Flash flood susceptibility modeling using geo-morphometric and hydrological approaches in Panjkora Basin, Eastern Hindu Kush, Pakistan

  • Shakeel MahmoodEmail author
  • Atta-ur Rahman
Original Article


This main objective of this study is flash flood susceptibility modeling using geo-morphometric and hydrological approaches in Panjkora Basin, Eastern Hindu Kush, Pakistan. In the study region, flash flood is one of the horrific and recurrent hydro-meteorological disasters causing damages to human life, their properties, and infrastructure. Watershed modeling approach is implemented to delineate Panjkora Basin, its sub-basins, and extract drainage network by utilizing Advance Space borne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer Global Digital Elevation Model as an input data in geographic information system environment. A total of 30 sub-basins were delineated using threshold of 25 km2. The geo-morphometric parameters of each sub-basin were computed by applying Hortonian, Schumm, and Strahler Geo-morphological laws. The value of each parameter was normalized and aggregated into geo-morphometric ranking number depicting the degree of flash flood susceptibility. Surface run-off depth of each sub-basin is estimated by applying Natural Resource Conservation Service Curve Number hydrological model. Both models outputs were integrated by implementing weighted overlay analysis technique and susceptibility map is obtained. The resultant map was analyzed and zonated into very high, high, moderate, low, and very low flash flood susceptibility zones. These zones were spread over an area of 1441 km2 (27%), 1950 km2 (36.5%), 1252 km2 (23.4%), 604 km2 (11.3%), and 98 km2 (1.8%), respectively. Spatially, the very high susceptible zone is located in the upstream areas, characterized by snow covered peaks, steep gradient (> 30°), and high drainage density (> 1.7 km/km2), and geologically dominated by igneous and metamorphic lithological units. Analysis indicated that flash flood susceptibility is directly increases with increasing surface run-off and geo-morphometric ranking number. A new model is developed to geo-visualize the spatial pattern of flash flood susceptibility. Accuracy of the model is assessed using global positioning system-based primary data regarding past-flood damages and flood marks. The study results can facilitate Disaster Management Authorities and flood dealing line agencies to initiate location-specific flood-risk reduction strategies in highly susceptible areas of Panjkora Basin. Similarly, this methodological approach can be adapted for any highland river system.


Flash flood Susceptibility model Geo-morphometry Surface run-off Hindu Kush 



We are highly thankful of Flood Forecasting Division, Lahore, Provincial Disaster Management Authority and local community for their cooperation. We are also acknowledging the anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions.


