Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the cost–benefit of LID strategies for urban surface water flooding based on risk management

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The changing climate and rapid urbanization have resulted in an increase in urban floods. It is crucial to develop and improve flood management measures in urban areas to minimize losses. The sponge city strategy, which is based on the concept of Low Impact Development (LID), has proven effective in mitigating urban surface water floods and improving water management. However, there is still a need to determine the scope of flood improvement based on flood risk assessment and consider the cost-effectiveness of improvement measures. This study addresses this gap by developing a rapid cost–benefit assessment method for LID measures using cellular automata. The study area was Waterloo, and potential LID measures such as green roofs, permeable pavements, and bio-retention facilities were chosen. LID mitigation scenarios were generated based on the risk distribution of buildings. The CADDIES model, which is based on cellular automata, was used to simulate urban surface floods. The study found that the submerged area of flood water depth greater than 0.3 m increased logarithmically with the rainfall return period, while areas with depths greater than 0.6 m and 0.9 m increased linearly. Implementation of all three LID scenarios had the best effect on flood control, with scenario S3 showing the highest economic benefit and scenario S12 demonstrating the best investment return. When only the green roofs measure was implemented, the recommended renovation area accounted for 30%-50% of the total building area. If the green roofs measure was combined with the other two measures, the renovation area should be as small as possible. The study has shown that this method efficiently selects an investment strategy with favorable cost–benefit outcomes, thereby assisting decision-making in the planning of sponge city construction. This practical and effective approach offers scientific support for the sustainable management of urban floods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig.1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig.8
Fig. 9
Fig.10
Fig.11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agency, E. (2011). Surface water management plan-London Borough of Southwark Bristol, UK.

  • Agency E (2015) Cost estimation for SUDS—summary of evidence. Bristol, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Apel H, Aronica GT, Kreibich H, Thieken AH (2009) Flood risk analyses-how detailed do we need to be? Nat Hazards 49(1):79–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell S, Jones K, McIntosh A, Malki-Epshtein L, and Yao Z (2017). Green infrastructure for London: a review of the evidence. London.

  • Büchele B, Kreibich H, Kron A, Thieken A, Ihringer J, Oberle P, Merz B, Nestmann F (2006) Flood-risk mapping: contributions towards an enhanced assessment of extreme events and associated risks. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 6:485–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEH (2015). "FEH Web Service. https://fehweb.ceh.ac.uk/."

  • Chan FKS, Griffiths JA, Higgitt D, Xu S, Zhu F, Tang Y-T, Xu Y, Thorne CR (2018) “Sponge City” in China-a breakthrough of planning and flood risk management in the urban context. Land Use Pol 76:772–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen S, Xue Z, Li M, Zhu X (2013) Variable sets method for urban flood vulnerability assessment. Sci China Tech Sci 56(12):3129–3136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chui TFM, Liu X, Zhan W (2016) Assessing cost-effectiveness of specific LID practice designs in response to large storm events. J Hydrol 533:353–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Disse M, Johnson TG, Leandro J, Hartmann T (2020) Exploring the relation between flood risk management and flood resilience. Water Secur 9:100059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djordjevic S, Butler D, Gourbesville P, Mark O, Pasche E (2011) New policies to deal with climate change and other drivers impacting on resilience to flooding in urban areas: the CORFU approach. Environ Sci Policy 14(7):864–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckart K, McPhee Z, Bolisetti T (2017) Performance and implementation of low impact development-a review. Sci Total Environ 607–608:413–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng Y, Burian S, Pomeroy C (2016) Potential of green infrastructure to restore predevelopment water budget of a semi-arid urban catchment. J Hydrol 542:744–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenner R, O’Donnell E, Ahilan S, Dawson D, Kapetas L, Krivtsov V, Ncube S, Vercruysse K (2019) Achieving urban flood resilience in an uncertain future. Water 11:1082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher TD, Shuster W, Hunt WF, Ashley R, Butler D, Arthur S, Trowsdale S, Barraud S, Semadeni-Davies A, Bertrand-Krajewski J-L (2014) SUDS, LID, BMPs, WSUD and more-the evolution and application of terminology surrounding urban drainage. Urban Water J 12(7):525–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldby B, Sayers P, Mulet-Marti J, Hassan MAAM, Benwell D (2009) A methodology for regional-scale flood risk assessment. Water Manag 161(3):169–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabs W, Tyagi AC, Hyodo M (2007) Integrated flood management. Water Sci Technol 56(4):97–103

