| LDR |
|
05397nam^^22003733a^4500 |
| 001 |
|
FI13042532_00001 |
| 005 |
|
20130529122404.0 |
| 006 |
|
m^^^^^o^^d^^^^^^^^ |
| 007 |
|
cr^^n^---ma^mp |
| 008 |
|
130529n^^^^^^^^xx^||||^o^^^^^|||^0^eng^d |
| 020 |
|
|a 9783704501486 |
| 024 |
8 |
|a FI13042532 |
| 245 |
00 |
|a Uncertainty and disaster risk management |h [electronic resource] |b modeling the flash flood risk to Vienna and its subway system |y English. |
| 260 |
|
|a Laxenburg, Austria : |b International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), |c 2009-10. |
| 506 |
|
|a All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright holder. |
| 510 |
|
|a Compton, K.L., Faber, R., Ermolieva, T.Y., Linnerooth-Bayer, J., Nachtnebel, H. (2009). Uncertainty and disaster risk management: modeling the flash flood risk to Vienna and its subway system. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). |
| 520 |
3 |
|a This document presents the use of an interdisciplinary approach to flood risk analysis and management as applied to the case of flood risks facing the subway system of the city of Vienna, Austria. It outlines alternative policy approaches, from disaster risk reduction (DRR) measures to opportunities for risk sharing and transfer. Effective risk management entails the implementation of multi-level policies that work together seamlessly. The challenge of designing such a policy network requires a multidisciplinary approach to risk analysis. To that end, specialists from a variety of fields pooled their skills to examine flash flood hazards in Vienna. This study focused on its U4 subway line, which the researchers predicted would suffer severe damage. Different aspects of risk management, such as flood prevention procedures and funding issues, were explored to assess their effectiveness in addressing highly probabilistic catastrophic events. The analysis revealed a variety of methodological flaws. However, the researchers presented solutions to address only those that concern a lack of standardization, as they were the most significant. Interdisciplinary variations in risk identification and inadequate descriptions of risk were the primary obstacles to efficient risk management. The study team resolved these issues by developing an assessment methodology based on Monte Carlo simulations on catastrophe models. Rainfall-runoff data was used to obtain the peak discharge for different operational detention basins, and the flow parameters were approximated using a modified hydraulic 1-D steady-flow model HEC-RAS. Monte Carlo simulations incorporated variables such as channel roughness, river elevation, and energy loss due to bridge constrictions in order to assess failure probabilities for multiple return periods. The new methodology combines multiple procedures in a way such that each discipline can easily use a single standardized methodology. This solution not only provides a consistency in risk response and policy implementation, but also reduces costs by insuring that the components of the disaster management system function cohesively. The use of a standardized, yet field-comprehensive method also serves to raise awareness among the groups as to the roles played by their counterparts in other fields, thus improving interdisciplinary communication. |
| 520 |
0 |
|a Disaster Risk Management |
| 520 |
2 |
|a Acknowledgments p. xi; Abstract p. xii; 1 Introduction and Theoretical Background p. 1; 1.1 Concepts of Risk p. 3; 1.2 Aleatory Uncertainty, Epistemic Uncertainty, and Risk Curves p. 4; 1.3 Catastrophe Models as Integrated Assessment Models p. 7; 1.4 Catastrophe Modeling and Uncertainty p. 9; 1.5 Motivation for Catastrophe Modeling p. 10; 1.6 Objectives andStructure of the Report p. 11; 2 Background p. 13; 2.1 General Description p. 13; 2.2 Rainfall Characteristics p. 13; 2.3 Elements at Risk p. 19; 2.4 Flood Protection p. 21; 3 Hydraulic Assessment Model Development p. 25; 3.1 StochasticHydraulicModel: SummaryDescription p. 25; 3.2 Stochastic Hydraulic Model—Parameters p. 27; 4 Damage Assessment Model Development p. 35; 4.1 Case Studies p. 37; 4.2 Analytical/Cost-Estimation Approach p. 46; 4.3 Summary p. 48; 5 Abstraction Methodology and Implementation p. 49; 5.1 Model Abstraction: Flood Hazard Analysis p. 51;
5.2 DamageAssessment p. 56; 5.3 Financial Parameters p. 59; 6 Results p. 66; 6.1 Structural Measures p. 66; 6.2 Financial Measures p. 69; 6.3 Mixed Measures p. 72; 7 Discussion and Conclusions p. 74; References p. 79 |
| 533 |
|
|a Electronic reproduction. |c Florida International University, |d 2013. |f (dpSobek) |n Mode of access: World Wide Web. |n System requirements: Internet connectivity; Web browser software. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Transportation |z Vienna (Austria) |x Subways. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Risk management |z Vienna (Austria). |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Natural hazards and disasters |z Vienna (Austria) |x Floods. |
| 662 |
|
|a Austria. |2 tgn |
| 700 |
1 |
|a Compton, Keith L.. |
| 700 |
1 |
|a Faber, Rudolf. |
| 700 |
1 |
|a Ermolieva, Tania Y.. |
| 700 |
1 |
|a Linnerooth-Bayer, Joanne. |
| 700 |
1 |
|a Nachtnebel, Hans-Peter. |
| 710 |
2 |
|a Disaster Risk Reduction Program, Florida International University (DRR/FIU), |e summary contributor. |
| 830 |
0 |
|a dpSobek. |
| 852 |
|
|a dpSobek |
| 856 |
40 |
|u http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI13042532/00001 |y Click here for full text |
| 992 |
04 |
|a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/13/04/25/32/00001/FI13042532_thm.jpg |
The record above was auto-generated from the METS file.