  1. Abuzied S, Yuan M, Ibrahim S, Kaiser M, Saleem T (2016) Geospatial risk assessment of flash floods in Nuweiba area, Egypt. J Arid Environ 133:54–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bankoff G (2013) The historical geography of disaster: ‘vulnerability’ and ‘local knowledge’ in western discourse. In: Bankoff G, Frerks G (eds) Mapping vulnerability. Taylor & Francis, Routledge, pp 44–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borga M, Boscolo P, Zanon F, Sangati M (2007) Hydrometeorological analysis of the August 29, 2003 flash flood in the eastern Italian Alps. J Hydrometeorol 8(5):1049–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cantet P, Bacro J, Arnaud P (2011) Using a rainfall stochastic generator to detect trends in extreme rainfall. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 25:429–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cardona OD (2011) Disaster risk and vulnerability: concepts and measurement of human and environmental insecurity. In: Brauch HG, Oswald Spring U, Mesjasz C, Grin J, Kameri-Mbote P, Chourou B, Dunay P, Birkmann J (eds) Coping with global environmental change, disasters and security. Hexagon Series on Human and Environmental Security and Peace, vol 5. Springer, Berlin, pp 107–121Google Scholar
  6. Cardona OD (2013) The need for rethinking the concepts of vulnerability and risk from a holistic perspective: a necessary review and criticism for effective risk management. In: Bankoff G, Frerks G (eds) Mapping vulnerability. Taylor & Francis, Routledge, pp 56–70Google Scholar
  7. Chung WH, Wang IT, Wang RY (2010) Theory-based SCS-CN method and its applications. J Hydrol Eng 15(12):1045–1058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Creutin JD, Borga M (2003) Radar hydrology modifies the monitoring of flash-flood hazard. Hydrol Process 17(7):1453–1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Creutin JD, Borga M, Gruntfest E, Lutoff C, Zoccatelli D (2013) A space and time framework for analyzing human anticipation of flash floods. J Hydrol 482:14–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Daggupati P, Srinivasan R, Ahmadi M, Verma D (2017) Spatial and temporal patterns of precipitation and stream flow variations in Tigris-Euphrates river basin. Environ Monit Assess 189(2):50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawood M, Mahmood S, Rahman G, Rahman A (2017) Impact of rainfall fluctuation on river discharge in Hindu Kush Region, Pakistan. Abasyn J Soc Sci 10:246–259Google Scholar
  12. DeGaetano AT (2009) Time-dependent changes in extreme-precipitation return-period amounts in the continental United States. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 48(10):2086–2099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dottori F, Martina MLV, Figueiredo R (2016) A methodology for flood susceptibility and vulnerability analysis in complex flood scenarios. J Flood Risk Manag. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elfeki A, Masoud M, Niyazi B (2017) Integrated rainfall–runoff and flood inundation modeling for flash flood risk assessment under data scarcity in arid regions: Wadi Fatimah basin case study, Saudi Arabia. Nat Hazards 85(1):87–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elmaghraby M, Masoud M, Niyazi B (2014) Assessment of surface runoff in arid, data scarce regions; an approach applied to Wadi Al-Hamd, Al Madinah Al Munawarah, Saudi Arabia. Life Sci J 11:271–289Google Scholar
  16. Elmoustafa AM, Mohamed MM (2013) Flash flood risk assessment using morphological parameters in Sinai Peninsula. Open J Mod Hydrol 3:122–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. El-Shamy I (1992) Recent Recharge and flash flooding opportunities in the Eastern Desert, Egypt. Ann Geol Surv Egypt 18:323–334Google Scholar
  18. Fang X, Thompson DB, Cleveland TG, Pradhan P, Malla R (2008) Time of concentration estimated using watershed parameters determined by automated and manual methods. J Irrig Drain Eng 134(2):202–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Farhan Y, Anaba O (2016) Flash flood risk estimation of Wadi Yutum (Southern Jordan) watershed using GIS based morphometric analysis and remote sensing techniques. Open J Mod Hydrol 6(02):79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Farhan Y, Anbar A, Enaba O, Al-Shaikh N (2015) Quantitative analysis of geomorphometric parameters of Wadi Kerak, Jordan, using remote sensing and GIS. J Water Resour Prot 7(06):456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Folke C (2006) Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for socialecological systems analyses. Glob Environ Change 16(3):253–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fuchs S, Glade T (2016) Foreword: vulnerability assessment in natural hazard risk—a dynamic perspective. Nat Hazards 82:81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gardiner V (1975) Drainage basin morphometry. Br Geomorphol Group Tech Bull 14:48Google Scholar
  24. Gardiner V (1990) Drainage basin morphometry. In: Goudie A (ed) Geomorphological techniques. Unwin Hyman, London, pp 71–81Google Scholar
  25. Green JI, Nelson EJ (2002) Calculation of time of concentration for hydrologic design and analysis using geographic information system vector objects. J Hydroinform 4(2):75–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hashmi HN, Siddiqui QTM, Ghumman AR, Kamal MA (2012) A critical analysis of 2010 floods in Pakistan. Afr J Agric Res 7(7):1054–1067Google Scholar
  27. Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol Soc Am Bull 56(3):275–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hu H (2016) Rainstorm flash flood risk assessment using genetic programming: a case study of risk zoning in Beijing. Nat Hazards 83(1):485–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ibarra E, M (2012) A geographical approach to post-flood analysis: the extreme flood event of 12 October 2007 in Calpe (Spain). Appl Geogr 32:490–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: synthesis report. In: Contribution of Working groups I. II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC), Geneva, Switzerland, p 151Google Scholar
