Skip to main content

Economic impacts of storm surge and the cost-benefit analysis of a coastal spine as the surge mitigation strategy in Houston-Galveston area in the USA

Abstract

Rapid population growth, urbanization, and concentration of valuable assets and strategic infrastructure in coastal regions make coastal inundation, flooding, and storm surge national problems for many countries, including the United States of America (USA). Enhancing coastal resilience is a complex problem and involves an integrated risk management approach, entailing both structural protection as well as other risk reduction strategies (e.g., building codes and ecosystem preservation). The former is an increasingly recognized mitigation option for densely populated areas and industrial hubs. Fully justifying benefits of costly flood defense structures is crucial, particularly when lack of funding and other institutional barriers make such projects easy targets for omission from or cuts to a budget. Justification usually requires a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis. This paper explores the economic feasibility of a coastal barrier, i.e., coastal spine, as a potential storm surge mitigation strategy to protect the Houston-Galveston metropolitan area of Texas, one of the most flood-prone and economically important regions in the USA. We provide an assessment of residential and chemical manufacturing plant and refinery exposure to multiple synthetic hurricane storm surge events by comparing losses with and without a coastal spine. While under all scenarios, benefits exceed engineering costs of a spine, our results indicate that the project feasibility largely hinges on accounting for industrial losses and resultant indirect and induced effects. As many regions and industrial hubs globally are designing adaptation and mitigation strategies to combat the consequences of extreme events, structural solution to surge mitigation maybe one of the few mitigation options for them. Unlike population and residential structures that can retreat and insure, these options are not viable for industrial plants that are resource-based. However, expertise and knowledge pertinent to surge barrier systems are relatively scarce as there are only handful of barriers around the world and they are all unique in engineering designs. As storm surge is becoming a threat for many coastal urban centers, one of the recommendations is to consolidate knowledge base and research across countries in order to foster knowledge exchange internationally. This will help identify concerns associated with existing barrier systems, pragmatic ways to improve them and will also aid the investment decision, engineering designs, and operational aspects of barriers in other parts of the world. Furthermore, forming regional research collaborations with developing countries at risk of storm surge and the sea level rise is vital to further facilitate knowledge spillover and exchange of expertise.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. Unlike other flood-prone countries including Netherlands and Denmark, where governments have been adamant in investing in flood control defense structures and where disaster risk management has been predominantly proactive (Botzen et al. 2013; Hallegatte et al. 2011), in the USA spending on mitigation projects at the federal government level is commonly triggered after major disaster declaration, and disaster risk management is typically delegated to relevant stakeholders at the local and state levels (Bierbaum et al. 2013).

  2. NAICS permits detailed breakdowns across 440 economic sectors.

  3. Available at https://www.fema.gov/risk-map-region-vi

  4. Depth-damage percentages vary by structure type and residency classes. The Online Resource Table A.1 presents percentages for each Hazus residency class type and structure features.

  5. Post-FIRM buildings refer to buildings that were built after the effective date of the first FIRM was adopted by the community.

  6. More accurate approach for estimating foundation elevation would require elevation certificates and direct foundation height measurements using aerial photograph street views. This was left for future research.

  7. Available at www.chemplants.com

  8. For instance, Phillips 66’s Bayway, New Jersey after super storm sandy reported economic losses approximately 706 million, of which $56 million (7.9%) was the cost of damaged equipment (capital loss) and the remaining 650 million was the output loss associated with 24-day shutdown due to power outage (Hydrocarbon Publishing Company 2016).

  9. In Online Resource Table A.2, we report the full list of Texas plants and corresponding shutdown/partial capacity days experienced as a consequence of the 2005 and 2008 hurricanes.

  10. The sample average number 26 days came very close to the number of shutdown days due to power outage reported for Phillips 66’s Bayway, one of the largest refineries in New Jersey, during and after super storm sandy. These shutdown durations were also close to reported 2-week shutdown periods for refineries after hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. Kirgiz et al. (2009) documented that of the 46 extensively damaged oil production platforms and 100 significantly affected pipelines, many returned to full operation in 2 weeks. However, approximately 50% could not fully operate until Hurricane Rita forced additional shut down over a month time window.

  11. Control/system rooms maybe elevated in some plants as part of their mitigation and hazard contingency plans. Under this scenario, plants will likely do not sustain damages but may still be down if there is mandatory evacuation of workers, shutdown happens for precautionary purposes or due to power outage.

