Search for: All records

Urbanization and climate change are contributing to severe flooding globally, damaging infrastructure, disrupting economies, and undermining human well-being. Approaches to make cities more resilient to floods are emerging, notably with the design of flood-resilient structures, but relatively little is known about the role of urban form and its complexity in the concentration of flooding. We leverage statistical mechanics to reduce the complexity of urban flooding and develop a mean-flow theory that relates flood hazards to urban form characterized by the ground slope, urban porosity, and the Mermin order parameter which measures symmetry in building arrangements. The mean-flow theory presents a dimensionless flood depth that scales linearly with the urban porosity and the order parameter, with different scaling for disordered square- and hexagon-like forms. A universal scaling is obtained by introducing an effective mean chord length representative of the unobstructed downslope travel distance for flood water, yielding an analytical model for neighborhood-scale flood hazards globally. The proposed mean-flow theory is applied to probe city-to-city variations in flood hazards, and shows promising results linking recorded flood losses to urban form and observed rainfall extremes. 

Abstract Extreme flooding events are becoming more frequent and costly, and impacts have been concentrated in cities where exposure and vulnerability are both heightened. To manage risks, governments, the private sector, and households now rely on flood hazard data from national‐scale models that lack accuracy in urban areas due to unresolved drainage processes and infrastructure. Here we assess the uncertainties of First Street Foundation (FSF) flood hazard data, available across the U.S., using a new model (PRIMo‐Drain) that resolves drainage infrastructure and fine resolution drainage dynamics. Using the case of Los Angeles, California, we find that FSF and PRIMo‐Drain estimates of population and property value exposed to 1%‐ and 5%‐annual‐chance hazards diverge at finer scales of governance, for example, by 4‐ to 18‐fold at the municipal scale. FSF and PRIMo‐Drain data often predict opposite patterns of exposure inequality across social groups (e.g., Black, White, Disadvantaged). Further, at the county scale, we compute a Model Agreement Index of only 24%—a ∼1 in 4 chance of models agreeing upon which properties are at risk. Collectively, these differences point to limited capacity of FSF data to confidently assess which municipalities, social groups, and individual properties are at risk of flooding within urban areas. These results caution that national‐scale model data at present may misinform urban flood risk strategies and lead to maladaptation, underscoring the importance of refined and validated urban models. 

Abstract Damage and disruption from flooding have rapidly escalated over recent decades. Knowing who and what is at risk, how these risks are changing, and what is driving these changes is of immense importance to flood management and policy. Accurate predictions of flood risk are also critical to public safety. However, many high‐profile research studies reporting risks at national and global scales rely upon a significant oversimplification of how floods behave—as a level pool—an approach known as bathtub modeling that is avoided in flood management practice due to known biases (e.g., >200% error in flood area) compared to physics‐based modeling. With publicity by news media, findings that would likely not be trusted by flood management professionals are thus widely communicated to policy makers and the public, scientific credibility is put at risk, and maladaptation becomes more likely. Here, we call upon researchers to abandon the practice of bathtub modeling in flood risk studies, and for those involved in the peer‐review process to ensure the conclusions of impact analyses are consistent with the limitations of the assumed flood physics. We document biases and uncertainties from bathtub modeling in both coastal and inland geographies, and we present examples of physics‐based modeling approaches suited to large‐scale applications. Reducing biases and uncertainties in flood hazard estimates will sharpen scientific understanding of changing risks, better serve the needs of policy makers, enable news media to more objectively report present and future risks to the public, and better inform adaptation planning. 

