Chang Hsueh-Sheng，Su Qingmu

Keywords： Flood Mitigation Resilience; Decision-making Framework; Runoff Sharing; Game Theory; Fairness and Efficiency

Abstract：

The “flood resistance” of the overall watershed needs to be incorporated into resilience and disaster prevention to improve its stormwater management system. However, there still lacks conceptual framework or decision-making methods for overall watershed flood mitigation resilience. This paper, from the perspective of welfare economy, attempts to construct a resilient theoretical decision-making framework that takes into account “fairness” and “efficiency”, and is instructive for the sharing of overall watershed runoff. This framework uses the perspective of game theory to establish a negotiation process model of fairness and efficiency in the process of flood reduction and the processing method of stormwater runoff, and realizes the distribution of flood reduction in the upper, middle and lower reaches of the river watershed, attempting to provide guidance on the total amount control of engineering design for reducing rain and flood disasters in each administrative region in the future. It is also a powerful tool for consultation among various stakeholders, providing a quantitative basis for future residents to achieve resilience and disaster prevention. It finds that from the perspective of efficiency, the upstream needs to bear 76.13% of the runoff; from the perspective of fairness, the downstream needs to bear 80.33% of the runoff; from the perspective of game theory, the upstream can always get benefits in the game model, while the midstream and downstream can have the greatest benefit when they undertake 9.16% and 63.55% of the flood reduction respectively. The framework established in this paper realizes the distribution of flood reduction in the upper, middle and lower reaches of the river watershed, and can provide guidance for the total amount control and negotiation of various stakeholders in the design of future rain and flood disaster reduction projects in various regions, helping improve the overall level of flood mitigation resilience of the river watershed.

Funds：

• [1] ZHANG X, SONG J, PENG J, et al. Landslides-oriented urban disaster resilience assessment–a case study in Shenzhen, China[J]. Science of the total environment, 2019, 661: 95-106.

  [2] NORIZAN N Z A, HASSAN N, YUSOFF M M. Strengthening flood resilient development in Malaysia through integration of flood risk reduction measures in local plans[J]. Land use policy, 2021, 102: 105178.

  [3] 张学圣 , 苏清木 . 韧性城市视角下台湾空间防灾体系的因应作为 [J]. 城市发展研究 , 2020, 27(7): 97-105.

  [4] HARTMANN T, SPIT T. Legitimizing differentiated flood protection levels–Consequences of the European flood risk management plan[J]. Environmental science and policy, 2016, 55: 361-367.

  [5] CHANG H-S, SU Q. Exploring the coupling relationship of stormwater runoff distribution in watershed from the perspective of fairness[J]. Urban climate, 2021, 36: 100792.

  [6] CAO X, ZENG W, WANG M, et al. Hybrid analytical framework for regional agricultural water resource utilization and efficiency evaluation[J]. Agricultural water management, 2020, 231: 106027.

  [7] ANGUELOVSKI I, SHI L, TEICHER H, et al. Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: critical perspectives from the Global North and South[J]. Journal of planning education and research, 2016, 36(3): 333-348.

  [8] DE ANDRADE M M N, SZLAFSZTEIN C. Coping, adaptation strategies, and institutional perception of hydrological risks in an urban Amazon city[J]. Disasters, 2019.

  [9] 台湾水利署水利规划试验所 . 径流分担与出流管制技术手册订定 [R]. 2018.

  [10] SU Q, CHANG H-S. Exploring the Spatial development of watersheds and the allocation of responsibility for stormwater runoff from the perspective of ecological efficiency based on the DEA Method[J]. Natural hazards review, 2021, 22(4): 04021041.

  [11] PAN J. Planning framework for watershed subdivision level of urban runoff allocation schemes[D]. Taiwan: National Cheng Kung University, 2018.

  [12] YIN D, EVANS B, WANG Q, et al. Integrated 1D and 2D model for better assessing runoff quantity control of low impact development facilities on community scale[J]. Science of the total environment, 2020, 720: 137630.

  [13] ALEXANDER M, PRIEST S, MEES H. A framework for evaluating flood risk governance[J]. Environmental science & policy, 2016, 64: 38-47.

  [14] ABOLHASANI S, TALEAI M, LAKES T. A collective decision-making framework for simulating urban land-use planning: an application of game theory with event-driven actors[J]. Computers, environment and urban systems, 2022, 94: 101795.

  [15] BERNARD J M, TUTTLE R W. Stream corridor restoration: principles, processes, and practices[M] // HAYES D F, ed. Engineering approaches to ecosystem restoration. The USA Department of Agriculture, 2012.

  [16] 林昭远 , 钟泽平 , 林家荣 . 台中都会公园开发前后绿覆率与保水功能之研究 [J]. 水土保持学报 , 2009, 41(1): 31-44.

  [17] SVUBURE O, GUMBO T, SOROPA G, et al. Evaluation of the sand abstraction systems for rural water supply: the case of Lupane District, Zimbabwe[J]. International journal of engineering science and technology, 2011, 3(1): 757-765.