Comprehensive Flood Risk Management Strategy

Methodology and technology to make resilient urban development

Dr. Hitoshi BABA

Ph.D. Environment and Resource Engineering

Senior Advisor, Japan International Cooperation Agency

email: Baba.Hitoshi@jica.go.jp

Urban agglomerations with more than

750,000 inhabitants, 2010.

Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population

Division; World Urbanization Prospects: The 2009 Revision; File 12: Population of

Urban Agglomerations with 750,000 Inhabitants or More in 20 Urban agglomerations

with more than 750,000 inhabitants, 2010.

Number of reported flood events.

Source: based on EM-DAT/CRED

Urban agglomerations by size class and

potential risk of flooding, 2025

Source: World Urbanization Prospects, the 2011 Revision

Eigenbrod, F., Bell, V.A., Davies, H.N., Heinemeyer, A., Armsworth, P.R., and Gaston, K.J. 2011. The impact of projected increases in urbanization on ecosystem services. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, online advance publication.

Increasing urban flood risk

• Recently increasing urban risk

2004

• China

• India

• Philippine

2005

• Pakistan

• China

• USA

(Hurricane

Katrina)

2006

• Philippine

• China

• Ethiopia

• Indonesia

2007

• India

• China

• UK

• Bangladesh

(cyclone Sidr)

• Indonesia

2008

• Laos

• Myanmar

(cyclone

Nargis)

2009

• Pakistan

• Taipei, Taiwan

• Philippine

• Ulaanbaatar,

Mongolia

2010

• Latin America

• Brazil

• Colombia

Fuente: El Heraldo

2011

• USA

(Flood, Drought, Tornado)

• Thai

Reaffirming HFA,

we know the direction to go. But How?

Priority Action 1: Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national

and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for

implementation.

Priority Action 2: Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and

enhance early warning.

Priority Action 3: Use knowledge, innovation and education to

build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels.

Priority Action 4: Reduce the underlying risk factors.

Priority Action 5: Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective

response at all levels.

High-Level Dialogue Communiqué

Ahead of the Wave: Leading the Way to Resilience

GPDRR, Geneva, May 2013 1. Advocate for disaster risk reduction and the building of resilience to be a central part of the future we want in sustainable development; the post-2015 development agenda; and the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change. All of which are to be supported by a post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction.

2. Call on countries to develop nationally agreed standards for hazard risk assessments especially of critical infrastructure (including schools, health centers, electricity and water supply systems, nodal ITC data centers, and road and transport systems).

3. Start a global safe schools and safe health structures campaign in disaster-prone areas with voluntary funding and commitments to be announced at the World Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction for 2015.

4. Call on the private sector to integrate disaster risk considerations in risk management practices.

5. Stimulate collaboration among the public and private sectors at local and national levels in risk management.

Chair’s Summery

4th session of the GPDRR, Geneva, May 2013

Highlighted action points:

• Assessing Risk; global economic losses, small local events

• Targeting the root causes of risk: price fluctuations, unemployment,

violence, conflict, health burden

• Including Communities for results: women, youth, disabilities

• Leading at the local level: municipalities, schools and hospitals

• Recognizing private sector as actor and partner: economic growth,

resilient business and investment

• Strengthening risk governance: communities and local governments

• Strengthening scientific and technical support: analysis, knowledge,

data, tools, method

• Building mutually reinforcing agendas: sustainable development,

environment, climate change impact, economic and social development

Objectives we encompass for tackling

with increasing urban flood risk

• Ensure the priority of risk reduction among decision makers particularly those standing on development side,

– Realistic understanding of flood risk and impact,

– Risk minded spatial planning,

• Clearly identify and quantitatively assess the uncertain risk and impact in order to get the decision makers acknowledged,

– Vulnerability assessment, risk and impact analysis,

– Damage cost estimation, DRR investment cost versus benefit,

• Effectively reflect the lessons from recent disasters and from precedents into the policy, strategy and planning of development,

