017. "Deep Impact: Geo-Simulations as a Policy Toolkit for Natural Disasters," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 395-418.
    5. Okuyama, Yasuhide & Sahin, Sebnem, 2009. "Impact estimation of disasters : a global aggregate for 1960 to 2007," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4963, The World Bank.
    6. H. Lin & Y. Kuo & D. Shaw & M. Chang & T. Kao, 2012. "Regional economic impact analysis of earthquakes in northern Taiwan and its implications for disaster reduction policies," 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. 61(2), pages 603-620, March.
    7. Paul Raschky, 2007. "Estimating the effects of risk transfer mechanisms against floods in Europe and U.S.A.: A dynamic panel approach," Working Papers 2007-05, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    8. Masato Yamazaki & Atsushi Koike & Yoshinori Sone, 2018. "A Heuristic Approach to the Estimation of Key Parameters for a Monthly, Recursive, Dynamic CGE Model," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 283-301, October.
    9. Aaron B. Gertz & James B. Davies & Samantha L. Black, 2019. "A CGE Framework for Modeling the Economics of Flooding and Recovery in a Major Urban Area," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(6), pages 1314-1341, June.
    10. David Nortes Martínez & Frédéric Grelot & Pauline Bremond & Stefano Farolfi & Juliette Rouchier, 2021. "Are interactions important in estimating flood damage to economic entities? The case of wine-making in France," Post-Print hal-03609616, HAL.
    11. Stéphane Hallegatte, 2014. "Modeling the Role of Inventories and Heterogeneity in the Assessment of the Economic Costs of Natural Disasters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 152-167, January.
    12. Jahn, Malte, 2013. "Economics of extreme weather events in cities: Terminology and regional impact models," HWWI Research Papers 143, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).
    13. Weijiang Li & Jiahong Wen & Bo Xu & Xiande Li & Shiqiang Du, 2018. "Integrated Assessment of Economic Losses in Manufacturing Industry in Shanghai Metropolitan Area Under an Extreme Storm Flood Scenario," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, December.
    14. Michael A. Hamilton & Tao Hong & Elizabeth Casman & Patrick L. Gurian, 2015. "Risk‐Based Decision Making for Reoccupation of Contaminated Areas Following a Wide‐Area Anthrax Release," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1348-1363, July.
    15. Otto, Christian & Willner, Sven Norman & Wenz, Leonie & Frieler, Katja & Levermann, Anders, 2017. "Modeling loss-propagation in the global supply network: The dynamic agent-based model acclimate," OSF Preprints 7yyhd, Center for Open Science.
    16. Baghersad, Milad & Zobel, Christopher W., 2015. "Economic impact of production bottlenecks caused by disasters impacting interdependent industry sectors," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 71-80.
    17. Kilgarriff, Paul & McDermott, T.K.J. & Vega, Amaya & Morrissey , Karyn & O’Donoghue, Cathal, 2018. "Flooding disruption and the impact on the spatial distribution of commuter’s income," Working Papers 309608, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    18. Elena Ianchovichina & Maros Ivanic, 2016. "Economic Effects of the Syrian War and the Spread of the Islamic State on the Levant," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 1584-1627, October.
    19. Inoue, Hiroyasu & Todo, Yasuyuki, 2017. "Firm-level simulation of supply chain disruption triggered by actual and predicted earthquakes," MPRA Paper 82920, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 22 Feb 2017.
    20. Jun Li & Douglas Crawford‐Brown & Mark Syddall & Dabo Guan, 2013. "Modeling Imbalanced Economic Recovery Following a Natural Disaster Using Input‐Output Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(10), pages 1908-1923, October.

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p314. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.