Natural Hazards

, Volume 95, Issue 3, pp 547–568 | Cite as

Benefit analysis of flood adaptation under climate change scenario

  • Hsin-Chi LiEmail author
  • Shih-Yun Kuo
  • Wei-Bo Chen
  • Lee-yaw Lin
Original Paper


Typhoon Morakot of 2009 caused the worst flooding in the history of Taiwan. Because research on climate change has indicated that similar extreme disasters are expected to become more frequent, this study investigated adaptation projects for mitigating the impact of such disasters in the future. It used Typhoon Morakot as an example and applied the pseudo-global warming method for simulating the impact of a Morakot-level typhoon plus warming effects to analyze the flood losses caused by increasing precipitation. For this study, Tainan City, a city severely damaged by Typhoon Morakot in 2009, was chosen as a demonstration area to evaluate the optimal adaptation measures by cost–benefit analysis methods. The results showed that the precipitation will increase as much as 60% in the Tainan region at the end of this century and that in the future the inundation area in Tainan will see a 10.4% increase beyond the flooding caused by Typhoon Morakot. Fifteen combinations of adaptation projects were provided to reduce future flood losses. Finally, a composite adaptation project combining riverbed dredging and improved plans for evacuation and sheltering was determined to be the optimal option, as it could create a net benefit of as much as 27 million US dollars in the 60 years of engineering service life for Tainan City.


Global warming Flood disaster Loss assessment CBA Adaptation 



The authors show their deep appreciation to Dr. Akio Kitoh of the Japan Meteorological Research Institute for the provision of MRI data and to an anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments. This project was funded by the Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST 103-2621-M-865-001).