  12. In Online Resource Table A.3, we report Hazus occupancy class categories along with corresponding IMPLAN sectors.

References

  • Aerts JC, Botzen WJ, Moel H, Bowman M (2013) Cost estimates for flood resilience and protection strategies in New York City. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1294(1):1–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allan RP, Soden BJ (2008) Atmospheric warming and the amplification of precipitation extremes. Science 321(5895):1481–1484. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1160787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anthoff D, Nicholls RJ, Tol RS (2010) The economic impact of substantial sea-level rise. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 15(4):321–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bender C, Smith JM, Kennedy A, Jensen R (2013) STWAVE simulation of hurricane Ike: model results and comparison to data. Coast Eng 73:58–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierbaum R, Smith JB, Lee A, Blair M, Carter L, Chapin FS et al (2013) A comprehensive review of climate adaptation in the United States: more than before, but less than needed. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 18(3):361–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bockarjova M, Steenge AE, van der Veen A (2004) On direct estimation of initial damage in the case of a major catastrophe: derivation of the “basic equation”. Disaster Prev Manag: An Int J 13(4):330–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botzen WJW, Aerts JCJH, Van den Bergh JCJM (2013) Individual preferences for reducing flood risk to near zero through elevation. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 18(2):229–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody SD, Zahran S, Highfield WE, Grover H, Vedlitz A (2008) Identifying the impact of the built environment on flood damage in Texas. Disasters 32(1):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant MA, Jensen RE (2017) Application of the Nearshore Wave Model STWAVE to the North Atlantic Coast Comprehensive Study, J Waterw Port Coastal Ocean Eng 143(5)

  • Burleson DW, Rifai HS, Proft JK, Dawson CN, Bedient PB (2015) Vulnerability of an industrial corridor in Texas to storm surge. Nat Hazards 77(2):1183–1203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialone MA, Grzegorzewski AS, Mark DJ, Bryant MA, Massey TC (2017) Coastal-storm model development and water-level validation for the North Atlantic Coast Comprehensive Study, Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, September 2017,Volume 143, Issue 5

  • Cavallo E, Noy I (2011) Natural disasters and the economy—a survey. Int Rev Environ Resour Econ 5(1):63–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane H (2004) Economic loss: myth and measurement. Disaster Prev Manag: An Int J 13(4):290–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davlasheridze M, Fan Q (2017) Household adjustments to hurricane Katrina. Rev Reg Stud 47(1):93–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Davlasheridze M, Fisher-Vanden K, Klaiber AH (2017) The effects of adaptation measures on hurricane induced property losses: which FEMA investments have the highest returns? J Environ Econ Manag 81:93–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2016.09.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Moel H, Jongman B, Kreibich H, Merz B, Penning-Rowsell E, Ward PJ (2015) Flood risk assessments at different spatial scales. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 20(6):865–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DelRossi AF, Inman RP (1999) Changing the price of pork: the impact of local cost sharing on legislators' demands for distributive public goods. J Public Econ 71(2):247–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding A, White JF, Ullman PW, Fashokun AO (2008) Evaluation of HAZUS-MH flood model with local data and other program. Nat Hazards Rev 9:20–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dircke PTM, Jongeling THG, Jansen PLM (2013) A global overview of navigable storm surge barriers: suitable gate types for New York for a Dutch perspective. Against the deluge: storm surge barriers to protect New York City (pp. 150-169)

  • Emanuel KA (2013) Downscaling CMIP5 climate models shows increased tropical cyclone activity over the 21st century. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(30):12219–12224. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1301293110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA (2006) Hazus-MH flood technical manual. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1820-25045-8292/hzmh2_1_fl_tm.pdf. Accessed 26 May 2006

  • FEMA (2008) Hurricane Ike impact report. http://www.fema.gov/pdf/hazard/hurricane/2008/ike/impact_report.pdf. Accessed 30 December 2008

  • FEMA (2017) Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology: flood model. Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, Washington, DC. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1820-25045-8814/hzmh2_1_fl_um.pdf. Accessed 15 January 2017

  • Ganderton PT (2005) ‘Benefit–cost analysis’ of disaster mitigation: application as a policy and decision-making tool. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 10(3):445–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goetz SJ, Davlasheridze M, Han Y (2015) County-level determinants of mental health, 2002–2008. Soc Indic Res 124(2):657–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grinsted A, Moore JC, Jevrejeva S (2013) Projected Atlantic hurricane surge threat from rising temperatures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110(14):5369–5373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griggs T, Lehren AW, Popovich N, Singhvi A, Tabuchi H (2017) More than 40 sites released hazardous pollutants because of hurricane Harvey. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/08/us/houston-hurricane-harvey-harzardous-chemicals.html. Accessed 8 September 2017

  • Haimes YY, Jiang P (2001) Leontief-based model of risk in complex interconnected infrastructures. J Infrastruct Syst 7(1):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haines A, Kovats RS, Campbell-Lendrum D, Corvalán C (2006) Climate change and human health: impacts, vulnerability and public health. Public Health 120(7):585–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallegatte S (2008) An adaptive regional input-output model and its application to the assessment of the economic cost of Katrina. Risk Anal 28(3):779–799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallegatte S, Ranger N, Mestre O, Dumas P, Corfee-Morlot J, Herweijer C, Wood RM (2011) Assessing climate change impacts, sea level rise and storm surge risk in port cities: a case study on Copenhagen. Clim Chang 104(1):113–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Highfield WE, Brody SD, Atoba K, Blessing R (2017) Identifying the future costs of flooding in the Houston-Galveston region. Center for Texas Beaches and Shores. Texas A&M University, Galveston Campus

    Google Scholar 

  • Hope ME, Westerink JJ, Kennedy AB, Kerr PC, Dietrich JC, Dawson C, Bender CJ, Smith JM, Jensen RE, Zijlema M, Holthuijsen LH, Luettich RA Jr, Powell MD, Cardone VJ, Cox AT, Poutaheri H, Roberts HJ, Atkinson JH, Tanaka S, Westerink HJ, Westerink LG (2013) Hindcast and validation of Hurricane Ike (2008) waves, forerunner, and storm surge. J Geophys Res: Oceans 118:4424–4460. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrc.20314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houston Galveston Area Council (2017) Regional growth forecast. http://www.h-gac.com/community/socioeconomic/2040-regional-growth-forecast/default.aspx. Accessed 15 January 2017

  • Hydrocarbon Publishing Company (2016) Power outage mitigation. Multi-Client Strategic Reports. http://www.hydrocarbonpublishing.com/ReportP/report13/power.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2016

  • IPCC (2012) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. In: Field, C.B., Barros, V., Stocker, T.F., Qin, D., Dokken, D.J., Ebi, K.L., Mastrandrea, M.D., Mach, K.J., Plattner, G.-K., Allen, S.K., Tignor, M., Midgley, P.M. (Eds.), A special report of working groups I and II of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA

  • Jensen RE, Cialone A, Smith JM, Bryant MA (2017) Regional wave modeling and evaluation for the North Atlantic coast comprehensive study. J Waterw Port Coastal Ocean Eng 143(2):B4016001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonkman SN, Lendering KT, van Berchum EC, Nillesen A, Mooyaart L, de Vries P, van Ledden M, Willems A, Nooij R (2015) Coastal spine system—interim design report. http://www.tamug.edu/ikedike/images_and_documents/20150620_Coastal_spine_system-interim_design_report_v06.pdf. Accessed 15 December 2015

  • Kirgiz K, Burtis M, Lunin DA (2009) Petroleum-refining industry business interruption losses due to Hurricane Katrina. J Bus Valuation Econ Loss Anal 4(2)

  • Knutson TR, Sirutis JJ, Vecchi GA, Garner S, Zhao M, Kim HS et al (2013) Dynamical downscaling projections of twenty-first-century Atlantic hurricane activity: CMIP3 and CMIP5 model-based scenarios. J Clim 26(17):6591–6617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousky C, Olmstead SM, Walls MA, Macauley M (2013) Strategically placing green infrastructure: cost-effective land conservation in the floodplain. Environ Sci Technol 47(8):3563–3570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousky C (2014a) Managing shoreline retreat: a US perspective. Clim Chang 124(1–2):9–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousky C (2014b) Informing climate adaptation: a review of the economic costs of natural disasters. Energy Econ 46:576–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousky C, Walls M (2014) Floodplain conservation as a flood mitigation strategy: examining costs and benefits. Ecol Econ 104:119–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krausmann E, Cruz AM (2013) Impact of the 11 March 2011, Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami on the chemical industry. Nat Hazards 67(2):811–828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus ED, McNamara DE, Smith MD, Gopalakrishnan S, Murray AB (2011) Emergent behavior in a coupled economic and coastline model for beach nourishment. Nonlinear Processes Geophysics 18(6):989–999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus ED, Murray AB (2011) An integrated hypothesis for regional patterns of shoreline change along the Northern North Carolina Outer Banks, USA. Mar Geol 281(1):85–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie CA, Santos JR, Barker K (2012) Measuring changes in international production from a disruption: case study of the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. Int J Prod Econ 138(2):293–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara D, Murray AB, Smith MD (2011) Coastal sustainability depends on how economic and coastline responses to climate change affect each other. Geophys Res Lett 38(7)

