Natural Hazards

, Volume 73, Issue 2, pp 907–932 | Cite as

Municipal flood hazard mapping: the case of British Columbia, Canada

Original Paper


Historical responses to flood hazards have stimulated development in hazardous areas. Scholars recommend an alternative approach to reducing flood losses that combines flood hazard mapping with land use planning to identify and direct development away from flood-prone areas. Creating flood hazard maps to inform municipal land use planning is an expensive and complex process that can require resources not always available at the municipal government level. Senior levels of government in some countries have addressed deficiencies in municipal capacity by assuming an active role in producing municipal flood hazard maps. In other countries, however, senior governments do not contribute to municipal flood hazard mapping. Despite a large body of research on the importance of municipal land use planning for addressing flood hazards, little is known about the extent of flood hazard information that is available to municipalities that do not receive outside assistance from senior governments for flood hazard mapping. We assess the status of flood hazard maps in British Columbia, where municipalities do not receive outside assistance in creating the maps. Our analysis shows that these maps are generally outdated and/or lacking a variety of features that are critical for supporting effective land use planning. We recommend that senior levels of government play an active role in providing municipalities with (1) detailed and current information regarding flood hazards in their jurisdiction and (2) compelling incentives to utilize this information.


Flood hazard map Flood risk map Land use planning British Columbia Canada Content analysis 


  1. Ahmad SS, Simonovic SP (2013) Spatial and temporal analysis of urban flood risk assessment. Urban Water J 10(1):26–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (2014) Accessed 4 Feb 2014
  3. BC Ministry of Public Safety (2007) BC flood plan: 2007 Edition. Consequence Management Series. Provincial Emergency Management ProgramGoogle Scholar
  4. Beeby D (2013) No flood-insurance policies in Canada without new maps: poll of CEOs. The Globe and MailGoogle Scholar
  5. Booth L, Quinn F (1995) Twenty-five years of the Canada water act. Can Water Resour J 20(2):65–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd DR (2003) Unnatural law: rethinking Canadian environmental law and policy. UBC Press, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  7. Brody SD, Zahran S, Maghelal P, Grover H, Highfield WE (2007) The rising cost of floods: examining the impact of planning and development decisions on property damage in Florida. J Am Plan As 73(3):330–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brody SD, Zahran S, Highfield WE, Grover H, Vedlitz A (2008) Identifying the impact of the built environment on flood damage in Texas. Disasters 32(1):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruce JP (1976) The national flood damage reduction program. Can Water Resour J 1(1):5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burby R (2006) Hurricane Katrina and the paradoxes of government disaster policy: bringing about wise governmental decisions for hazardous areas. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 604(1):171–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burby RJ, Dalton LC (1994) Plans can matter! The role of land use plans and state planning mandates in limiting the development of hazardous areas. Public Adm Rev 54(3):229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (2013) Flood insurance that isn’t there when you need it: why most Canadian homes are not covered for catastrophic floods. CBC NewsGoogle Scholar
  13. Day JC (1999) Planning for floods in the Lower Fraser Basin, British Columbia: toward an integrated approach? Environ 27(1):49–66Google Scholar
  14. de Loë R, Wojtanowski D (2001) Associated benefits and costs of the Canadian flood damage reduction program. Appl Geogr 21(1):1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Deyle RE, French SP, Olshansky RB, Paterson RG (1998) Hazard assessment: the factual basis for planning and mitigation. In: Burby RJ (ed) Cooperating with nature: confronting natural hazards with land-use planning for sustainable communities. Joseph Henry Press, Washington, pp 119–166Google Scholar
  16. Environment Canada (2014) Flood damage reduction program. Accessed 3 Feb 2014
  17. Excimap (2007) Handbook on good practices for flood mapping in EuropeGoogle Scholar
  18. Faber S (1996) On borrowed land: public policies for floodplains. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. FEMA (2013) The National Flood Insurance Program community status book. Accessed 22 Apr 2013
  20. FEMA (2014) the official site of the NFIP. Accessed 3 Feb 2014
  21. Freelon DG (2010) ReCal: intercoder reliability calculation as a web service. Int J of Internet Sc 5(1):20–33Google Scholar
  22. Friedmann J (1987) Planning in the public domain: from knowledge to action. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  23. Godschalk DR, Kaiser EJ, Berke PR (1998) In: Burby RJ (ed) Cooperating with nature: confronting natural hazards with land-use planning for sustainable communities. Joseph Henry Press, Washington, pp 85–118Google Scholar
  24. Highfield WE, Brody SD (2013) Evaluating the effectiveness of local mitigation activities in reducing flood losses. Nat Hazards Rev 14(4):229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jha AK, Bloch R, Lamond J (2012) Cities and flooding: a guide to integrated urban flood risk management for the 21st century. The World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  26. Krippendorff K (2013) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Multihazard Mitigation Council (2005) Natural hazard mitigation saves: an independent study to assess the future savings from mitigation activities. National Institute of Building Sciences, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  28. National Round table on the Environment and the Economy (Canada) (2011) Paying the price: the economic impacts of climate change for CanadaGoogle Scholar
  29. Nelson AC, French SP (2002) Plan quality and mitigating damage from natural disasters: a case study of the Northridge Earthquake with planning policy considerations. J Am Plan As 68(2):194–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. CTV News (2013) Why can’t Canadians get overland flood insurance? CTV NewsGoogle Scholar
  31. Nguyen L (2011) Historic prairie flooding top weather story of 2011. Vancouver Sun, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  32. Stevens MR, Hanschka S (2014) Multilevel governance of flood hazards: municipal flood bylaws in British Columbia, Canada. Nat Hazards Rev 15(1):74–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stevens MR, Lyles LW, Berke PR (2014) Measuring and reporting intercoder reliability in plan quality evaluation research. J Plan Educ Res 34(1):77–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Thomson K (1984) An evaluation of selected Canadian flood plain management policies. Dissertation, York UniversityGoogle Scholar
  35. Toneguzzi M (2013) Alberta floods the costliest insured natural disaster in Canadian history. Calgary, Alberta. 23 Sept 2013Google Scholar
  36. Watt WE (1995) The national flood damage reduction program: 1976–1995. Can Water Resour J 20(4):237–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Watt WE, Paine JD (1992) Flood risk mapping in Canada: 1. Uncertainty considerations. Can Water Resour J 17(2):129–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Community and Regional Planning, 223-1933 West MallUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Clackamas County, Oregon, Planning and Zoning DivisionOregon CityUSA

Personalised recommendations