Flood Risk Assessment in the Netherlands: A Case Study for Dike Ring South Holland

Large parts of the Netherlands are below sea level. Therefore, it is important to have insight into the possible consequences and risks of flooding. In this article, an analysis of the risks due to flooding of the dike ring area South Holland in the Netherlands is presented. For different flood scenarios the potential number of fatalities is estimated. Results indicate that a flood event in this area can expose large and densely populated areas and result in hundreds to thousands of fatalities. Evacuation of South Holland before a coastal flood will be difficult due to the large amount of time required for evacuation and the limited time available. By combination with available information regarding the probability of occurrence of different flood scenarios, the flood risks have been quantified. The probability of death for a person in South Holland due to flooding, the so‐called individual risk, is small. The probability of a flood disaster with many fatalities, the so‐called societal risk, is relatively large in comparison with the societal risks in other sectors in the Netherlands, such as the chemical sector and aviation. The societal risk of flooding appears to be unacceptable according to some of the existing risk limits that have been proposed in literature. These results indicate the necessity of a further societal discussion on the acceptable level of flood risk in the Netherlands and the need for additional risk reducing measures.     

The Use of Individual and Societal Risk Criteria Within the Dutch Flood Safety Policy—Nationwide Estimates of Societal Risk and Policy Applications

The Dutch government is in the process of revising its flood safety policy. The current safety standards for flood defenses in the Netherlands are largely based on the outcomes of cost‐benefit analyses. Loss of life has not been considered separately in the choice for current standards. This article presents the results of a research project that evaluated the potential roles of two risk metrics, individual and societal risk, to support decision making about new flood safety standards. These risk metrics are already used in the Dutch major hazards policy for the evaluation of risks to the public. Individual risk concerns the annual probability of death of a person. Societal risk concerns the probability of an event with many fatalities. Technical aspects of the use of individual and societal risk metrics in flood risk assessments as well as policy implications are discussed. Preliminary estimates of nationwide levels of societal risk are presented. Societal risk levels appear relatively high in the southwestern part of the country where densely populated dike rings are threatened by a combination of river and coastal floods. It was found that cumulation, the simultaneous flooding of multiple dike rings during a single flood event, has significant impact on the national level of societal risk. Options for the application of the individual and societal risk in the new flood safety policy are presented and discussed.     

The Role of Society in Engineering Risk Analysis: A Capabilities-Based Approach

This article proposes a new conceptual framework in engineering risk analysis to account for the net impact of hazards on individuals in a society. It analyzes four limitations of prevailing approaches to risk analysis and suggests a way to overcome them. These limitations are a result of how societal impacts are characteristically accounted for and valued. Prevailing approaches typically focus too narrowly on the consequences of natural or man-made hazards, not accounting for the broader societal impacts of such hazards. Such approaches lack a uniform and consistent metric for accounting for the impact of the nonquantifiable consequences (like psychological trauma or societal impacts) and rely upon implicit and potentially inaccurate value judgments when evaluating risks. To overcome these limitations, we propose an alternative, Capabilities-Based Approach to the treatment of society in risk analysis. A similar approach is currently used by the United Nations to quantitatively measure the degree of development in countries around the world. In a Capabilities-Based Approach, the potential benefits and losses due to a hazard are measured and compared in a uniform way by using individual capabilities (functionings individuals are able, still able, or unable to achieve) as a metric. This Capabilities-Based Approach provides a foundation for identifying and quantifying the broader, complex societal consequences of hazards and is based on explicit, value judgments. The Capabilities-Based Approach can accommodate different methods or techniques for risk determination and for risk evaluation and can be used in assessing risk in diverse types of hazards (natural or man-made) and different magnitudes that range from minor to catastrophic. In addition, implementing a Capabilities-Based Approach contributes to the development of a single standard for public policy decision making, since a Capabilities-Based Approach is already in use in development economics and policy.     

Insights into the Societal Risk of Nuclear Power Plant Accidents

The elements of societal risk from a nuclear power plant accident are clearly illustrated by the Fukushima accident: land contamination, long‐term relocation of large numbers of people, loss of productive farm area, loss of industrial production, and significant loss of electric capacity. NUREG‐1150 and other studies have provided compelling evidence that the individual health risk of nuclear power plant accidents is effectively negligible relative to other comparable risks, even for people living in close proximity to a plant. The objective of this study is to compare the societal risk of nuclear power plant accidents to that of other events to which the public is exposed. We have characterized the monetized societal risk in the United States from major societally disruptive events, such as hurricanes, in the form of a complementary cumulative distribution function. These risks are compared with nuclear power plant risks, based on NUREG‐1150 analyses and new MACCS code calculations to account for differences in source terms determined in the more recent SOARCA study. A candidate quantitative societal objective is discussed for potential adoption by the NRC. The results are also interpreted with regard to the acceptability of nuclear power as a major source of future energy supply.     

