Advertisement

Natural Hazards

, Volume 79, Issue 3, pp 2055–2071 | Cite as

Methodology of flood risk assessment from flash floods based on hazard and vulnerability of the river basin

  • Martina Zeleňáková
  • Lenka Gaňová
  • Pavol Purcz
  • Ladislav Satrapa
Original Paper

Abstract

Flood protection is a society-wide task. The basic rules of prevention in flood protection are stipulated by the regulation of a secondary right of the European Union—Directive of the European Parliament and Council 2007/60/EC on assessment and management of flood risks. The paper is focused on preliminary flood risk assessment of flash floods. The task was to obtain knowledge on the spatial variability of flood risk from flash floods and in doing so supplement a preliminary flood risk assessment already conducted in 2011 for the purpose of proposing suitable flood mitigation measures for reducing the risk found. Flood risk in this study is understood as a combination of flood hazard and vulnerability. The main part of the work is devoted to the proposal of a methodological approach for preliminary flood risk assessment of flash floods. Application of the proposed approach in Bodva river basin, southern Slovakia, is described in the results section.

Keywords

Flood risk Hazard Vulnerability Flash floods 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper was written thanks to support from project VEGA 1/0609/14.

References

  1. Boroushaki S, Malczewski J (2008) Implementing an extension of the analytical hierarchy process using ordered weighted averaging operators with fuzzy quantifiers in ArcGIS. Comput Geosci 34:399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chandran R, Joisy MB (2009) Flood hazard mapping of Vamanapuram river basin – a case study. In: Proceedings of the 10th conference on technological trend [online]. http://117.211.100.42:8180/jspui/bitstream/123456789/572/1/CE_HE_05.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2014
  3. EC (2007) Directive on the assessment and management of flood risks (2007/60/EC). Official J, L288. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Brussels, pp 27–34Google Scholar
  4. Grešková A (2001) Identification of risky areas and flood causal risky factors in small basins. Geogr J 53:247–268Google Scholar
  5. Hanák T, Korytárová J (2014) Risk zoning in the context of insurance: comparison of flood, snow load, windstorm and hailstorm. J Appl Eng Sci 12:137–144Google Scholar
  6. IPCC (2012) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. A special report of working groups i and ii of the intergovernmental panel on climate change In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken DJ, Ebi KL, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner G-K, Allen SK, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge p 582Google Scholar
  7. Kandilioti G, Makropoulos C (2012) Preliminary flood risk assessment. The case of Athens. Nat Hazards 61:441–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Langhammer J, Vilímek V (2008) Landscape changes as a factor affecting the course and consequences of extreme floods in the Otava river basin, Czech Republic. Environ Monit Assess 144:53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lavell A, Oppenheimer M, Diop C, Hess J, Lempert R, Li J, Muir-Wood R, Myeong S (2012) Climate change: new dimensions in disaster risk, exposure, vulnerability, and resilience. In: Susanne M, Kuniyoshi T (eds) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. A special report of working groups i and ii of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 25–64Google Scholar
  10. MoE SR. 2011. Preliminary flood risk assessment in subbasin Bodva. http://www.minzp.sk/files/sekcia-vod/bodva-suhrnny.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2013
  11. Pekárová P, Miklánek P, Onderka M, Kohnová S (2009) Water balance comparison of two small experimental basins with different vegetation cover. Biologia 64:487–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 437Google Scholar
  13. Scheuer S, Haase D, Meyer V (2011) Exploring multicriteria flood vulnerability by integrating economic, social and ecological dimensions of flood risk and coping capacity: from a starting point view towards an end point view of vulnerability. Nat Hazards 58:731–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Solín Ľ (2012) Spatial variability in the flood vulnerability of urban areas in the headwater basins of Slovakia. J Flood Risk Manag 5:303–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Solín Ľ, Feranec J, Nováček J (2011) Land cover changes in small catchments in Slovakia during 1990–2006 and their effects on frequency of flood events. Nat Hazards 56:195–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tanavud CH, Yongchalermchai CH, Bennui A, Densreeserekul O (2004) Assessment of flood risk in Hat Yai Municipality, Southern Thailand, using GIS. J Nat Disaster Sci 26:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. TGM WRI (2009) Methodology for critical points identification. http://www.povis.cz/mzp/KB_metodicky_navod_identifikace.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2012
  18. WRI (2009) General characteristics of subbasin Bodva. http://www.vuvh.sk/rsv/docs/PMP/prilohy/priloha_2/priloha_2_1/Bodva.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2013
  19. Yahaya S, Ahmad N, Abdalla FR (2010) Multicriteria analysis for flood vulnerable areas in Hadejia-Jama’are river basin, Nigeria. Eur J Sci Res 42:71–83Google Scholar
  20. Yalcin G, Akyurek Z (2004) Analysing flood vulnerable areas with multicriteria evaluation. Geo-imagery bridging continents, XXth ISPRS Congress, pp 359–364Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martina Zeleňáková
    • 1
  • Lenka Gaňová
    • 1
  • Pavol Purcz
    • 1
  • Ladislav Satrapa
    • 2
  1. 1.Technical University of KošiceKošiceSlovakia
  2. 2.Czech Technical University in PraguePragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations