Abstract
Climate change, population increase, and urban expansion have increased the risk of flooding. Therefore, accurately identifying future changing patterns in the flood risk is essential. For this purpose, this study elaborated a new framework for a basin scale that employs a future land-use simulation model, a factor spatialization technique, and a novel hybrid model for scenario-based flood risk assessment in 2030 and 2050. Three land-use scenarios (i.e., natural growth scenario, cropland protection scenario, and ecological protection scenario) were set and applied in Jinjiang Basin to explore the changes in future flood risk under these scenarios. The results indicate the different degrees of increase in flood risk that will occur in the three scenarios. Under the natural growth (NG) scenario, the city will expand rapidly with the growth of population and economy, and the total area with high and very high flood risk will increase by 371.30 km2 by 2050, as compared to 2020. However, under the ecological protection (EP) scenario, woodlands will be protected, and the growth in population, economy, and built-up lands will slow down with slightly increased risk of flooding. In this scenario, the total area with high and very high flood risk will increase by 113.75 km2 by 2050. Under the cropland protection (CP) scenario, the loss of croplands will have been effectively stopped, and the flood risk will not show a significant increase under this scenario, with an increase by only 90.96 km2 by 2050, similar to the EP scenario. Spatially, these increased flood risks mainly locate at the periphery of existing built-up lands, and the high-flood-risk zones are mainly distributed in the southeast of the Jinjiang Basin. The information about increasing flood risk determined by the framework provides insight into the spatio-temporal characteristics of future flood-prone areas, which facilitates reasonable flood mitigation measures to be developed at the most critical locations in the region.
Highlights
Flood is considered to be the natural disaster responsible for the most severe losses of economy and lives [1], with economic losses caused by flood constituting 31% of the total losses resulting from natural disasters globally [2]
The main purpose of this study is to propose a new framework to assess future flood risk dynamically, which provides a practical way to explore the complex relationship between changes in future flood risk and the state of social development
Compared to the natural growth (NG) scenario, a lower rate of population and economic growth can be found under the ecological protection (EP) scenario
Summary
Flood is considered to be the natural disaster responsible for the most severe losses of economy and lives [1], with economic losses caused by flood constituting 31% of the total losses resulting from natural disasters globally [2]. In 2010, for example, approximately 178 million people were affected by flooding, and the total losses recorded during 1998 and 2010 exceeded USD 40 billion worldwide [4]. 1990, China has suffered an average annual economic loss of about $17 billion caused by flooding, with two-thirds of its territory and more than half of its total population affected by floods [1]. Before taking targeted measures to control floods, the likelihood of flooding, potential losses, and resilience must be assessed first [6]. In this regard, flood risk assessment as a nonstructural measure has been widely taken into account to identify the areas more susceptible to floods [7]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.