  1. André C, Boulet D, Rey-Valette H, Rulleau B (2016) Protection by hard defence structures or relocation of assets exposed to coastal risks: contributions and drawbacks of cost–benefit analysis for long-term adaptation choices to climate change. Ocean Coast Manag 134:173–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aryal S, Cockfield G, Maraseni TN (2018) Globalisation and traditional social-ecological systems: Understanding impacts of tourism and labour migration to the transhumance systems in the Himalayas. Environ Dev 25:73–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asaeda T, Ca VT (2000) Characteristics of permeable pavement during hot summer weather and impact on the thermal environment. Build Environ 35(4):363–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bryant MM (2006) Urban landscape conservation and the role of ecological greenways at local and metropolitan scales. Landsc Urb Plan 76:23–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chao-Tzuen C, Yi-Ying L, Dan-Rong C, Jun-Jih L, Hsin-chi L (2016) Projection of precipitation changes of 2009 Typhoon Morakot under pseudo global warming scenario. Technology report, National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction, Taipei (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  6. Chen C, Beardsley RC (2015) An unstructured grid, finite-volume coastal ocean model (FVCOM) system. Oceanography 19(1):78–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen S-Y, Li H-C (2016) The assessment model of necessary food in shelter during flood event. Mag Chin Inst Civ Hydraul Eng 43(3):87–90 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  8. Chen S-H, Chang C-C, Li H-C, Yang H-H (2011) Social impacts and recovery survey of Typhoon Morakot. Technology report, National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction, Taipei (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  9. Choudhury P (2010) Reservoir flood control operation model incorporating multiple uncontrolled water flows. Lakes Reserv Res Manag 15(2):153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cooper W, Garcia F, Pape D, Ryder D, Witherell B (2016) Climate change adaptation case study: benefit-cost analysis of coastal flooding hazard mitigation. J Ocean Coast Econ 3(2), Article 3.
  11. Cutter SL (1996) Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Prog Hum Geogr 20:529–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cutter SL, Boruff BJ, Shirley WL (2003) Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Q 84(2):242–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dawson RJ, Speight L, Hall JW, Djordjevic S, Savic D, Leandro J (2008) Attribution of flood risk in urban areas. J Hydroinform 10(4):275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Devkota RP, Cockfield G, Maraseni TN (2014) Perceived community-based flood adaptation strategies under climate change in Nepal. Int J Glob Warm 6(1):113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. EEA (2010) Mapping the impacts of natural hazards and technological accidents in Europe—an overview of the last decade. EEA technical report. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. 62638. 144 pp. 13/2010, ISSN 1725-2237
  16. European Commission (2007) Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks (text with EEA relevance). Accessed Sept 2010
  17. FEMA (1993) Flood insurance study guidelines and specifications for study contractor. Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA 37, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Gentle P, Maraseni TN (2012) Climate change, poverty and livelihoods: adaptation practices by rural mountain communities in Nepal. Environ Sci Policy 21:24–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gentle P, Thwaites R, Race D, Alexander K, Maraseni T (2018) Household and community responses to impacts of climate change in the rural hills of Nepal. Clim Change 147(1–2):267–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hara M, Yoshikane T, Kawase H, Kimura F (2008) Estimation of the impact of global warming on snow depth in Japan by the pseudo-global-warming method. Hydrol Res Lett 2:61–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harrington SE, Niehaus G (2001) Government insurance, tax policy, and the affordability and availability of catastrophe insurance. J Insur Regul 19(4):591–612Google Scholar
  22. Hong YM, Yeh N, Chen JY (2006) The simplified methods on evaluating detention storage volume for small catchment. Ecol Eng 26(4):355–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hsin-Chi L, Shiao-Ping W, Chao-Tzuen C, Jun-Jih L, Yong-Ming C, Keh-Chia Y (2015) Applying risk analysis to disaster impact of extreme Typhoon events under climate change. J Disaster Res 10(3):513–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hsin-Chi L, Tingyeh W, Hsiao-Ping W, Hung-Ju S, Yi-Chiung C (2017) Basinwide disaster loss assessments under extreme climate scenarios: a case study of the Kaoping River basin. Nat Hazards 86(3):1039–1058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hsu H-H, Chia C, Wu Y-c, Lu M-M, Chen C-T, Chen Y-M (2011) Climate change in Taiwan: scientific report 2011 (summary). National Science Council, Taipei, Taiwan, ROCGoogle Scholar
  26. IPCC (1994) Climate change 1994: radiative forcing of climate change and an evaluation of the IPCCIS92 emission scenarios. In: Houghton JT, Meira Filho LG, Bruce J, Lee H, Callander BA, Haites E, Harris N, Maskell K (eds). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Kawase H, Yoshikane T, Hara M, Kimura F, Yasunari T, Ailikun B, Ueda H, Inoue T (2009) Intermodel variability of future changes in the Baiu rainband estimated by the pseudo global warming downscaling method. J Geophys Res 114:D24110. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kimura F, Kitoh A (2007) Downscaling by pseudo global warming method. The final report of the ICCAP. Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RIHN), Kyoto, Japan.
  29. Klein RJ, Maciver DC (1999) Adaptation to climate variability and change: methodological issues. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 4(3):189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koomey J (2013) Moving beyond benefit-cost analysis of climate change. Environ Res Lett 8:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kundzewicz Z, Pińskwar I, Brakenridge R (2013) Large floods in Europe, 1985–2009. Hydrol Sci J 58:1–7. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kunreuther H (1996) Mitigating disaster losses through insurance. J Risk Uncertain 12:171–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leary NA (1999) A framework for benefit-cost analysis of adaptation to climate change and climate variability. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 4(3):307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lempert R (1999) Book review on cost–benefit analysis of climate change: the broader perspectives. Clim Change 41(3–4):635–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Li HC, Kuo YL, Shaw D, Huang TH (2008) The household benefits assessment of the flood reduction plan in a flood-prone area: a case study of Sinwen, Chiayi, Taiwan. Agric Resour Econ 5(2):41–58Google Scholar
  36. Li WS, Yeh KC, Lin CC, Hsieh CL, Wen CC, Yeh YL, Shie LS, Chen LG, Li SJ, Wang YW (2010) Exploration and analysis regarding the aftermath of typhoon Morakot research project report. National Science Council, NSC 98-2625-M-492-010 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  37. Murakami H, Wang Y, Yoshimura H, Mizuta R, Sugi M, Shindo E, Adachi Y, Yukimoto S, Hosaka M, Kusunoki S, Ose T, Kitoh A (2012) Future changes in tropical cyclone activity projected by the new high-resolution MRI-AGCM. J Clim 25:3237–3260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oku Y, Yoshino J, Takemi T, Ishikawa H (2014) Assessment of disaster potential based on an ensemble simulation of Typhoon Talas. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 14:2699–2709.
  39. Poussin JK, Botzen WJW, Aerts JCJH (2015) Effectiveness of flood damage mitigation measures: empirical evidence from French flood disasters. Glob Environ Change 31:74–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rasmussen R, Liu C, Ikeda K, Gochis D, Yates D, Chen F, Tewari M, Barlage M, Dudhia J, Yu W, Miller K, Arsenault KI, Grubišić V, Thompson G, Gutmann E (2011) High-resolution coupled climate runoff simulations of seasonal snowfall over Colorado: a process study of current and warmer climate. J Clim 24:3015–3048. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rojas R, Feyen L, Watkiss P (2013) Climate change and river floods in the European Union: socio-economic consequences and the costs and benefits of adaptation. Glob Environ Change 23(6):1737–1751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shaw D, Hsueh L-M (1986) Social cost assessment method for nuclear power: impact of nuclear power on the environment. In: Modern engineering technology seminar. pp 699–717 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  43. Skourtos M, Tourkolias C, Damigos D, Kontogianni A, Harrison PA, Berry P (2015) Incorporating cross-sectoral effects into analysis of the cost-effectiveness of climate change adaptation measures. Clim Change 128:307–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Steinführer A, Tunstall S, Tapsell S, Fernandez-Bilbao A (2007) Vulnerability and flooding: a re-analysis of FHRC data. European Community, UKGoogle Scholar
  45. Su K-M (2014) Regional frequency analysis with consideration of multisite covariance of Typhoon rainfalls. Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering College of Bioresources and Agriculture, Master Thesis, National Taiwan UniversityGoogle Scholar
  46. Tol RSJ (2003) Is the uncertainty about climate change too large for expected cost–benefit analysis? Clim Change 56:265–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wang C-C, Lin B-X, Chen C-T, Lo S-H (2015) Quantifying the effects of long-term climate change on tropical cyclone rainfall using a cloud-resolving model: examples of two landfall Typhoons in Taiwan. J Clim 28:66–85. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Watkiss P, Hunt A, Blyth W, Dyszynski J (2015) The use of new economic decision support tools for adaptation assessment: a review of methods and applications, towards guidance on applicability. Clim Change 132(3):401–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Werritty A, Houston D, Ball T, Tavendale A, Black A (2007) Exploring the social impacts of flood risk and flooding in Scotland. Scottish Executive, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  50. You Y-D, Hsu W-S, Lu S-C (2004) A study on the assessing model of Taiwan reservoir watershed for sustainable development. Environ Prot 27(2):184–192Google Scholar
  51. Zhou Q, Mikkelsen PS, Halsnæs K, Arnbjerg-Nielsen K (2012a) Framework for economic pluvial flood risk assessment considering climate change effects and adaptation benefits. J Hydrol 414–415:539–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhou Q, Halsnaes K, Arnbjerg-Nielsen K (2012b) Economic assessment of climate adaptation options for urban drainage design in Odense, Denmark. Water Sci Technol 66(8):1812CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Science and Technology Center for Disaster ReductionNew Taipei CityTaiwan

Personalised recommendations