  31. Jonkman SN, Vrijling JK (2008) Loss of life due to floods. J Flood Risk Manag 1:43–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Khosravi K, Nohani E, Maroufinia E, Pourghasemi HR (2016) A GIS-based flood susceptibility assessment and its mapping in Iran: a comparison between frequency ratio and weights-of-evidence bivariate statistical models with multi-criteria decision-making technique. Nat Hazards 83(2):947–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kim J, Kuwahara Y, Kumar M (2011) A DEM-based evaluation of potential flood risk to enhance decision support system for safe evacuation. Nat Hazards 59:1561–1572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Korytny L, &Kichigina M N, V (2006) Geographical analysis of river floods and their causes in southern East Siberia. Hydrol Sci J 51(3):450–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kundzewicz ZW, Jania JA (2007) Extreme hydro-meteorological events and their impacts. From the global down to the regional scale. Geogr Pol 80(2):9–23Google Scholar
  36. Llasat MC, Llasat-Botija M, Rodriguez A, Lindbergh S (2010) Flash floods in Catalonia: a recurrent situation. Adv Geosci 26:105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mahmood S (2013) Flood hazard: causes, damages and mitigation in District Upper Dir. LAP, Lambert Academic Publishing, Saarbrücken (ISBN-13: 978-3-659-46747-9$4) Google Scholar
  38. Mahmood S, Rani R (2018) Extent of flood damages in Chenab Basin, Upper Indus Plain. Nat Hazards Risk Assess Vulnerability Reduct., (ISBN 978-953-51-6297-1) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mahmood S, Khan AH, Mayo SM (2016a) Exploring underlying causes and assessing damages of 2010 flash flood in the upper zone of Panjkora River. Nat Hazards 83(2):1213–1227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mahmood S, Khan AH, Ullah S (2016b) Assessment of 2010 flash flood causes and associated damages in Dir Valley, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 16:215–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mazzorana B, Hübl J, Fuchs S (2009) Improving risk assessment by defining consistent and reliable system scenarios. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(1):145–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miller V (1953) A quantitative geomorphic study of drainage basin characteristics in the Clinch Mountain Area, Virginia and Tennessee. Project NR 389-402, Technical report 3, Department of Geology, ONR, Columbia University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Mishra SK, Singh VP, Sansalone JJ, Aravamuthan V (2003) A modified SCS-CN method: characterization and testing. Water Resour Manag 17(1):37–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rahman A, Khan AN (2011) Analysis of flood causes and associated socio-economic damages in the Hindu Kush region. Nat Hazards 59(3):1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rahman A, Khan AN (2013) Analysis of 2010-flood causes, nature and magnitude in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Nat Hazards 66(2):887–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Santangelo N, Santo A, Di Crescenzo G, Foscari G, Liuzza V, Sciarrotta S, Scorpio V (2011) Flood susceptibility assessment in a highly urbanized alluvial fan: the case study of Sala Consilina (southern Italy). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11(10):2765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schumm SA (1956) Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badlands at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Geol Soc Am Bull 67(5):597–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shadeed S, Almasri M (2010) Application of GIS-based SCS-CN method in West Bank catchments, Palestine. Water Sci Eng 3(1):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shehata M, Mizunaga H (2018) Flash flood risk assessment for Kyushu Island, Japan. Environ Earth Sci 77(3):76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Singh N, Singh KK (2017) Geomorphological analysis and prioritization of sub-watersheds using Snyder’s synthetic unit hydrograph method. Appl Water Sci 7(1):275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Singh P, Thakur J, Singh UC (2013) Morphometric analysis of Morar River Basin, Madhya Pradesh, India, using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Environ Earth Sci 68:1967–1977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Strahler A (1957) Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Trans Am Geophys Union 38:913–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Strahler A (1964) Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. In: Chow V (ed) Handbook of applied hydrology. McGraw Hill, New York, pp 439–476Google Scholar
  54. Tehrany MS, Pradhan B, &Jebur MN (2014) Flood susceptibility mapping using a novel ensemble weights-of-evidence and support vector machine models in GIS. J Hydrol 512:332–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Umrikar BN (2017) Morphometric analysis of Andhale watershed, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune, India. Appl Water Sci 7(5):2231–2243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. USDA Soil Conservation Service (1972) SCS national engineering handbook, section 4: 391 hydrology. USDA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  57. Vogel C, O’Brien K (2004) Vulnerability and global environmental change: rhetoric and reality. Aviso: an information bulletin on global environmental change and human security, issue no. 13, March 2004Google Scholar
  58. Youssef AM, Pradhan B, Gaber AFD, Buchroithner MF (2009) Geomorphological hazard analysis along the Egyptian Red Sea coast between Safaga and Quseir. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(3):751–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Youssef AM, Pradhan B, Hassan AM (2011) Flash flood risk estimation along the St. Katherine Road, Southern Sinai, Egypt using GIS based morphometry and satellite imagery. Environ Earth Sci 62:611–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Youssef AM, Pradhan B, Sefry SA (2016) Flash flood susceptibility assessment in Jeddah city (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) using bivariate and multivariate statistical models. Environ Earth Sci 75(1):12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeographyGovernment College University LahoreLahorePakistan
  2. 2.Department of GeographyUniversity of PeshawarPeshawarPakistan

Personalised recommendations