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Guidolin M, Chen AS, Ghimire B, Keedwell EC, Djordjevic S, Savic DA (2016) A weighted cellular automata 2D inundation model for rapid flood analysis. Environ Modell Softw 84:378–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu M, Sayama T, Zhang X, Tanaka K, Takara K, Yang H (2017) Evaluation of low impact development approach for mitigating flood inundation at a watershed scale in China. J Environ Manage 193:430–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins K, Surminski S, Hall J, Crick F (2017) Assessing surface water flood risk and management strategies under future climate change: insights from an Agent-Based Model. Sci Total Environ 595:159–168

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jia H, Wang Z, Zhen X, Clar M, Yu SL (2017) China’s Sponge city construction: a discussion on technical approaches. Front Env Sci Eng 11(4):18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang Y, Zevenbergen C, Fu D (2017) Understanding the challenges for the governance of China’s “sponge cities” initiative to sustainably manage urban stormwater and flooding. Nat Hazards 89(1):521–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubal C, Haase D, Meyer V, Scheuer S (2009) Integrated urban flood risk assessment–adapting a multicriteria approach to a city. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(6):1881–1895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Song K, Peng L (2021) Flood risk assessment under land use and climate change in Wuhan city of the Yangtze river basin. China Land 10:878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu W, Chen W, Peng C (2014) Assessing the effectiveness of green infrastructures on urban flooding reduction: a community scale study. Eco Model 291:6–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Ahiablame LM, Bralts VF, Engel BA (2015) Enhancing a rainfall-runoff model to assess the impacts of BMPs and LID practices on storm runoff. J Environ Manage 147:12–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löwe R, Urich C, Domingo NS, Mark O, Deletic A, Arnbjerg-Nielsen K (2017) Assessment of urban pluvial flood risk and efficiency of adaptation options through simulations-a new generation of urban planning tools. J Hydrol 550:335–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyu H, Shen S, Zhou A, Yang J (2019) Perspectives for flood risk assessment and management for mega-city metro system. Tunn Undergr Sp Tech 84:31–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madhuri R, Raja YSLS, Raju KS, Punith BS, Manoj K (2021) Urban flood risk analysis of buildings using HEC-RAS 2D in climate change framework. H2Open J 4:1262–1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mao X, Jia H, Yu SL (2017) Assessing the ecological benefits of aggregate LID-BMPs through modelling. Ecol Model 353:139–149

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mei C, Liu J, Wang H, Yang Z, Ding X, Shao W (2018) Integrated assessments of green infrastructure for flood mitigation to support robust decision-making for sponge city construction in an urbanized watershed. Sci Total Environ 639:1394–1407

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Montalto F, Behr C, Alfredo K, Wolf M, Arye M, Walsh M (2007) Rapid assessment of the cost-effectiveness of low impact development for CSO control. Landscape Urban Plan 82:117–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison A, Westbrook CJ, Noble BF (2018) A review of the flood risk management governance and resilience literature. J Flood Risk Manag 11(3):291–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palla A, Gnecco I (2015) Hydrologic modeling of low impact development systems at the urban catchment scale. J Hydrol 528:361–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penning-Rowsell E, Viavattene C, Pardoe J, Chatterton J, Parker D, Morris J (2010) The benefits of flood and coastal risk management: a handbook of assessment techniques. Flood Hazard Research Centre, Middlesex University, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Plate EJ (2002) Flood risk and flood management. J Hydrol 267:2–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qin H, Li Z, Fu G (2013) The effects of low impact development on urban flooding under different rainfall characteristics. J Environ Manage 129:577–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocheta VLS, Isidoro JMGP, Lima JLMPD (2015) Infiltration of Portuguese cobblestone pavements-An exploratory assessment using a double-ring infiltrometer. Urban Water J 14(3):291–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig BR, McPhillips L, Chang H, Cheng C, Welty C, Matsler M, Iwaniec D, Davidson CI (2018) Pluvial flood risk and opportunities for resilience. Wires Water 5(6):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semadeni-Davies A, Hernebring C, Svensson G, Gustafsson L-GR (2008) The impacts of climate change and urbanisation on drainage in Helsingborg, Sweden: combined sewer system. J Hydrol 350:100–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shuster WD, Morrison MA, Webb R (2008) Front-loading urban stormwater management for success-a perspective incorporating current studies on the implementation of retrofit low-impact development. Cities Environ 1(2):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang H, Mei C, Liu JH, Shao WW (2018) A new strategy for integrated urban water management in China: sponge city. Sci China Technol Sc 61(3):317–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Meng F, Liu H, Zhang C, Fu G (2019) Assessing catchment scale flood resilience of urban areas using a grid cell based metric. Water Res 163:114852