Abstract Exposure to sea-level rise (SLR) and flooding will make some areas uninhabitable, and the increased demand for housing in safer areas may cause displacement through economic pressures. Anticipating such direct and indirect impacts of SLR is important for equitable adaptation policies. Here we build upon recent advances in flood exposure modeling and social vulnerability assessment to demonstrate a framework for estimating the direct and indirect impacts of SLR on mobility. Using two spatially distributed indicators of vulnerability and exposure, four specific modes of climate mobility are characterized: (1) minimally exposed to SLR (Stable), (2) directly exposed to SLR with capacity to relocate (Migrating), (3) indirectly exposed to SLR through economic pressures (Displaced), and (4) directly exposed to SLR without capacity to relocate (Trapped). We explore these dynamics within Miami-Dade County, USA, a metropolitan region with substantial social inequality and SLR exposure. Social vulnerability is estimated by cluster analysis using 13 social indicators at the census tract scale. Exposure is estimated under increasing SLR using a 1.5 m resolution compound flood hazard model accounting for inundation from high tides and rising groundwater and flooding from extreme precipitation and storm surge. Social vulnerability and exposure are intersected at the scale of residential buildings where exposed population is estimated by dasymetric methods. Under 1 m SLR, 56% of residents in areas of low flood hazard may experience displacement, whereas 26% of the population risks being trapped (19%) in or migrating (7%) from areas of high flood hazard, and concerns of depopulation and fiscal stress increase within at least 9 municipalities where 50% or more of their total population is exposed to flooding. As SLR increases from 1 to 2 m, the dominant flood driver shifts from precipitation to inundation, with population exposed to inundation rising from 2.8% to 54.7%. Understanding shifting geographies of flood risks and the potential for different modes of climate mobility can enable adaptation planning across household-to-regional scales. 

Abstract Cycles of wildfire and rainfall produce sediment‐laden floods that pose a hazard to development and may clog or overtop protective infrastructure, including debris basins and flood channels. The compound, post‐fire flood hazards associated with infrastructure overtopping and clogging are challenging to estimate due to the need to account for interactions between sequences of wildfire and storm events and their impact on flood control infrastructure over time. Here we present data sources and calibration methods to estimate infrastructure clogging and channel overtopping hazards on a catchment‐by‐catchment basis using the Post‐Fire Flood Hazard Model (PF2HazMo), a stochastic modeling approach that utilizes continuous simulation to resolve the effects of antecedent conditions and system memory. Publicly available data sources provide parameter ranges needed for stochastic modeling, and several performance measures are considered for model calibration. With application to three catchments in southern California, we show that PF2HazMo predicts the median of the simulated distribution of peak bulked flows within the 95% confidence interval of observed flows, with an order of magnitude range in bulked flow estimates depending on the performance measure used for calibration. Using infrastructure overtopping data from a post‐fire wet season, we show that PF2HazMo accurately predicts the number of flood channel exceedances. Model applications to individual watersheds reveal where infrastructure is undersized to contain present‐day and future overtopping hazards based on current design standards. Model limitations and sources of uncertainty are also discussed. 

Abstract This paper develops the concept of flood problem framing to understand decision-makers’ priorities in flood risk management in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Region in California (LA Metro). Problem frames shape an individual’s preferences for particular management strategies and their future behaviors. While flooding is a complex, multifaceted problem, with multiple causes and multiple impacts, a decision-maker is most likely to manage only those dimensions of flooding about which they are aware or concerned. To evaluate flood decision-makers’ primary concerns related to flood exposure, vulnerability, and management in the LA Metro, we draw on focus groups with flood control districts, city planners, nonprofit organizations, and other flood-related decision-makers. We identify numerous concerns, including concerns about specific types of floods (e.g., fluvial vs pluvial) and impacts to diverse infrastructure and communities. Our analyses demonstrate that flood concerns aggregate into three problem frames: one concerned with large fluvial floods exacerbated by climate change and their housing, economic, and infrastructure impacts; one concerned with pluvial nuisance flooding, pollution, and historic underinvestment in communities; and one concerned with coastal and fluvial flooding’s ecosystem impacts. While each individual typically articulated concerns that overlapped with only one problem frame, each problem frame was discussed by numerous organization types, suggesting low barriers to cross-organizational coordination in flood planning and response. This paper also advances our understanding of flood risk perception in a region that does not face frequent large floods. Significance Statement This paper investigates the primary concerns that planners, flood managers, and other decision-makers have about flooding in Southern California. This is important because the way that decision-makers understand flooding shapes the way that they will plan for and respond to flood events. We find that some decision-makers are primarily concerned with large floods affecting large swaths of infrastructure and housing; others are concerned with frequent, small floods that mobilize pollution in low-income areas; and others are concerned with protecting coastal ecosystems during sea level rise. Our results also highlight key priorities for research and practice, including the need for flexible and accessible flood data and education about how to evacuate.