– Good practices, models of advanced nations,

– Standard methodology and technology,

• Practice the risk reduction under coordinated manner with stakeholders

– Institutional strengthening, legal framework,

– Community participation, conflict management,

Lessons from experience

• Japan’s most rapid development after the WW2

Tokyo Hiroshima

1945 2004

Good practice of urban flood risk management

• Recently increasing urban risk

• Importance of risk reduction to secure the future sustainable development

1976 Flood in Yokohama

(Tokyo Metropolitan Area)

Multipurpose Rainwater Storage Facility

normally

Kirigaoka reservoirs

(Tsurumi river)

flooded

Controlled flooding

Underground Flood Water Storage

high void ratio : 90%+

Retention and infiltration Measures

Without flood retention measure

Increasing flood

Run-off

Increased run-off

Before development Flo

od

run

-off

Time

Flo

od

run

-off

Time

Function of Countermeasures

Restraining of

increased run-off

to the previous level

After countermeasures

Retention or

infiltration of

Storm water

Dam, Tunnel and High Standard Structures

Underground Flood Tunnel Flood Control Dam

High Standard Embankment

Structural

conventional measures

For flood damage prevention

Non-structural

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve F

loo

d C

on

tro

l in

U

rban

Riv

er B

asin

In-stream Measures

Information Measures

Channel Normalization

Flood way, Diversion, Polder

Dam, Reservoir

Flood Forecasting, Alert

Public Response

Watershed Measures Storm Water Retention

Surface Water Infiltration

Land Use Regulation

Flood Proofed Building

National level coordination needed

• Needs to get participated by government and private entity of watershed

• Needs to apply technical standard • Needs to make flood control measures obligated

A new scheme is required to effectively implement flood control

measures against increasing inundation disaster in urban river basins.

→Measures through cooperative efforts of river administrator,

sewerage system administrator, local municipalities etc.

○ Frequent flood damages in urban areas due

to the Tokai flood of 2000 and recent disasters

○ Frequent local heavy rains and increase of

inundation hazard due to urban development

Inundation during the Tokai

heavy rains of 2000

“Flood Damage Control Law for Urban River Basins in Japan”

Previous Laws and frameworks of urban flood issues

New framework of Urban Flood Control (UFC)

Flood Damage Control Law for

Specified Urban River Basins (Law No.77, 2003)

-Spatial distribution of measures that cross over the

conventional Laws

-Obligatory installation of flood control facilities

-Obligatory reporting of actions and operations

-Administrative agreement among local public

organizations

-Cost sharing rules

Article 3 Designation of the specified urban river and river area

Article 4 Formation of the plan for flood damage control measures in the

river-basin

Article 6 Development / maintenance of facilities for retention and

infiltration of storm water by ‘river administrator’

Article 7 Defrayment (cost sharing) by other local authorities

Article 8 Special technical standard on drainage facilities

(Restrictions, etc. in the catchments area)

Article 9-22 A Permit, etc. for an action to hamper infiltration of storm water

Article 23-26 Conservation of Regulation pond

Article 27-31 Management agreement

Major features of the UFC Law

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

Disaster Management

Cycle

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

DM Capacity

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.

DM Capacity

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.

DM Capacity

Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.

Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.

Early warning, Evacuation training,

Stockpiling, etc.

DM Capacity

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.

Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.

Early warning, Evacuation training,

Stockpiling, etc.

Regional cooperation, Rescue standard

(SASOP), CBDRM, etc.

DM Capacity

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.

Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.

Early warning, Evacuation training,

Stockpiling, etc.

Regional cooperation, Rescue standard

(SASOP), CBDRM, etc.

Building code, Risk transfer, Financing, etc.

DM Capacity

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

DM Capacity

Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.

Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.

Early warning, Evacuation training,

Stockpiling, etc.

Regional cooperation, Rescue standard

(SASOP), CBDRM, etc.

Building code, Risk transfer, Financing, etc.

