Votre recherche

ABSTRACT Flood risk management (FRM) involves planning proactively for flooding in high‐risk areas to reduce its impacts on people and property. A key challenge for governments pursuing FRM is to pinpoint assets that are highly economically exposed and vulnerable to flood hazards in order to prioritize them in policy and planning. This paper presents a novel flood risk assessment, making use of a dataset that identifies the location, dwelling type, property characteristics, and potential economic losses of Canadian residential properties. The findings reveal that the average annual costs are $1.4B, but most of the risks are concentrated in high‐risk areas. Data gaps are uncovered that justify replication through local validation studies. The results provide a novel evidence base for specific reforms in Canada's approach to FRM, with a focus on insurance that improves both implementation and effectiveness.

Abstract. Climate change impact studies require a reference climatological dataset providing a baseline period to assess future changes and post-process climate model biases. High-resolution gridded precipitation and temperature datasets interpolated from weather stations are available in regions of high-density networks of weather stations, as is the case in most parts of Europe and the United States. In many of the world's regions, however, the low density of observational networks renders gauge-based datasets highly uncertain. Satellite, reanalysis and merged product datasets have been used to overcome this deficiency. However, it is not known how much uncertainty the choice of a reference dataset may bring to impact studies. To tackle this issue, this study compares nine precipitation and two temperature datasets over 1145 African catchments to evaluate the dataset uncertainty contribution to the results of climate change studies. These deterministic datasets all cover a common 30-year period needed to define the reference period climate. The precipitation datasets include two gauge-only products (GPCC and CPC Unified), two satellite products (CHIRPS and PERSIANN-CDR) corrected using ground-based observations, four reanalysis products (JRA55, NCEP-CFSR, ERA-I and ERA5) and one merged gauged, satellite and reanalysis product (MSWEP). The temperature datasets include one gauged-only (CPC Unified) product and one reanalysis (ERA5) product. All combinations of these precipitation and temperature datasets were used to assess changes in future streamflows. To assess dataset uncertainty against that of other sources of uncertainty, the climate change impact study used a top-down hydroclimatic modeling chain using 10 CMIP5 (fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) general circulation models (GCMs) under RCP8.5 and two lumped hydrological models (HMETS and GR4J) to generate future streamflows over the 2071–2100 period. Variance decomposition was performed to compare how much the different uncertainty sources contribute to actual uncertainty. Results show that all precipitation and temperature datasets provide good streamflow simulations over the reference period, but four precipitation datasets outperformed the others for most catchments. They are, in order, MSWEP, CHIRPS, PERSIANN and ERA5. For the present study, the two-member ensemble of temperature datasets provided negligible levels of uncertainty. However, the ensemble of nine precipitation datasets provided uncertainty that was equal to or larger than that related to GCMs for most of the streamflow metrics and over most of the catchments. A selection of the four best-performing reference datasets (credibility ensemble) significantly reduced the uncertainty attributed to precipitation for most metrics but still remained the main source of uncertainty for some streamflow metrics. The choice of a reference dataset can therefore be critical to climate change impact studies as apparently small differences between datasets over a common reference period can propagate to generate large amounts of uncertainty in future climate streamflows.

Climate anomalies, such as floods and droughts, as well as gradual temperature changes have been shown to adversely affect economies and societies. Although studies find that climate change might increase global inequality by widening disparities across countries, its effects on within-country income distribution have been little investigated, as has the role of rainfall anomalies. Here, we show that extreme levels of precipitation exacerbate within-country income inequality. The strength and direction of the effect depends on the agricultural intensity of an economy. In high-agricultural-intensity countries, climate anomalies that negatively impact the agricultural sector lower incomes at the bottom end of the distribution and generate greater income inequality. Our results indicate that a 1.5-SD increase in precipitation from average values has a 35-times-stronger impact on the bottom income shares for countries with high employment in agriculture compared to countries with low employment in the agricultural sector. Projections with modeled future precipitation and temperature reveal highly heterogeneous patterns on a global scale, with income inequality worsening in high-agricultural-intensity economies, particularly in Africa. Our findings suggest that rainfall anomalies and the degree of dependence on agriculture are crucial factors in assessing the negative impacts of climate change on the bottom of the income distribution.

Abstract Analyzing intra-annual stream flow can reveal the main causes for runoff changes and the contributions of climate variability and human activities. For this purpose, the Mann–Kendall and cumulative rank difference (CRD) tests, and the double mass curve method, were applied to a time series of hydro-meteorological variables from 1971 to 2010 in the Tajan River basin in Iran. Results indicated that runoff changes in the wet and dry seasons after 1999 had significant respective decreasing and increasing trends, at the 0.01 confidence level, due to dam construction. In the pre-dam period (1991–1998), the results of the double mass curve method showed that climate variability and human activities contributed 57.76% and 42.24%, respectively, to the runoff decrease during the wet season. For the post-dam period (1999–2010), climate variability and anthropogenic activities contributed 24.68% and 75.32%, respectively, to the wet season runoff decrease of 116.55 mm. On the other hand, in the same period during the dry season, climate variability contributed −30.68% and human activities contributed 130.68% to the runoff increase of 41.45 mm. It is evident that runoff changes in both wet and dry seasons were mainly due to human activities associated with dam construction to meet water supply demands for agriculture.

Watershed runoff is closely related to land use but this influence is difficult to quantify. This study focused on the Chaudière River watershed (Québec,...

Purpose Few people living in informal settlements in the Global South spontaneously claim that they are “resilient” or “adapting” to disaster risk or climate change. Surely, they often overcome multiple challenges, including natural hazards exacerbated by climate change. Yet their actions are increasingly examined through the framework of resilience, a notion developed in the North, and increasingly adopted in the South. To what extent eliminate’ do these initiatives correspond to the concepts that scholars and authorities place under the resilience framework? Design/methodology/approach Three longitudinal case studies in Yumbo, Salgar and San Andrés (Colombia) serve to investigate narratives of disaster risks and responses to them. Methods include narrative analysis from policy and project documents, presentations, five workshops, six focus groups and 24 interviews. Findings The discourse adopted by most international scholars and local authorities differs greatly from that used by citizens to explain risk and masks the politics involved in disaster reduction and the search for social justice. Besides, narratives of social change, aspirations and social status are increasingly masked in disaster risk explanations. Tensions are also concealed, including those regarding the winners and losers of interventions and the responsibilities for disaster risk reduction. Originality/value Our findings confirm previous results that have shown that the resilience framework contributes to “depoliticize” the analysis of risk and serves to mask and dilute the responsibility of political and economic elites in disaster risk creation. But they also show that resilience fails to explain the type of socioeconomic change that is required to reduce vulnerabilities in Latin America.