Benefits and Limitations of Real Options Analysis for the Practice of River Flood Risk Management

Jarl M. Kind, Jorn H. Baayen, W. J.Wouter Botzen

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Decisions on long-lived flood risk management (FRM) investments are complex because the future is uncertain. Flexibility and robustness can be used to deal with future uncertainty. Real options analysis (ROA) provides a welfare-economics framework to design and evaluate robust and flexible FRM strategies under risk or uncertainty. Although its potential benefits are large, ROA is hardly used in todays' FRM practice. In this paper, we investigate benefits and limitations of a ROA, by applying it to a realistic FRM case study for an entire river branch. We illustrate how ROA identifies optimal short-term investments and values future options. We develop robust dike investment strategies and value the flexibility offered by additional room for the river measures. We benchmark the results of ROA against those of a standard cost-benefit analysis and show ROA's potential policy implications. The ROA for a realistic case requires a high level of geographical detail, a large ensemble of scenarios, and the inclusion of stakeholders' preferences. We found several limitations of applying the ROA. It is complex. In particular, relevant sources of uncertainty need to be recognized, quantified, integrated, and discretized in scenarios, requiring subjective choices and expert judgment. Decision trees have to be generated and stakeholders' preferences have to be translated into decision rules. On basis of this study, we give general recommendations to use high discharge scenarios for the design of measures with high fixed costs and few alternatives. Lower scenarios may be used when alternatives offer future flexibility.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3018-3036
Number of pages19
JournalWater Resources Research
Volume54
Issue number4
Early online date24 Mar 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2018

Fingerprint

river
stakeholder
welfare economics
cost-benefit analysis
risk management
analysis
dike
management practice
cost
decision

Keywords

  • adaptation
  • cost-benefit analysis
  • Delta Programme
  • flood risk management
  • real options analysis
  • room for the river

Cite this

@article{8153994a19204a00ab93e97b1c4310b0,
title = "Benefits and Limitations of Real Options Analysis for the Practice of River Flood Risk Management",
abstract = "Decisions on long-lived flood risk management (FRM) investments are complex because the future is uncertain. Flexibility and robustness can be used to deal with future uncertainty. Real options analysis (ROA) provides a welfare-economics framework to design and evaluate robust and flexible FRM strategies under risk or uncertainty. Although its potential benefits are large, ROA is hardly used in todays' FRM practice. In this paper, we investigate benefits and limitations of a ROA, by applying it to a realistic FRM case study for an entire river branch. We illustrate how ROA identifies optimal short-term investments and values future options. We develop robust dike investment strategies and value the flexibility offered by additional room for the river measures. We benchmark the results of ROA against those of a standard cost-benefit analysis and show ROA's potential policy implications. The ROA for a realistic case requires a high level of geographical detail, a large ensemble of scenarios, and the inclusion of stakeholders' preferences. We found several limitations of applying the ROA. It is complex. In particular, relevant sources of uncertainty need to be recognized, quantified, integrated, and discretized in scenarios, requiring subjective choices and expert judgment. Decision trees have to be generated and stakeholders' preferences have to be translated into decision rules. On basis of this study, we give general recommendations to use high discharge scenarios for the design of measures with high fixed costs and few alternatives. Lower scenarios may be used when alternatives offer future flexibility.",
keywords = "adaptation, cost-benefit analysis, Delta Programme, flood risk management, real options analysis, room for the river",
author = "Kind, {Jarl M.} and Baayen, {Jorn H.} and Botzen, {W. J.Wouter}",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1002/2017WR022402",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "3018--3036",
journal = "Water Resources Research",
issn = "0043-1397",
publisher = "American Geophysical Union",
number = "4",

}

Benefits and Limitations of Real Options Analysis for the Practice of River Flood Risk Management. / Kind, Jarl M.; Baayen, Jorn H.; Botzen, W. J.Wouter.

In: Water Resources Research, Vol. 54, No. 4, 04.2018, p. 3018-3036.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Benefits and Limitations of Real Options Analysis for the Practice of River Flood Risk Management

AU - Kind, Jarl M.

AU - Baayen, Jorn H.

AU - Botzen, W. J.Wouter

PY - 2018/4

Y1 - 2018/4

N2 - Decisions on long-lived flood risk management (FRM) investments are complex because the future is uncertain. Flexibility and robustness can be used to deal with future uncertainty. Real options analysis (ROA) provides a welfare-economics framework to design and evaluate robust and flexible FRM strategies under risk or uncertainty. Although its potential benefits are large, ROA is hardly used in todays' FRM practice. In this paper, we investigate benefits and limitations of a ROA, by applying it to a realistic FRM case study for an entire river branch. We illustrate how ROA identifies optimal short-term investments and values future options. We develop robust dike investment strategies and value the flexibility offered by additional room for the river measures. We benchmark the results of ROA against those of a standard cost-benefit analysis and show ROA's potential policy implications. The ROA for a realistic case requires a high level of geographical detail, a large ensemble of scenarios, and the inclusion of stakeholders' preferences. We found several limitations of applying the ROA. It is complex. In particular, relevant sources of uncertainty need to be recognized, quantified, integrated, and discretized in scenarios, requiring subjective choices and expert judgment. Decision trees have to be generated and stakeholders' preferences have to be translated into decision rules. On basis of this study, we give general recommendations to use high discharge scenarios for the design of measures with high fixed costs and few alternatives. Lower scenarios may be used when alternatives offer future flexibility.

AB - Decisions on long-lived flood risk management (FRM) investments are complex because the future is uncertain. Flexibility and robustness can be used to deal with future uncertainty. Real options analysis (ROA) provides a welfare-economics framework to design and evaluate robust and flexible FRM strategies under risk or uncertainty. Although its potential benefits are large, ROA is hardly used in todays' FRM practice. In this paper, we investigate benefits and limitations of a ROA, by applying it to a realistic FRM case study for an entire river branch. We illustrate how ROA identifies optimal short-term investments and values future options. We develop robust dike investment strategies and value the flexibility offered by additional room for the river measures. We benchmark the results of ROA against those of a standard cost-benefit analysis and show ROA's potential policy implications. The ROA for a realistic case requires a high level of geographical detail, a large ensemble of scenarios, and the inclusion of stakeholders' preferences. We found several limitations of applying the ROA. It is complex. In particular, relevant sources of uncertainty need to be recognized, quantified, integrated, and discretized in scenarios, requiring subjective choices and expert judgment. Decision trees have to be generated and stakeholders' preferences have to be translated into decision rules. On basis of this study, we give general recommendations to use high discharge scenarios for the design of measures with high fixed costs and few alternatives. Lower scenarios may be used when alternatives offer future flexibility.

KW - adaptation

KW - cost-benefit analysis

KW - Delta Programme

KW - flood risk management

KW - real options analysis

KW - room for the river

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048001663&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85048001663&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/2017WR022402

DO - 10.1002/2017WR022402

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 3018

EP - 3036

JO - Water Resources Research

JF - Water Resources Research

SN - 0043-1397

IS - 4

ER -