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

DM Capacity

Disaster Management Cycle

Preparedness,

Defense

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation

Japan’s disaster management relevant

national laws surrounding DMC Tonankai-Nankai Earthquake Law

Mega Scale Earthquake Law

Meteorological Service Law

Volcanic Disaster Prevention Law

Special Law for Severe Damage

Infrastructure Rehabilitation Law

Building Codes

Urban Planning Law

Sewerage Law

Urban Flood Law

Forest Conservation Law

Forest Law

Sediment Disaster Law

Sabo Law

Coast Law

River Law

Flood Defense Law

Disaster Rescue Law

Law for Disaster Management

People Protection Law

Fire Fighting Law

Fire Fighting Organization Law

Oil Incident Law

Nuclear Incident Law

Law of Self Defense Force

Disaster Condolence Fund Law

Victims Rehabilitation Support Law

Disaster Management

Cycle

12 principles of Urban Flood Management

1. Every flood risk scenario is different: there is no flood management blueprint.

2. Designs for flood management must be able to cope with a changing and uncertain

future.

3. Rapid urbanization requires the integration of flood risk management into regular

urban planning and governance.

4. An integrated strategy requires the use of both structural and non-structural measures

and good metrics for “getting the balance right”.

5. Heavily engineered structural measures can transfer risk upstream and downstream.

6. It is impossible to entirely eliminate the risk from flooding.

7. Many flood management measures have multiple co-benefits over and above their

flood management role.

8. It is important to consider the wider social and ecological consequences of flood

management spending.

9. Clarity of responsibility for constructing and running flood risk programs is critical.

10. Implementing flood risk management measures requires multi-stakeholder

cooperation.

11. Continuous communication to raise awareness and reinforce preparedness is necessary.

12. Plan to recover quickly after flooding and use the recovery to build capacity.

Steps for DRR

1. Understanding the risk and share among all stakeholders

– Assess the probable urban risks in accordance with the development plan

– Establish standard methodology and technology of risk assessment

2. Understanding the impact

– Clarify the future impact and damage cost

3. Drafting probable options of structural and non-structural measures

– Prevention cost for each option

4. Formulating the Concept and Strategy to make resilient city development

– Probabilistic approach of DRR planning

– Setting target protection levels

– Optimum combination of structural and non-structural measures

5. Implementing and managing

6. Monitoring and evaluating

Sta

ndar

d D

RR

pro

cess

1. Understanding Flood Hazard

1. Type and cause

2. Probability

3. Flood hazard assessment

2. Understanding Flood Impact

1. Direct impact

2. Indirect impact

3. Vulnerability and Risk assessment

3. Considering structural options

1. Conveyance

2. Flood storage

3. Drainage systems

4. Infiltration

5. Wetland and environmental buffers

6. Flood proofing, resilience/resistance

7. Flood defense

4. Considering non-structural options

1. Flood zoning, land use planning

2. Flood awareness campaigns

3. Health awareness

4. Solid and liquid waste management

5. Community based resilience

improvement

6. Flood insurance

7. Early warning

8. Evacuation

9. Emergency response

10. Flood recovery and reconstruction

5. Evaluating alternative risk reduction

options

1. Evaluating cost and benefit

2. Defining “target protection level”

Acceptance of risk ALARP principle

Opportunity cost

The value of a life

Demands of insurability

Benchmarking and regional cross-

cooperation

Decisions under uncertainty

No regret solutions

Flexible solutions

Decision Trees

3. Designing of measures

6. Implementing and managing

1. Implementation

2. Sustainable maintenance

3. Community engagement

7. Evaluating and benchmarking risk

measures

1. Evaluation

2. Benchmarking and monitoring

2008 2030

50% 64%

Urbanization rate

Future Projection of Land Use in Cilliwung

River Basin, Jakarta

+49%

+57%

Flood risk assessment, increasing discharge

Probabilistic Risk Assessment

1% probability flood hazard. Ciliwung River, Jakarta. Simulation by Dr. BABA

Modeling Software:iRIC +Nais2DFlood

Purposes of Flood Risk Assessment

Purpose Description

Policy Making Formulation of national and regional development policy on strategic

