Hess opinions: An interdisciplinary research agenda to explore the unintended consequences of structural flood protection

107Citations
Citations of this article
224Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

One common approach to cope with floods is the implementation of structural flood protection measures, such as levees or flood-control reservoirs, which substantially reduce the probability of flooding at the time of implementation. Numerous scholars have problematized this approach. They have shown that increasing the levels of flood protection can attract more settlements and high-value assets in the areas protected by the new measures. Other studies have explored how structural measures can generate a sense of complacency, which can act to reduce preparedness. These paradoxical risk changes have been described as levee effect, safe development paradox or safety dilemma. In this commentary, we briefly review this phenomenon by critically analysing the intended benefits and unintended effects of structural flood protection, and then we propose an interdisciplinary research agenda to uncover these paradoxical dynamics of risk.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Baldassarre, G. D., Kreibich, H., Vorogushyn, S., Aerts, J., Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K., Barendrecht, M., … Ward, P. J. (2018). Hess opinions: An interdisciplinary research agenda to explore the unintended consequences of structural flood protection. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22(11), 5629–5637. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5629-2018

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free