Natural Hazards

, Volume 84, Issue 3, pp 1513–1527 | Cite as

Spatial and temporal changes in flood hazard potential at coastal lowland area: a case study in the Kujukuri Plain, Japan

  • Huali Chen
  • Yuka Ito
  • Marie Sawamukai
  • Tao Su
  • Tomochika Tokunaga
Original Paper


The spatial–temporal change in flood hazard potential in the coastal lowland area was analyzed in the Kujukuri Plain, Japan, where widespread occurrence of land subsidence, the expansion of urban area, and the change in land cover have been reported. The data on flood hazard potential factors (river system, elevation, depression area, ratio of impermeable area, detention ponds, and precipitation) at three different periods, i.e., 1970, 2004, and 2013, were integrated by using geographic information system. Main data sources used are airborne laser scanning data, leveling data, Landsat TM data, river watershed maps, and precipitation data from precipitation observation stations and radar precipitation data. The flood hazard assessment maps for each time were obtained by using an algorithm that combines the flood hazard potential factors with weighted linear combinations based on multicriteria decision analysis technique. By comparing each factor layer map and flood hazard condition maps of different periods, it was found that the changes in different factors were quite variable during different periods with different spatial distributions. From year 1970 to year 2004, most of the areas where flood hazard potential was increased were concentrated in the central and northeastern part of the study area. During the period from year 2004 to year 2013, the areas where flood hazard potential was increased moved to the north and east. This study provides a flexible method to study the spatial–temporal variation of the flood hazard and, hence, could help flood management and environment protection in similar coastal lowland areas.


Flood hazard potential Spatial–temporal analysis Coastal lowland area 



We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the Keiyo Natural Gas Association (Japan), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41401539), and Science Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars (State Education Ministry of China, [2015] No. 1098) for supporting this study. Residential maps provided by ZENRIN CO., Ltd, are used as the CSIS Joint Research (No. 524) using spatial data provided by Center for Spatial Information Science, The University of Tokyo.


  1. Anselmo V, Galeati G, Palmieri S, Rossi U, Todini E (1996) Flood risk assessment using an integrated hydrological and hydraulic modeling approach: a case study. J Hydrol 175:533–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment Part I: model development. J Am Water Resour As 34(1):73–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballesteros-Cánovas JA, Sanchez-Silva M, Bodoque JM, Díez-Herrero A (2013) An integrated approach to flood risk management: a case study of Navaluenga (Central Spain). Water Resour Manag 27:3051–3069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banai-Kashami AR (1989) New method for site suitability analysis—the analytic hierarchy process. Environ Manag 13(6):685–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chan F, Chan M, Tang N (2000) Evaluation methodologies for technology selection. J Mater Process Technol 107:330–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chang N, Parvathinathan G, Breeden J (2008) Combining GIS with fuzzy multicriteria decision-making for landfill siting in a fast-growing urban region. J Environ Manag 87(1):139–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen HL, Ito Y, Sawamukai M, Tokunaga T (2015) Flood hazard assessment in the Kujukuri Plain of Chiba Prefecture, Japan, based on GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Nat Hazards 78(1):105–120. doi: 10.1007/s11069-015-1699-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng CH (1997) Evaluating naval tactical systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function. Eur J Oper Res 96:343–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chiba Prefecture (1971) Flooding report in Chiba Prefecture (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  10. Chiba Prefecture (2005) Flooding report in Chiba Prefecture (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  11. Chiba Prefecture (2013) Flooding report in Chiba Prefecture (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  12. Chiba Prefecture Chosei Civil Engineering Office (2004) Second grade river Nabaki river watershed map. Naigai Map Production Inc. (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  13. Chiba Prefecture Chosei Regional Development Center (2005). Second grade river Ichinomiya river watershed map, Naigai Map Production Inc. (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  14. Dewan AM, Islam MM, Kumamoto T, Nishigaki M (2007) Evaluating flood hazard for land-use planning in Greater Dhaka of Bangladesh using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Water Resour Manag 21:1601–1612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doornkamp JC (1998) Coastal flooding, global warming and environmental management. J Environ Manag 52:327–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Downs PW (2000) Rehabilitation of a lowland river: reconciling flood defence with habitat diversity and geomorphological sustainability. J Environ Manag 58:249–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Environmental and Community Affairs Department, Chiba Prefecture (2007). Leveling results in Chiba Prefecture [reference date: February 1970-January 1st, 2007] (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  18. Furdada G, Calderon LE, Marques MA (2008) Flood hazard map of La Trinidad (NW Nicaragua). Method and results. Nat Hazards 45:183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gamper C, Thöni M, Weck-Hannemann H (2006) A conceptual approach to the use of cost benefit and multi criteria analysis in natural hazard management. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 6(2):293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huang C, Chen Y, Wu J (2014) Mapping spatio-temporal flood inundation dynamics at larger river basin scale using time-series flow data and MODIS imagery. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 26:350–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hunt A, Watkiss P (2011) Climate change impacts and adaptations in cities: a review of the literature. Clim Change 104:13–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. IPCC (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Japan Meteorological Agency (2004) Radar-AMeDAS Precipitation 2004 CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
  24. Japan Meteorological Agency (2013) Radar-AMeDAS Precipitation 2013 CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
  25. Japan Meteorological Agency (2014) Japan Meteorological Agency Meteorological statistics information (Mobara), Japan Meteorological Agency. (in Japanese)
  26. Jenks GF (1967) The data model concept in statistical mapping. Int Yearb Cartogr 7:186–190Google Scholar
  27. Lee G, Jun KS, Chung ES (2013) Integrated multi-criteria flood vulnerability approach using fuzzy TOPSIS and Delphi technique. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13:1293–1312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Malczewski J (2006) GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 20(7):703–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meyer V, Scheuer S, Haase D (2009) A multicriteria approach for flood risk mapping exemplified at the Mulde river. Nat Hazards, Germany. doi: 10.1007/s11069-008-9244-4 Google Scholar
  30. Moriwaki H (1979) The landform evolution of the Kujukuri Coastal Plain, Central Japan. Quat Res 18:1–16 (in Japanese) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Obanawa H, Tokunaga T, Rokugawa S, Deguchi T, Nakamura T (2010) Land subsidence at the Kujukuri Plain in Chiba Prefecture, Japan: evaluation and monitoring environmental impacts. IAHS Publ 339:17–22Google Scholar
  32. Schlaffer S, Matgen P, Hollaus M, Wagner W (2015) Flood detection from multi-temporal SAR data using harmonic analysis and change detection. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 38:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sinha R, Bapalu GV, Singh LK, Rath B (2008) Flood risk analysis in the Kosi river basin, north Bihar using multi-parametric approach of analytical hierarchy process (AHP). J Indian Soc Remote Sens 36:335–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Suriya S, Mudgal BV (2012) Impact of urbanization on flooding: the Thirusoolam sub watershed—a case study. J Hydrol 412–413:210–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Whalen TM, Savage GT, Jeong GD (2002) The method of self-determined probability weighted moments revisited. J Hydrol 268:177–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zou Q, Zhou JZ, Zhou C, Song LX, Guo J (2013) Comprehensive flood risk assessment based on set pair analysis-variable fuzzy sets model and fuzzy AHP. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 27:525–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huali Chen
    • 1
  • Yuka Ito
    • 2
  • Marie Sawamukai
    • 3
  • Tao Su
    • 2
  • Tomochika Tokunaga
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Environmental Science and EngineeringZhejiang Gongshang UniversityHangzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Environment Systems, School of Frontier SciencesThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  3. 3.VisionTech Inc.Tsukuba-CityJapan

Personalised recommendations