Hess Opinions: An interdisciplinary research agenda to explore the unintended consequences of structural flood protection
<p>One common approach to cope with floods is the implementation of structural flood protection measures, such as levees or flood-control reservoirs, which substantially reduce the probability of flooding at the time of implementation. Numerous scholars have problematized this approach. The...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2018-10-01
|
| Series: | Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
| Online Access: | https://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/22/5629/2018/hess-22-5629-2018.pdf |
| Summary: | <p>One common approach to cope with floods is the implementation of structural
flood protection measures, such as levees or flood-control reservoirs, which
substantially reduce the probability of flooding at the time of
implementation. Numerous scholars have problematized this approach. They have
shown that increasing the levels of flood protection can attract more
settlements and high-value assets in the areas protected by the new measures.
Other studies have explored how structural measures can generate a sense of
complacency, which can act to reduce preparedness. These paradoxical risk
changes have been described as <q>levee effect</q>, <q>safe development paradox</q> or
<q>safety dilemma</q>. In this commentary, we briefly review this phenomenon by
critically analysing the intended benefits and unintended effects of
structural flood protection, and then we propose an interdisciplinary
research agenda to uncover these paradoxical dynamics of risk.</p> |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1027-5606 1607-7938 |