  • Mechler R, Hochrainer S, Aaheim A, Salen H, Wreford A (2010) Modelling economic impacts and adaptation to extreme events: insights from European case studies. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 15(7):737–762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minnesota IMPLAN Group (MIG) (2012) Impact analysis for planning (IMPLAN) system, Hudson, WI

  • Mooyaart L, Jonkman S, de Vries P, Van der Toorn A, van Ledden M (2014) Storm surge barrier: overview and design considerations. Coastal Engineering Proceedings 1(34)

  • NOAA National Center for Environmental Information (2017) National Oceanic Atmospheric Association’s National Center for Environmental Information database. Available at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/events/US/1980-2017). Accessed 15 June 2017

  • Norio O, Ye T, Kajitani Y, Shi P, Tatano H (2011) The 2011 eastern Japan great earthquake disaster: overview and comments. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 2(1):34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okuyama Y (2004) Modeling spatial economic impacts of an earthquake: input-output approaches. Disaster Prev Manag: An Int J 13(4):297–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parisi P, Lund R (2008) Return periods of continental U.S. hurricanes. American Metrological Society—notes and correspondence, pp. 403-411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI1772.1

  • Pielke RA Jr, Gratz J, Landsea CW, Collins D, Saunders MA, Musulin R (2008) Normalized hurricane damage in the United States: 1900–2005. Nat Hazards Rev 9(1):29–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilkey OH, Young R (2008) The rising sea: Island Press

  • Port of Houston (2017) Port of Houston Overview. http://porthouston.com. Accessed 15 July 2017

  • Razafindrabe BH, Kada R, Arima M, Inoue S (2014) Analyzing flood risk and related impacts to urban communities in central Vietnam. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 19(2):177–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rebuild Texas (2017) Rebuild Texas. The Governor’s Commission to Rebuild Texas. Request for Federal Disaster Assistance Critical Infrastructure Projects. https://www.rebuildtexas.today/. Accessed 30 October 2017

  • Rose A (2004) Defining and measuring economic resilience to disasters. Disaster Prev Manag: An Int J 13(4):307–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose AZ (2009a) Economic resilience to disasters. CREATE Homeland Security Center. Published Articles & Papers. Paper 75. http://create.usc.edu/sites/default/files/publications/economicresiliencetodisasters_2.pdf. 11-1-2009

  • Rose AZ (2009b) A framework for analyzing the total economic impacts of terrorist attacks and natural disasters. J Homeland Sec Emerg Manag 6(1)

  • Rose AZ, Blomberg SB (2010) Total economic consequences of terrorist attacks: insights from 9/11. Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy, 16(1). Doi: https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-8597.1189

  • Rose A, Guha GS (2004) Computable general equilibrium modeling of electric utility lifeline losses from earthquakes. In: Modeling spatial and economic impacts of disasters (pp. 119–141). Springer Berlin Heidelberg

  • Rose A, Liao SY (2005) Modeling regional economic resilience to disasters: a computable general equilibrium analysis of water service disruptions*. J Reg Sci 45(1):75–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose AZ, Oladosu G, Lee B, Asay GB (2009) The economic impacts of the September 11 terrorist attacks: a computable general equilibrium analysis. Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy, 15(2). Doi: https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-8597.1161

  • Rose A, Oladosu G, Liao SY (2007) Business interruption impacts of a terrorist attack on the electric power system of Los Angeles: customer resilience to a total blackout. Risk Analysis 27(3):513–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose A, Wei D (2013) Estimating the economic consequences of a port shutdown: the special role of resilience. Econ Syst Res 25(2):212–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose A, Wei D, Wein A (2011) Economic impacts of the ShakeOut scenario. Earthquake Spectra 27(2):539–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz Fuentes MJ (2014) Storm surge barrier Tokyo Bay: analysis on a system level and conceptual design. MSc Thesis. Delft University of Technology. https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid%3Afdd9f39e-d0f5-400a-9c91-a4fe6240b77d. Accessed 5 April 2018

