Abstract
An overall goal of the Upper Tisza flood risk management project was to design a flood management policy that shared liability for disaster losses between the central government and individual households in a way that was considered acceptable by all the stakeholders. A participatory approach was adopted, where a flood simulation model was used interactively to support the process. In this chapter, we describe the design, implementation and use of the dynamic and spatially explicit flood simulation model, which incorporated novel elements like micro-level representation and Monte Carlo techniques. The model was provided with an interactive graphical interface designed to facilitate its use as a decision support tool in a participatory setting with multiple users. During this process, the model supported comparisons between pre-defined policy options, as well as the design of a new policy option on which consensus was finally reached.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
2,5802.
- 2.
1,000 HUF equals approximately 4.7 USD.
References
Amendola A, Ermoliev Y, Ermolieva T et al (2000a) A systems approach to modeling catastrophic risk and insurability. Nat Hazards 21(2/3):381–393
Amendola A, Ermoliev Y, Ermolieva T et al (2000b) Earthquake risk management: a case study for an Italian region. In: Proceedings of the second Euroconference on global change and catastrophe risk management: earthquake risks in Europe. IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria, 6–9 July 2000
Cain J, Jinapala K, Makin IW et al (2003) Participatory decision support for agricultural management. A case study from Sri Lanka. Agr Syst 76:457–482
Dahinden U, Querol C, Jäger J et al (2000) Exploring the use of computer models in participatory integrated assessment – experiences and recommendations for further steps. Integr Assess 1:253–266
Ermolieva T (1997) The design of optimal insurance decisions in the presence of catastrophic risks. IIASA Interim report IR-97068, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria
Ermolieva T, Ermoliev Y (2005) Catastrophic risk management: flood and seismic risks case studies. In: Wallace SW, Ziemba WT (eds) Applications of stochastic programming, MPS-SIAM series on optimization. SIAM, Philadelphia
Ermolieva T, Ermoliev Y, Fischer G et al (2003) The role of financial instruments in integrated catastrophic flood management. Multinatl Financ 7(3/4):207–230
Friedman B (2004) Value sensitive design. In: Bainbridge WS (ed) Encyclopedia of human-computer interaction. Berkshire Publishing Group, Great Barrington, pp 769–774
Gregory R, Fischhoff B, McDaniels T (2005) Acceptable input: using decision analysis to guide public policy deliberations. Decis Anal 2(1):4–16
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group III (2000) Emission scenarios: summary for policymakers. Tech rep ISBN: 92-9169-113-5, IPPC (WMO UNEP)
Jakeman AJ, Letcher RA, Norton RA (2006) Ten iterative steps in development and evaluation of environmental models. Environ Model Software 21:602–614
Jiggins JLS, de Zeeuw H (1992) Participatory technology development in practice: process and methods. In: Reijntjes C, Haverkort B, Waters-Bayer A (eds) Farming for the future; an introduction to low-external-input and sustainable agriculture. Macmillan, London
KSH (2000) Major annual figures – regional. Hungarian Statistics Central Office, Budapest
Linnerooth-Bayer J, Amendola A (2000) Global change, catastrophic risk and loss spreading –issues of efficiency and equity. Geneva Pap Risk Insur 25(2):203–219
Linnerooth-Bayer J, Vari A, Thompson M (2006) Floods and fairness in Hungary. In: Verweij M, Thompson M (eds) Clumsy solutions for a complex world: governance politics and plural perceptions. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke/New York
Macintosh A, Whyte A (2006) Evaluating how eParticipation changes local democracy. In: IraniZ, Ghoneim A (eds) Proceedings of the eGovernment workshop 2006. Brunel University, London, eGov06
Mitton L, Sutherland H, Weeks M (2000) Microsimulation modelling for policy analysis: challenges and innovations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York
Rios Insua D, Kersten GE, Rios J et al (2007) Towards decision support for participatory democracy. Inf Syst E-Bus Manag 6(2):161–191
Stern PC, Fineberg HV (1996) Understanding risk – informing decision in a democratic society. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
Vári A, Linnerooth-Bayer J, Ferencz Z (2003) Stakeholder views on flood risk management in Hungary’s Upper Tisza basin. Risk Anal 23:537–627
Vari A, Ereifej L, Ferencz Z (2009) Implementing the EU water framework directive in Hungary: a pilot project in the Upper-Tisza region. Int J Risk Assess Manag 12(1):82–102
VITUKI (1999) Consult Rt. Explanation of detailed methodology for flood damage assessment, Budapest
Walker G (1997) Current developments in catastrophe modelling. In: Britton NR, Oliver J (eds) Financial risk management for natural catastrophes. Griffith University, Brisbane
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brouwers, L., Riabacke, M. (2013). Consensus by Simulation: a Flood Model for Participatory Policy Making. In: Amendola, A., Ermolieva, T., Linnerooth-Bayer, J., Mechler, R. (eds) Integrated Catastrophe Risk Modeling. Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, vol 32. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2226-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2226-2_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2225-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2226-2
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)