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang H, Zhou J, Tang Y, Liu Z, Kang A, Chen B (2020) Flood economic assessment of structural measure based on integrated flood risk management: a case study in Beijing. J Environ Manage 280:111701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Liu Z, Wang G, Xue W (2021) Cellular automata based framework for evaluating mitigation strategies of sponge city. Sci Total Environ 796:148991

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Zhang C, Chen AS, Wang G, Fu G (2023) Exploring the relationship between urban flood risk and resilience at a high-resolution grid cell scale. Sci Total Environ 893:164852

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Webber JL, Gibson MJ, Chen AS, Savic D, Fu G, Butler D (2018) Rapid assessment of surface-water flood-management options in urban catchments. Urban Water J 15(3):210–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webber JL, Fu G, Butler D (2019) Comparing cost-effectiveness of surface water flood management interventions in a UK catchment. J Flood Risk Manag 12(S2):e12523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willems P, Vrac M (2011) Statistical precipitation downscaling for small-scale hydrological impact investigations of climate change. J Hydrol 402(3–4):193–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willems P, Arnbjerg-Nielsen K, Olsson J, Nguyen VTV (2012) Climate change impact assessment on urban rainfall extremes and urban drainage: methods and shortcomings. Atmos Res 103:106–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward M, Gouldby B, Kapelan Z, Khu ST, Townend I (2011) Real Options in flood risk management decision making. J Flood Risk Manag 4:339–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu H, Ma C, Lian J, Xu K, Chaima E (2018) Urban flooding risk assessment based on an integrated k-means cluster algorithm and improved entropy weight method in the region of Haikou, China. J Hydrol 563:975–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang Y, Yin J, Wang D, Liu Y, Lu Y, Zhang W, Xu S (2023) ABM-based emergency evacuation modelling during urban pluvial floods: a “7.20” pluvial flood event study in Zhengzhou, Henan Province. Sci China Earth Sci 66(2):282–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Q, Mikkelsen PS, Halsnæs K, Arnbjerg-Nielsen K (2012) Framework for economic pluvial flood risk assessment considering climate change effects and adaptation benefits. J Hydrol 414–415:539–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, No. 52109001; the Open Project of the Key Laboratory/Engineering Technology Center of the Yellow River Water Conservancy Research Institute, No. LYRCER202203;Scientific Research Initiation Project of North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, No.202005014.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Water Conservancy, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou, 450045, China

    Xinyu Wu

  2. Key Laboratory of Lower Yellow River Channel and Estuary Regulation, Yellow River Conservancy Commission of the Ministry of Water Resources, Zhengzhou, 450003, China

    Xinyu Wu

  3. China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing, 100038, China

    Rong Tang

  4. State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Rong Tang

  5. State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China

    Yuntao Wang

  6. Innovation Research Center of Satellite Application, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China

    Yuntao Wang

Authors
  1. Xinyu Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rong Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuntao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuntao Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, X., Tang, R. & Wang, Y. Evaluating the cost–benefit of LID strategies for urban surface water flooding based on risk management. Nat Hazards (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-024-06608-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-024-06608-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation