Abstract
Hydro-meteorological risk (HMR) management involves a range of methods, such as monitoring of uncertain climate, planning and prevention by technical countermeasures, risk assessment, preparedness for risk by early-warnings, spreading knowledge and awareness, response and recovery. To execute HMR management by risk assessment, many models and tools, ranging from conceptual to sophisticated/numerical methods are currently in use. However, there is still a gap in systematically classifying and documenting them in the field of disaster risk management. This paper discusses various methods used for HMR assessment and its management via potential nature-based solutions (NBS), which are actually lessons learnt from nature. We focused on three hydro-meteorological hazards (HMHs), floods, droughts and heatwaves, and their management by relevant NBS. Different methodologies related to the chosen HMHs are considered with respect to exposure, vulnerability and adaptation interaction of the elements at risk. Two widely used methods for flood risk assessment are fuzzy logic (e.g. fuzzy analytic hierarchy process) and probabilistic methodology (e.g. univariate and multivariate probability distributions). Different kinds of indices have been described in the literature to define drought risk, depending upon the type of drought and the purpose of evaluation. For heatwave risk estimation, mapping of the vulnerable property and population-based on geographical information system is a widely used methodology in addition to a number of computational, mathematical and statistical methods, such as principal component analysis, extreme value theorem, functional data analysis, the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process and meta-analysis. NBS (blue, green and hybrid infrastructures) are promoted for HMR management. For example, marshes and wetlands in place of dams for flood and drought risk reduction, and green infrastructure for urban cooling and combating heatwaves, are potential NBS. More research is needed into risk assessment and management through NBS, to enhance its wider significance for sustainable living, building adaptations and resilience.
Highlights
Drought indices can only reflect drought conditions based on hydro-meteorological variables, but it is unable to quantify the economic losses
We provide an overview of risk management through potential NBS, which have been applied to mitigate the risks posed by HMHs and documented in the existing literature
Empirical methods are good for flood monitoring and post-disaster assessment, but hydrodynamic models represent detailed flow dynamics, which are required to study the impact of dam breaks, tsunamis or flash flooding (Teng et al, 2017)
Summary
Risk assessment was classified into qualitative and quantitative methods. Few references were given where risk was a function of hazard, exposure, vulnerability and sometimes preparedness deficiency or capacity measure. Four approaches to assess regional flood risk based on representative researches from 2000 to 2017 were mentioned (1) statistical methods (2) multi- criteria analysis, (3) analysis based on Geographical Information System (GIS) and Remote Sensing (RS) techniques, and (4) scenario- based inundation analysis with their limitations of use. The scope of this review article is to cover three of the more common risks caused by HMHs; namely, floods, droughts and heatwaves, and their management via NBS, because they are interrelated, being linked with the water-cycle, soil and air moisture, and air temperature. It categorizes the HMR assessment methods into different appropriate groups.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
