An assessment of flood hazard vulnerability in the Dongting Lake Region of China

Gao, Jixi; Nickum, James E.; Pan, Yingzi

doi:10.1111/j.1440-1770.2007.00318.x

Cited by 36 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The great flood in 1998, lasted from June to August, was a catastrophic disaster. It caused the death of 4150 people and $30 billion worth of economic damage (Hayashi et al, 2008;Gao et al, 2007). In 1998, the average water-levels of Beijinggang, Nanzui, and Chenglingji in June, July and August exceeded the upper limit of EAWLR, especially of Chenglingji.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hydrologic index based method for determining ecologically acceptable water-level range of Dongting Lake

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water-level fluctuation (WLF) is regarded as a key environmental factor for lake ecosystems. Keeping moderate WLFs approximating to its natural conditions is substantially essential to maintain its biodiversity and integrity. In this study, a hydrological index based method for determining ecologically acceptable water-level range (EAWLR) was illustrated by a case-study of Dongting Lake. This method was proposed based on a consideration of hydrological alterations induced by natural variability and human activity. It was during this process that two hydrological indices, the ratio flow deviation (RFD) and the amended annual proportional flow deviation (AAPFD), played vital roles in change point detection and the determination of EAWLR, respectively. The WLFs are closely related to species richness. The relationship between them follows a hump-backed curve and EAWLR serves as the hump part of the curve. The final results indicated that EAWLRs of Beijinggang, Nanzui and Chenglingji during flood season were 27.78-38.26 m, 25.19-38.45 m and 24.48-30.96 m, respectively, while those during non-flood season were 18.33-27.79 m, 17.68-29.19 m and 15.59-22.07 m, respectively

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hydrologic index based method for determining ecologically acceptable water-level range of Dongting Lake

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, vulnerability assessments can extensively contribute to disaster risk reduction (Gao et al 2007 ) . Second, they promote the development of a disaster-resilient society (Birkmann 2006 ) .…”

Section: Concept Of Vulnerability Hazard and Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hazards, Risk, and Vulnerability

Dewan

2013

Springer Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural hazard terminologies with existing models of vulnerability, hazard, and risk are presented in this chapter. A conceptual framework has been developed based on hazard literature. The basic premise of the framework is based on Cutter's place of hazard theory with inputs from recent literature. In the framework, hazard is viewed as a threat that has the potential to overwhelm people, property, and the environment. It is a pre-existing condition that can turn into a catastrophe depending on the in fl uence of exogenous and endogenous factors. Exposure to hazard is treated as given and is an implicit element. The vulnerability element is perceived as the interactive effects of the social and physical aspects of a system (e.g., urban) regarding the causal process of hazards. Contrary to some conceptualizations, the framework views that the total vulnerability of a community depends on physical, social, and existing coping capacity attributes, and therefore, the calculation of the total vulnerability should consider these elements simultaneously. Risk is conceptualized as the product of hazard and vulnerability. To minimize the effects of disasters, it is imperative to take appropriate measures to reduce vulnerability rather than risk.The utilization of geospatial techniques in fl ood risk management is separated into three categories: fl ood mapping, damage assessment, and evaluation of fl ood risk and vulnerability. Biophysical and socioeconomic data that are sourced from remote sensing, census geography, and other spatial databases are employed to evaluate fl ood-related risk in diverse environments. A variety of methods-comprising inductive, deductive, and multi-criteria evaluation-are used to determine fl ood vulnerability and risk as evidenced by the literature survey. It reveals that geospatial techniques can be utilized effectively in the entire spectrum of the disaster cycle, which can save lives and property from natural hazards such as fl ood, as well as support informed decision making during emergencies.

show abstract

“…(Ballesteros-Cánovas et al 2013). The goal is to reduce loss of life and property, but it is inevitable, even structural measures could have useful consequences for a specific period; they also lead to potential threats as well because they rebuild natural processes but do not follow natural rules (Gao et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

District flood vulnerability index: urban decision-making tool

Nasiri

Yusof

Ali

et al. 2018

Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flood vulnerability assessment as an essential part of the urban flood management is done by various methods by several researchers. In fact, the improvement in assessment methods is related to the necessity for enhanced decision-making procedures; for instance, economic or infrastructural investments in cities can be assigned in the best form. To achieve this aim, introducing indices for evaluating vulnerability and identifying more vulnerable zones and then doing relevant comparisons can be useful. District flood vulnerability index (DFVI) developed by the author uses 25 indicators in its calculation. Nevertheless, it is obvious that some of these indicators have no effect on the consequences. This paper presents the results of the analysis for the selection of the most significant indicators of the DFVI construction. This index is appropriate for urban district scaling (or: the urban district scale) and the various components of flood vulnerability (social, economic, environmental and physical). DFVI was made by analyzing the indicators' relevance and by studying the main indicators needed to depict reality of the urban district floods in an effective way. For this purpose, expert elicitation was done by Delphi and AHP method in two separate phases. Then, all these results were combined in order to construct DFVI equations. Finally, the index was implemented in Kuala Lumpur city's districts. This paper outlines which district of cities (in this case Kuala Lumpur) are most vulnerable to flood hazard with regard to the system's components, that is, social, physical, environmental and economic.

show abstract

An assessment of flood hazard vulnerability in the Dongting Lake Region of China

Cited by 36 publications

References 2 publications

A hydrologic index based method for determining ecologically acceptable water-level range of Dongting Lake

A hydrologic index based method for determining ecologically acceptable water-level range of Dongting Lake

Hazards, Risk, and Vulnerability

District flood vulnerability index: urban decision-making tool

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About