The safe development paradox: An agent-based model for flood risk under climate change in the European Union

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

With increasing flood risk due to climate change and socioeconomic trends, governments are under pressure to continue implementing flood protection measures, such as dikes, to reduce flood risk. However, research suggests that a sole focus on government-funded flood protection leads to an adverse increase in exposure as people and economic activities tend to concentrate in protected areas. Moreover, governmental flood protection can reduce the incentive for autonomous adaptation by local households, which paradoxically results in more severe consequences if an extreme flood event occurs. This phenomenon is often referred to as the ‘safe development paradox’ or ‘levee effect’ and is generally not accounted for in existing flood risk models used to assess developments in future flood risk under climate change. In this study we assess the impact of extreme flood events for the European Union using a large-scale agent-based model (ABM). We quantify how the safe development paradox affects (1) population growth and the increase in exposed property values, (2) the reduction in investments to flood-proof buildings as public protection increases, and (3) the increase in potential damage should a flood occur. For this analysis, we apply an ABM that integrates the dynamic behaviour of governments and residents into a large-scale flood risk assessment framework, in which we include estimates of changing population growth. We find that the impact of extreme flood events increases considerably when governments provide high protection levels, especially in large metropolitan areas. Moreover, we demonstrate how policy that stimulates the flood-proofing of buildings can largely counteract the effects of the safe development paradox.

Original languageEnglish
Article number102009
JournalGlobal Environmental Change
Volume60
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2020

Fingerprint

European Union
natural disaster
climate change
population growth
event
building
levee
economic activity
metropolitan area
protected area
dike
incentive
risk assessment
agglomeration area
damages
damage
resident

Keywords

  • Adaptation policy
  • Agent-based model
  • Extreme events
  • Flood risk
  • Levee effect
  • Safe development paradox

Cite this

@article{28e4e321aac449e9a3ce274478168de8,
title = "The safe development paradox: An agent-based model for flood risk under climate change in the European Union",
abstract = "With increasing flood risk due to climate change and socioeconomic trends, governments are under pressure to continue implementing flood protection measures, such as dikes, to reduce flood risk. However, research suggests that a sole focus on government-funded flood protection leads to an adverse increase in exposure as people and economic activities tend to concentrate in protected areas. Moreover, governmental flood protection can reduce the incentive for autonomous adaptation by local households, which paradoxically results in more severe consequences if an extreme flood event occurs. This phenomenon is often referred to as the ‘safe development paradox’ or ‘levee effect’ and is generally not accounted for in existing flood risk models used to assess developments in future flood risk under climate change. In this study we assess the impact of extreme flood events for the European Union using a large-scale agent-based model (ABM). We quantify how the safe development paradox affects (1) population growth and the increase in exposed property values, (2) the reduction in investments to flood-proof buildings as public protection increases, and (3) the increase in potential damage should a flood occur. For this analysis, we apply an ABM that integrates the dynamic behaviour of governments and residents into a large-scale flood risk assessment framework, in which we include estimates of changing population growth. We find that the impact of extreme flood events increases considerably when governments provide high protection levels, especially in large metropolitan areas. Moreover, we demonstrate how policy that stimulates the flood-proofing of buildings can largely counteract the effects of the safe development paradox.",
keywords = "Adaptation policy, Agent-based model, Extreme events, Flood risk, Levee effect, Safe development paradox",
author = "Toon Haer and Husby, {Trond G.} and Botzen, {W. J.Wouter} and Aerts, {Jeroen C.J.H.}",
year = "2020",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.102009",
language = "English",
volume = "60",
journal = "Global Environmental Change",
issn = "0959-3780",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

The safe development paradox : An agent-based model for flood risk under climate change in the European Union. / Haer, Toon; Husby, Trond G.; Botzen, W. J.Wouter; Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H.

In: Global Environmental Change, Vol. 60, 102009, 01.01.2020.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The safe development paradox

T2 - An agent-based model for flood risk under climate change in the European Union

AU - Haer, Toon

AU - Husby, Trond G.

AU - Botzen, W. J.Wouter

AU - Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H.

PY - 2020/1/1

Y1 - 2020/1/1

N2 - With increasing flood risk due to climate change and socioeconomic trends, governments are under pressure to continue implementing flood protection measures, such as dikes, to reduce flood risk. However, research suggests that a sole focus on government-funded flood protection leads to an adverse increase in exposure as people and economic activities tend to concentrate in protected areas. Moreover, governmental flood protection can reduce the incentive for autonomous adaptation by local households, which paradoxically results in more severe consequences if an extreme flood event occurs. This phenomenon is often referred to as the ‘safe development paradox’ or ‘levee effect’ and is generally not accounted for in existing flood risk models used to assess developments in future flood risk under climate change. In this study we assess the impact of extreme flood events for the European Union using a large-scale agent-based model (ABM). We quantify how the safe development paradox affects (1) population growth and the increase in exposed property values, (2) the reduction in investments to flood-proof buildings as public protection increases, and (3) the increase in potential damage should a flood occur. For this analysis, we apply an ABM that integrates the dynamic behaviour of governments and residents into a large-scale flood risk assessment framework, in which we include estimates of changing population growth. We find that the impact of extreme flood events increases considerably when governments provide high protection levels, especially in large metropolitan areas. Moreover, we demonstrate how policy that stimulates the flood-proofing of buildings can largely counteract the effects of the safe development paradox.

AB - With increasing flood risk due to climate change and socioeconomic trends, governments are under pressure to continue implementing flood protection measures, such as dikes, to reduce flood risk. However, research suggests that a sole focus on government-funded flood protection leads to an adverse increase in exposure as people and economic activities tend to concentrate in protected areas. Moreover, governmental flood protection can reduce the incentive for autonomous adaptation by local households, which paradoxically results in more severe consequences if an extreme flood event occurs. This phenomenon is often referred to as the ‘safe development paradox’ or ‘levee effect’ and is generally not accounted for in existing flood risk models used to assess developments in future flood risk under climate change. In this study we assess the impact of extreme flood events for the European Union using a large-scale agent-based model (ABM). We quantify how the safe development paradox affects (1) population growth and the increase in exposed property values, (2) the reduction in investments to flood-proof buildings as public protection increases, and (3) the increase in potential damage should a flood occur. For this analysis, we apply an ABM that integrates the dynamic behaviour of governments and residents into a large-scale flood risk assessment framework, in which we include estimates of changing population growth. We find that the impact of extreme flood events increases considerably when governments provide high protection levels, especially in large metropolitan areas. Moreover, we demonstrate how policy that stimulates the flood-proofing of buildings can largely counteract the effects of the safe development paradox.

KW - Adaptation policy

KW - Agent-based model

KW - Extreme events

KW - Flood risk

KW - Levee effect

KW - Safe development paradox

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075730735&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075730735&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.102009

DO - 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.102009

M3 - Article

VL - 60

JO - Global Environmental Change

JF - Global Environmental Change

SN - 0959-3780

M1 - 102009

ER -