Risk Preferences,Probability Weighting,and Strategy Tradeoffs in Wildfire Management

Wildfires present a complex applied risk management environment, but relatively little attention has been paid to behavioral and cognitive responses to risk among public agency wildfire managers. This study investigates responses to risk, including probability weighting and risk aversion, in a wildfire management context using a survey‐based experiment administered to federal wildfire managers. Respondents were presented with a multiattribute lottery‐choice experiment where each lottery is defined by three outcome attributes: expenditures for fire suppression, damage to private property, and exposure of firefighters to the risk of aviation‐related fatalities. Respondents choose one of two strategies, each of which includes “good” (low cost/low damage) and “bad” (high cost/high damage) outcomes that occur with varying probabilities. The choice task also incorporates an information framing experiment to test whether information about fatality risk to firefighters alters managers' responses to risk. Results suggest that managers exhibit risk aversion and nonlinear probability weighting, which can result in choices that do not minimize expected expenditures, property damage, or firefighter exposure. Information framing tends to result in choices that reduce the risk of aviation fatalities, but exacerbates nonlinear probability weighting.     

Risk Perception,Experience, and Objective Risk: A Cross‐National Study with European Emergency Survivors

Understanding public risk perceptions and their underlying processes is important in order to learn more about the way people interpret and respond to hazardous emergency events. Direct experience with an involuntary hazard has been found to heighten the perceived risk of experiencing the same hazard and its consequences in the future, but it remains unclear if cross‐over effects are possible (i.e., experience with one hazard influencing perceived risk for other hazards also). Furthermore, the impact of objective risk and country of residence on perceived risk is not well understood. As part of the BeSeCu (Behavior, Security, and Culture) Project, a sample of 1,045 survivors of emergencies from seven European countries (i.e., Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland, Sweden, Spain, Turkey, and Italy) was drawn. Results revealed heightened perceived risk for emergency events (i.e., domestic and public fires, earthquakes, floods, and terrorist attacks) when the event had been experienced previously plus some evidence of cross‐over effects, although these effects were not so strong. The largest country differences in perceived risk were observed for earthquakes, but this effect was significantly reduced by taking into account the objective earthquake risk. For fires, floods, terrorist attacks, and traffic accidents, only small country differences in perceived risk were found. Further studies including a larger number of countries are welcomed.     

Risk Governance for Mobile Phones,Power Lines,and Other EMF Technologies

Power‐frequency electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) have been present in industrialized countries since the late 19th century and a considerable amount of knowledge has been accumulated as to potential health effects. The mainstream scientific view is that even if there is a risk, it is unlikely to be of major public‐health significance. EMFs from cellular communications and other radio‐frequency technologies have increased rapidly in the last decade. This technology is constantly changing, which makes continued research both more urgent and more challenging. While there are no persuasive data suggesting a health risk, research and particularly exposure assessment is still immature. The principal risk‐governance issue with power frequencies is how to respond to weak and uncertain scientific evidence that nonetheless causes public concern. For radio‐frequency electromagnetic fields, the issue is how to respond to large potential consequences and large public concern where only limited scientific evidence exists. We survey these issues and identify deficits in risk governance. Deficits in problem framing include both overstatement and understatement of the scientific evidence and of the consequences of taking protective measures, limited ability to detect early warnings of risk, and attempted reassurance that has sometimes been counterproductive. Other deficits relate to the limited public involvement mechanisms, and flaws in the identification and evaluation of tradeoffs in the selection of appropriate management strategies. We conclude that risk management of EMFs has certainly not been perfect, but for power frequencies it has evolved and now displays many successful features. Lessons from the power‐frequency experience can benefit risk governance of the radio‐frequency EMFs and other emerging technologies.     

Risk Management and Decision Rules for Light Water Reactors

A quantitative approach to risk management for accidents in light water nuclear power reactors is proposed to serve as one focus for discussion. In this proposal risk management is divided into two major tasks: the predominantly social and political task of setting the safety goals and the technical task of estimating the risks and deciding whether the safety goals have been met. The proposed safety goals include limits on the following: risk to the individual of early death or delayed cancer death; overall societal risk of early or delayed death; and the frequency of core melt accidents as well as the frequency of containment failure, given a core melt. Also included are a small element of risk aversion and an "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) approach with a cost-effectviness criterion which includes both economic and health effects.     

Risk Management for Development—Assessing Obstacles and Prioritizing Action

Throughout the process of economic and social development, decisionmakers from the household to the state level are confronted with a multitude of risks: from health and employment risks, to financial and political crises, as well as environmental damages and from the local to global level. The World Bank's 2014 World Development Report (WDR) provides an in‐depth analysis of how the management of such risks can be improved. In particular, it argues that a proactive and integrated approach to risk management can create opportunities for fighting poverty and achieving prosperity—but also acknowledges substantial obstacles to its implementation in practice. This article presents and discusses these obstacles with respect to their causes, consequences, interlinkages, and solutions. In particular, these include obstacles to individual risk management, the obstacles that are beyond the control of individuals and thus require collective action, and, finally, the obstacles that affect the ability of governments and public authorities to manage risks. From these obstacles, this article derives a policy roadmap for the development of risk management strategies that are designed not only around the risk they have to cope with, but also around the practical obstacles to policy implementation.     

Intelligent Adversary Risk Analysis: A Bioterrorism Risk Management Model

The tragic events of 9/11 and the concerns about the potential for a terrorist or hostile state attack with weapons of mass destruction have led to an increased emphasis on risk analysis for homeland security. Uncertain hazards (natural and engineering) have been successfully analyzed using probabilistic risk analysis (PRA). Unlike uncertain hazards, terrorists and hostile states are intelligent adversaries who can observe our vulnerabilities and dynamically adapt their plans and actions to achieve their objectives. This article compares uncertain hazard risk analysis with intelligent adversary risk analysis, describes the intelligent adversary risk analysis challenges, and presents a probabilistic defender–attacker–defender model to evaluate the baseline risk and the potential risk reduction provided by defender investments. The model includes defender decisions prior to an attack; attacker decisions during the attack; defender actions after an attack; and the uncertainties of attack implementation, detection, and consequences. The risk management model is demonstrated with an illustrative bioterrorism problem with notional data.     

Examining Public Trust in Risk‐Managing Organizations After a Major Disaster

This research investigates the public's trust in risk‐managing organizations after suffering serious damage from a major disaster. It is natural for public trust to decrease in organizations responsible for mitigating the damage. However, what about trust in organizations that address hazards not directly related to the disaster? Based on the results of surveys conducted by a national institute, the Japanese government concluded, in a White Paper on Science and Technology, that the public's trust in scientists declined overall after the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake. Because scientists play a key role in risk assessment and risk management in most areas, one could predict that trust in risk‐managing organizations overall would decrease after a major disaster. The methodology of that survey, however, had limitations that prevented such conclusions. For this research, two surveys were conducted to measure the public's trust in risk‐managing organizations regarding various hazards, before and after the Tohoku Earthquake (n = 1,192 in 2008 and n = 1,138 in 2012). The results showed that trust decreased in risk‐managing organizations that deal with earthquakes and nuclear accidents, whereas trust levels related to many other hazards, especially in areas not touched by the Tohoku Earthquake, remained steady or even increased. These results reject the assertion that distrust rippled through all risk‐managing organizations. The implications of this research are discussed, with the observation that this result is not necessarily gratifying for risk managers because high trust sometimes reduces public preparedness for disasters.     

Why Study Risk Perception?

Studies of risk perception examine the opinions people express when they are asked, in various ways, to characterize and evaluate hazardous activities and technologies. This research aims to aid risk analysis and societal decision making by (i) improving methods for eliciting opinions about risk, (ii) providing a basis for understanding and anticipating public responses to hazards, and (iii) improving the communication of risk information among laypeople, technical experts, and policy makers.     

A Methodology for Modeling Regional Terrorism Risk

Over the past decade, terrorism risk has become a prominent consideration in protecting the well‐being of individuals and organizations. More recently, there has been interest in not only quantifying terrorism risk, but also placing it in the context of an all‐hazards environment in which consideration is given to accidents and natural hazards, as well as intentional acts. This article discusses the development of a regional terrorism risk assessment model designed for this purpose. The approach taken is to model terrorism risk as a dependent variable, expressed in expected annual monetary terms, as a function of attributes of population concentration and critical infrastructure. This allows for an assessment of regional terrorism risk in and of itself, as well as in relation to man‐made accident and natural hazard risks, so that mitigation resources can be allocated in an effective manner. The adopted methodology incorporates elements of two terrorism risk modeling approaches (event‐based models and risk indicators), producing results that can be utilized at various jurisdictional levels. The validity, strengths, and limitations of the model are discussed in the context of a case study application within the United States.     

Implementation of Equity in Resource Allocation for Regional Earthquake Risk Mitigation Using Two‐Stage Stochastic Programming

This article presents a new methodology to implement the concept of equity in regional earthquake risk mitigation programs using an optimization framework. It presents a framework that could be used by decisionmakers (government and authorities) to structure budget allocation strategy toward different seismic risk mitigation measures, i.e., structural retrofitting for different building structural types in different locations and planning horizons. A two‐stage stochastic model is developed here to seek optimal mitigation measures based on minimizing mitigation expenditures, reconstruction expenditures, and especially large losses in highly seismically active countries. To consider fairness in the distribution of financial resources among different groups of people, the equity concept is incorporated using constraints in model formulation. These constraints limit inequity to the user‐defined level to achieve the equity‐efficiency tradeoff in the decision‐making process. To present practical application of the proposed model, it is applied to a pilot area in Tehran, the capital city of Iran. Building stocks, structural vulnerability functions, and regional seismic hazard characteristics are incorporated to compile a probabilistic seismic risk model for the pilot area. Results illustrate the variation of mitigation expenditures by location and structural type for buildings. These expenditures are sensitive to the amount of available budget and equity consideration for the constant risk aversion. Most significantly, equity is more easily achieved if the budget is unlimited. Conversely, increasing equity where the budget is limited decreases the efficiency. The risk‐return tradeoff, equity‐reconstruction expenditures tradeoff, and variation of per‐capita expected earthquake loss in different income classes are also presented.     

“How Exposed Is Exposed Enough?” Lay Inferences About Chemical Exposure

The concept of exposure is central to chemical risk assessment and plays an important role in communicating to the public about the potential health risks of chemicals. Research on chemical risk perception has found some indication that the model lay people use to judge chemical exposure differs from that of toxicologists, thereby leading to different conclusions about chemical safety. This paper presents the results of a series of studies directed toward developing a model for understanding how lay people interpret the concept of chemical exposure. The results indicate that people's beliefs about chemical exposure (and its risks) are based on two broad categories of inferences. One category of inferences relates to the nature in which contact with a chemical has taken place, including the amount of a chemical involved and its potential health consequences. A second category of inferences about chemical exposure relates to the pragmatics of language interpretation, leading to beliefs about the motives and purposes behind chemical risk communication. Risk communicators are encouraged to consider how alternative models of exposure and language interpretation can lead to conflicting conclusions on the part of the public about chemical safety.     

Systems Resilience for Multihazard Environments: Definition,Metrics, and Valuation for Decision Making

The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction reported that the 2011 natural disasters, including the earthquake and tsunami that struck Japan, resulted in $366 billion in direct damages and 29,782 fatalities worldwide. Storms and floods accounted for up to 70% of the 302 natural disasters worldwide in 2011, with earthquakes producing the greatest number of fatalities. Average annual losses in the United States amount to about $55 billion. Enhancing community and system resilience could lead to massive savings through risk reduction and expeditious recovery. The rational management of such reduction and recovery is facilitated by an appropriate definition of resilience and associated metrics. In this article, a resilience definition is provided that meets a set of requirements with clear relationships to the metrics of the relevant abstract notions of reliability and risk. Those metrics also meet logically consistent requirements drawn from measure theory, and provide a sound basis for the development of effective decision‐making tools for multihazard environments. Improving the resiliency of a system to meet target levels requires the examination of system enhancement alternatives in economic terms, within a decision‐making framework. Relevant decision analysis methods would typically require the examination of resilience based on its valuation by society at large. The article provides methods for valuation and benefit‐cost analysis based on concepts from risk analysis and management.     

Risk Management Solutions for Climate Change–Induced Disasters

In honor of the 40th anniversary of Risk Analysis, this article suggests ways of linking risk assessment and risk perception in developing risk management strategies that have a good chance of being implemented, focusing on the problem of reducing losses from natural hazards in the face of climate change. Following a checklist for developing an implementable risk management strategy, Section 2 highlights the impact that exponential growth of CO₂ emissions is likely to have on future disaster losses as assessed by climate and social scientists. Section 3 then discusses how people perceive the risks of low-probability adverse events and the cognitive biases that lead them to underprepare for future losses. Based on this empirical evidence, Section 4 proposes a risk management strategy for reducing future losses using the principles of choice architecture to communicate the likelihood and consequences of disasters, coupled with economic incentives and well-enforced regulations.