Adapting to climate change: a comparison of two strategies for dike heightening

Arjen Ysbert Hoekstra, Jean-Luc de Kok

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)
40 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In the Netherlands the current dike design policy is to design flood defence structures corresponding to an agreed flooding probability with an extra safety board of at least 0.5 m. For river dikes a return period of 1,250 years is used to determine the design water levels. A problem with this strategy is that it builds on assumptions with regard to the intrinsically uncertain probability distributions for the peak discharges. The uncertainty is considerable and due to (1) the measuring records that are limited to about 100 years and (2) the changing natural variability as a result of climate change. Although the probability distributions are regularly updated based on new discharge data the nature of the statistics is such that a change in the natural variability of the peak discharge affects the probability distribution only long after the actual change has happened. Here we compare the performance of the probabilistic dike design strategy with the older strategy, referred to as the ‘self-learning dike’. The basic principle of the latter strategy is that the dike height is kept at a level equal to the highest recorded water level plus a certain safety margin. The two flood prevention strategies are compared on the basis of the flooding safety over a 100-year period. The Rhine gauge station at Lobith serves as case study. The results indicate that the self-learning dike performs better than the probabilistic design in terms of safety and costs, both under current and climate change conditions.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)217-228
Number of pages12
JournalNatural hazards
Volume47
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Fingerprint

dike
climate change
safety
peak discharge
water level
flooding
learning
design flood
return period
comparison
gauge
river
cost
distribution

Keywords

  • IR-59991
  • METIS-247964

Cite this

@article{82a5bc4717414b1b8a8a4c2fa1b382f5,
title = "Adapting to climate change: a comparison of two strategies for dike heightening",
abstract = "In the Netherlands the current dike design policy is to design flood defence structures corresponding to an agreed flooding probability with an extra safety board of at least 0.5 m. For river dikes a return period of 1,250 years is used to determine the design water levels. A problem with this strategy is that it builds on assumptions with regard to the intrinsically uncertain probability distributions for the peak discharges. The uncertainty is considerable and due to (1) the measuring records that are limited to about 100 years and (2) the changing natural variability as a result of climate change. Although the probability distributions are regularly updated based on new discharge data the nature of the statistics is such that a change in the natural variability of the peak discharge affects the probability distribution only long after the actual change has happened. Here we compare the performance of the probabilistic dike design strategy with the older strategy, referred to as the ‘self-learning dike’. The basic principle of the latter strategy is that the dike height is kept at a level equal to the highest recorded water level plus a certain safety margin. The two flood prevention strategies are compared on the basis of the flooding safety over a 100-year period. The Rhine gauge station at Lobith serves as case study. The results indicate that the self-learning dike performs better than the probabilistic design in terms of safety and costs, both under current and climate change conditions.",
keywords = "IR-59991, METIS-247964",
author = "Hoekstra, {Arjen Ysbert} and {de Kok}, Jean-Luc",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1007/s11069-008-9213-y",
language = "English",
volume = "47",
pages = "217--228",
journal = "Natural hazards",
issn = "0921-030X",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "2",

}

Adapting to climate change: a comparison of two strategies for dike heightening. / Hoekstra, Arjen Ysbert; de Kok, Jean-Luc.

In: Natural hazards, Vol. 47, No. 2, 2008, p. 217-228.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Adapting to climate change: a comparison of two strategies for dike heightening

AU - Hoekstra, Arjen Ysbert

AU - de Kok, Jean-Luc

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - In the Netherlands the current dike design policy is to design flood defence structures corresponding to an agreed flooding probability with an extra safety board of at least 0.5 m. For river dikes a return period of 1,250 years is used to determine the design water levels. A problem with this strategy is that it builds on assumptions with regard to the intrinsically uncertain probability distributions for the peak discharges. The uncertainty is considerable and due to (1) the measuring records that are limited to about 100 years and (2) the changing natural variability as a result of climate change. Although the probability distributions are regularly updated based on new discharge data the nature of the statistics is such that a change in the natural variability of the peak discharge affects the probability distribution only long after the actual change has happened. Here we compare the performance of the probabilistic dike design strategy with the older strategy, referred to as the ‘self-learning dike’. The basic principle of the latter strategy is that the dike height is kept at a level equal to the highest recorded water level plus a certain safety margin. The two flood prevention strategies are compared on the basis of the flooding safety over a 100-year period. The Rhine gauge station at Lobith serves as case study. The results indicate that the self-learning dike performs better than the probabilistic design in terms of safety and costs, both under current and climate change conditions.

AB - In the Netherlands the current dike design policy is to design flood defence structures corresponding to an agreed flooding probability with an extra safety board of at least 0.5 m. For river dikes a return period of 1,250 years is used to determine the design water levels. A problem with this strategy is that it builds on assumptions with regard to the intrinsically uncertain probability distributions for the peak discharges. The uncertainty is considerable and due to (1) the measuring records that are limited to about 100 years and (2) the changing natural variability as a result of climate change. Although the probability distributions are regularly updated based on new discharge data the nature of the statistics is such that a change in the natural variability of the peak discharge affects the probability distribution only long after the actual change has happened. Here we compare the performance of the probabilistic dike design strategy with the older strategy, referred to as the ‘self-learning dike’. The basic principle of the latter strategy is that the dike height is kept at a level equal to the highest recorded water level plus a certain safety margin. The two flood prevention strategies are compared on the basis of the flooding safety over a 100-year period. The Rhine gauge station at Lobith serves as case study. The results indicate that the self-learning dike performs better than the probabilistic design in terms of safety and costs, both under current and climate change conditions.

KW - IR-59991

KW - METIS-247964

U2 - 10.1007/s11069-008-9213-y

DO - 10.1007/s11069-008-9213-y

M3 - Article

VL - 47

SP - 217

EP - 228

JO - Natural hazards

JF - Natural hazards

SN - 0921-030X

IS - 2

ER -