areas for disaster prevention, identification of model areas and

budgetary arrangements; development and/or update of comprehensive

plans, future land use maps, and zoning regulations

Flood Management

Planning Preparedness for emergency actions (evacuation and rescue) and relief

actions; develop hazard mitigation projects; planning for continuity of

operations plans, continuity of government plans, and emergency

operations plans

Preparedness and

Emergency

Actions

Information for disaster mitigation and prevention planning, and river

basin flood control master plan; re-evaluate and prioritize mitigation

actions in local hazard mitigation plans; to communicate with property

owners, business owners, and other citizens about flood risks

Damage Analysis Damage analysis for investment on regional industrial clusters and

insurance on factories, buildings and utilities; risk assessment on

economic corridors such as roads, ports, and railways

Emergency Response, Recovery

Rehabilitation,

Reconstruction

Prevention

Mitigation Preparedness,

Defense

Disaster Management

Cycle

Application of Flood Risk Assessment

Flood Risk Assessment

Institutional Arrangement for

Flood Risk Transfer

Area Business

Continuity Planning

Policy Making

Flood Management

Planning

Assessment of Flood Hazard

• Basic Conditions of Flood Hazard Identification

– Output of the flood hazard identification should be displayed on any Geographic

Information System (GIS) or on printed maps.

– The flood hazard information, identifying inundation risk areas, should be

designated by the relevant, national, state or provincial government in accordance

with the disaster management law and then notified to the municipal governments

concerned.

– If an inundation risk area lies across multiple municipalities, the municipal

governments concerned may need to jointly conduct flood hazard identification

and mapping with relating municipalities in a wide area.

– Evacuation sites and routes for instance, in addition to the information of

inundation risk areas and intensities, can be indicated on the hazard maps in a case

that the flood hazard maps are used at the time of evacuation.

Assessment of Vulnerability and Risk

Type of vulnerability and the Factors Affecting Their Rate of Exposure

Types of Vulnerability Exposure Factors

Individual or household

vulnerability Education, age, gender, race, income, past disaster experience

Social vulnerability Poverty, race, isolation, lack of social security services

Institutional

Vulnerability Ineffective policies, unorganized and non-committed public and private

institutions

Economic Vulnerability Financial insecurity, GDP, sources of national income and funds for

disaster prevention and mitigation

Physical Vulnerability Location of settlement, material of building, maintenance, forecasting

and warning system

Environmental

Vulnerability Poor environmental practices, unprecedented population growth and

migration

System Vulnerability Utility service for the community, health services, resilient system

Place Vulnerability Mitigation and social fabric

Factors Required to Estimate Flood Risk

Factor Definition Key Indicator

A. Hazards Potentially damaging event of flooding Water depth (mainly), water

velocity, inundation period

B. Vulnerability Conditions determined by physical, social

factors to the impact of flood hazard Susceptibility or Resilience; 0 (no)

to 1 (highest) or B = E ÷ D

C. Probability of hazard Extent to which an event is likely occur Return period, probability of

occurrence; 0 (no occurrence) to 1

(100% occurrence)

D. Value of the elements at

risk (or exposure) Aggregate value of assets, operational

indirect products, intangible assets of the

elements at risk

Monetary value ($), death toll, etc

E. Damage of the elements

at risk by an event of

hazard

Aggregate value of direct and indirect

damages to the elements impacted by an

event of flooding

Damage ($, death toll, etc) = B x D

or Value of damage measured by

surveys

F. Risk Combination of the probability of an

event (%) and its consequences

($, death toll)

Risk = C x E or C x B x D

Stage-Damage Curve

Stage or Water Depth

Probability (%)

Return Period (Year)