  • Scawthorn C, Blais N, Seligson H, Tate E, Mifflin E, Thomas W, Murphy J, Jones C (2006a) HAZUS-MH flood loss estimation methodology. I: overview and flood hazard characterization. Nat Hazards Rev 7:60–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scawthorn C, Flores P, Blais N, Seligson H, Tate E, Chang S, Mifflin E, Thomas W, Murphy J, Jones C (2006b) HAZUS-MH flood loss estimation methodology. II. Damage and loss assessment. Nat Hazards Rev 7(2):72–81. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2006)7:2(72)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith MD, Slott JM, McNamara D, Murray AB (2009) Beach nourishment as a dynamic capital accumulation problem. J Environ Econ Manag 58(1):58–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoeten KJ (2013) Hurricane surge risk reduction for Galveston Bay. MSc Thesis. Delft University of Technology. https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:3239a90e-42ef-485b-a73a-d39a99c1611a/datastream/OBJ. Accessed 20 December 2013

  • Sue Wing I, Rose AZ, Wein AM (2016) Economic consequence analysis of the ARkStorm scenario. Nat Hazards Rev 17(4):A4015002. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SURGEDAT (2017) SURGEDAT: the world’s storm surge data center. Online database. Available at http://surge.srcc.lsu.edu/. Accessed June 15, 2017

  • Sweet WV, Dusek G, Obeysekera J, Marra JJ (2018) Patterns and projections of high tide flooding along the U.S. coastline. NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 086. Available at https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/techrpt86_PaP_of_HTFlooding.pdf

  • Tate E, Muñoz C, Suchan J (2014) Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of the Hazus-MH flood model. Nat Hazards Rev 16(3):04014030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson EF, Cardone VJ (1996) Practical modeling of hurricane surface wind fields. J Waterway Port Coastal Ocean Eng 1996:195–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TAMUG (2017) Texas A&M University at Galveston. Ike Dike. Retrieved from http://www.tamug.edu/ikedike/

  • UNISDR (2006) The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015. Online available at https://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L-docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf. Accessed July 1, 2006

  • UNISDR (2015) The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Online available at http://www.unisdr.org/we/coordinate/sendai-framework. Accessed July 1, 2015

  • U.S. Climate Change Science Program (2008) Weather and climate extremes in a changing climate. U.S. Climate Change Science Program, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Energy (2009) Infrastructure Security and Energy Restoration; Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. Comparing the Impacts of the 2005 and 2008 Hurricanes on U.S. Energy Infrastructure. Report. February 2008

  • van der Pol TD, van Ierland EC, Gabbert S (2017) Economic analysis of adaptive strategies for flood risk management under climate change. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 22(2):267–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Ledden M, Lansen J, de Ridder H, Edge B (2012) Reconnaissance level study Mississippi storm surge barrier. Coastal Eng Proc 1(33)

  • Villarini G, Vecchi GA (2013) Projected increases in North Atlantic Tropical Cyclone Intensity from CMIP5 models. Journal of Climate, 26(10). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00441.1

  • Walsh KJE, McBride JL, Klotzbach PJ, Balachandran S, Camargo SJ, Holland G, Knutson TR, Kossin JP, Lee T, Sobel A, Sugi M (2016) Tropical cyclones and climate change. WIREs Clim Change 7:65–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei D, Chatterjee S (2013) Economic impact of sea level rise to the city of Los Angeles. Price School of Public Policy and Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events. University of Southern California Final Report January 27, 2013

  • Westerink JJ, Luettich RA, Baptista AM, Scheffner NW, Farrar P (1992) Tide and storm surge predictions using finite element model. J Hydraul Eng 118(10):1373–1390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerbe RO, Dively DD (1994) Benefit–cost analysis in theory and practice. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is based on research supported by the US National Science Foundation (Grant No. 1545837). The findings and opinions reported are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the funding organizations or those who provided assistance with various aspects of the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meri Davlasheridze.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 4165 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Davlasheridze, M., Atoba, K.O., Brody, S. et al. Economic impacts of storm surge and the cost-benefit analysis of a coastal spine as the surge mitigation strategy in Houston-Galveston area in the USA. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 24, 329–354 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-018-9814-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-018-9814-z

Keywords

  • Coastal spine
  • Flood damage
  • Industrial
  • Petrochemical
  • Economic losses
  • Disaster impacts
  • Storm surge
  • Hazus
  • IMPLAN
  • Houston
  • Galveston