100

50

10

5

2 1

1

2

10

20

50 100

Secured Stage with No-Damage

Total d

evastation

(maxim

um

dam

age)

Damage ($ or casualty)

– From actual damage survey

– From hypothetical scenario

Probabilistic approach

Hazard

L

evel

A Target

Protection

Level based

on a planned

and designed

hazard

Protection

by mainly

Structural

Measures

Mitigation

by mainly

Non-

structural

Measures

Hazard

L

evel

Minimizing

Damages and

losses at

multiple

scenarios by

Comprehensive

Combination of

Structural and

Non-structural

Measures, with

Redundancy

Multiple

Scenarios

based on

probabilistic

hazard

projection

Deterministic Approach Probabilistic Approach

Magnitude

of Hazard

Damage potential and

impact assessment

Extreme (rare prob.)

Severe damage, need

comprehensive works

Large (low prob.)

Heavy damage, must be

controlled

Medium (mid prob.)

Damage on livelihood, no

casualty

Small (high prob.)

Little damage, avoidable

Impact assess based on wide range of hazard projections

adaptive planning with multiple scenario selections

Coping Strategy to make

Adaptive Planning

Main

selection

More emphasis on

response side

Warning Evacuation

Combination of designed

prevention and response

Mitigation Early Warn

Preventive strategy with

some response measures

Prevention Mitigation

Preventive strategy

mainly by infrastructure

Structural prevention

Damage potential and impact assessment

Magnitude

of flood

Damage potential and

impact

Probability

per year

Extreme Severe damage, need

comprehensive works × 0.1%

Large Heavy damage, must be

controlled × 1%

Medium Damage on livelihood, no

casualty × 10%

Small Little damage, avoidable × 100%

Impact assess based on wide range of hazard projections

Impact value

Average Impact per year

Damage potential and impact assessment

Schematic image of comprehensive

flood management

A) Prevention of hazard by structure

B) Mitigation by watershed measures

C) EW, emergency response and fighting against hazards

D) Hazard proofing and business continuity

E) Temporal acceptance of damage and restoration

F) Evacuation and relocation

Options preventive strategy

reactive strategy

Strategic combination of

Structural and Non-structural Measures

inter- mediate

Flood risk management options

Source: Baca Architects

A) Robust development, raising infrastructure resilience

B) Conserve current land use as it is

C) Use as less development condition (farmland, forest, etc)

D) Gradual restoration for natural condition

E) Protect land from human intervention

Options

Strategic Land Use Management

preventive strategy

reactive strategy

inter- mediate

Total Cost

Protection Cost

Probable Damage

Poin

t C

ost

Optim

um

Utensil for Strategic Target setting

ranging through Reactive to Preventive

Reactive Preventive

Co

st a

nd

Dam

age

Relative costs and benefits of flood

management options.

Modified from source: Adapted from Ranger and Garbett-Shields 2011

Insurance

Resettlement to lower risk

zones

Rebuilding natural

ecosystems

Erosion control

Urban development

control Urban drainage systems

Early warning systems Building

codes

Flood defenses

Reduced social

vulnerability

Flood control

Flood channel

Low benefits relative to costs

High benefits relative to costs

High robustness to uncertainties

Low robustness to uncertainties

In deciding on an acceptable level of risk for populations to bear, the concept

of As Low As Reasonably Practical (ALARP) can be adopted.

- Risk cannot be justified save in extraordinary circumstances

- Tolerable only if risk reduction is impracticable or if benefits only marginally greater than costs

- Tolerable if benefits not significantly greater than costs

- Necessary to maintain assurance that risk remains at this level

Defining “target protection levels” Source: Integrated Urban Flood Risk Management for the 21st Century: A Practitioner’s Handbook,

THE WORLD BANK, GFDRR. 2011, Chapter 5.3.1.

Unacceptable region

ALARP or tolerability region

Broadly acceptable

region

Acceptable levels of risk and the ALARP principle, Source: adapted from Flood site language of risk.

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Number of casualties

Decreasing human loss by floods in Japan

Outcome of the comprehensive flood risk

management under the rapid urbanization

Increasing Economic damage by flood

Source: EMDAT

Economic Damage by Climatological

Disasters, global total

SOURCE: www.livetradingnews.com

SOURCE: BANKOKPOST

SOURCE: http://investinvietnam.vn

SOURCE: Pratista, Panoramio

Increasing vulnerability

Recent mega scale disasters,

affecting the global economy

• Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, 2011

• Thai Flood, 2011

• …

The idea of Area BCP

• Sharing the critical resources under

– “Regional cooperation” and

– “Inter-regional cooperation”

• Redundant operation of each enterprise or industry by

– “Industrial Cooperation” and

– “Supply Chain cooperation”

Industry agglomerated area

Sharing critical resources

Each enterprise

Industry agglomerated area

Sharing critical resources

Each enterprise

Inter-regional cooperation

Enterprise in a specific

Industry

Industrial cooperation

Supply Chain cooperation

Concept of Area BCP

• Area Command

• Area BCP

Area Commander

Incident #1

Incident Commander

Incident #2

Incident Commander

Incident #3

Incident Commander

Area BCP

BCP #1 BCP #2 BCP #3

External Resources and Infrastructure

Local Disaster Management

Why Area BCP?

• Continuity of operations in industry agglomerated area:

– In certain area where industrial agglomeration takes place, each enterprise

will try to continue operation or to promptly restart.

– To support the industry, critical resources for operations of the area shall be

designated by the entity who is responsible for ensuring the area economy,

through review of business continuity of the companies and disaster

prevention measures of the area.

– The entity must also support the effectiveness of the performance of

operations by securing the resilience of critical resources.

• Two aspects of Area BCP:

– Critical resource(s) management for business continuity of companies of the

area

– Regional disaster prevention (Risk Reduction) by redundant resource

management (backup system)

OMY Economic Center

• In OMY Area in the vicinity of Tokyo Station (major economic center of

Japan, with working population of 290,000 and is home to approx. 4,000

enterprises), the whole area is working together to discuss the

(1) Measures for Stranded Commuters, and

(2) Continuity of Business of Companies in the Area

• Securing staff safety, staging area, electricity, water and sanitation, etc.

Source：Disaster Prevention Efforts of OMY Area（Mitsubishi Estate Co., Ltd.）

Tokyo Station

Marunouchi

Otemachi

Yurakucho

Kasumigaseki Imperial Palace

ASEAN Area BCP Study

Under cooperation between JICA and the AHA Centre, the ASEAN Area BCP Study is in progress

– To collect and analyze information and data necessary for natural disaster risk assessment and formulation of the Area BCP and

– To formulate the Area BCPs for three pilot areas, in Indonesia (Bekashi to Karawang), the Philippines (Cavite, Laguna, Metro Manila) and Vietnam (Haiphong)

Conducting activities and getting output such as

– Mapping of industrial agglomerated areas (Industrial Area) in 10 AESAN countries

– Assessment of vulnerability of infrastructure of distribution system and study of supply chain

– Assessment of overall risks of the countries

– Assessment of risks of the pilot areas

– Formulation of the Area BCP for the pilot areas

– Preparation of guidelines of Area BCP

Conclusion

• Flood risk is increasing in accordance to recent rapid urban agglomerations

• Need common understanding of the risk and impact among all stakeholders

• We should learn from our experiences of enhancing capacity of flood risk management in the process of urbanization

• Established methodology and technology can be applied to newly emerging urban development

• Probabilistic risk assessment is essentially important to make common understanding of the risks

• Probable impacts and damages should be analyzed based on the multiple risk scenarios to create a strategic target level of safety and comprehensive combination of Structural and Non-structural Measures

• Considering the increasing vulnerability of industrial agglomerations and globally expanding economic damages in case particularly of large scale disaster, the Area BCP is one of the challenging DRR travels