A Minimax Regret Analysis of Flood Risk Management Strategies Under Climate Change Uncertainty and Emerging Information

被引:12
作者
van der Pol, T. D. [1 ]
Gabbert, S. [2 ]
Weikard, H. -P. [2 ]
van Ierland, E. C. [2 ]
Hendrix, E. M. T. [3 ]
机构
[1] Netherlands Bur Econ Policy Anal, Climate & Reg Econ, POB 80510, NL-2508 GM The Hague, Netherlands
[2] Wageningen Univ, Environm Econ & Nat Resources Grp, POB 8130, NL-6700 EW Wageningen, Netherlands
[3] Univ Malaga, Comp Architecture, ETSI Informat, Campus Teatinos, E-29071 Malaga, Spain
关键词
Minimax regret; Flood risk; Climate change; Adaptive management; Flexibility; Robust optimisation; Learning; ENVIRONMENTAL-POLICY; ADAPTATION DECISIONS; WATER MANAGEMENT; NETHERLANDS; ROBUSTNESS; SCENARIOS; AMBIGUITY; CHOICE;
D O I
10.1007/s10640-016-0062-y
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper studies the dynamic application of the minimax regret (MR) decision criterion to identify robust flood risk management strategies under climate change uncertainty and emerging information. An MR method is developed that uses multiple learning scenarios, for example about sea level rise or river peak flow development, to analyse effects of changes in information on optimal investment in flood protection. To illustrate the method, optimal dike height and floodplain development are studied in a conceptual model, and conventional and adaptive MR solutions are compared. A dynamic application of the MR decision criterion allows investments to be changed after new information on climate change impacts, which has an effect on today's optimal investments. The results suggest that adaptive MR solutions are more robust than the solutions obtained from a conventional MR analysis of investments in flood protection. Moreover, adaptive MR analysis with multiple learning scenarios is more general and contains conventional MR analysis as a special case.
引用
收藏
页码:1087 / 1109
页数:23
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]   Minmax regret solutions for minimax optimization problems with uncertainty [J].
Averbakh, I .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH LETTERS, 2000, 27 (02) :57-65
[3]   THE THEORY OF DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING [J].
BELLMAN, R .
BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY, 1954, 60 (06) :503-515
[4]  
BenTal A, 2009, PRINC SER APPL MATH, P1
[5]  
Bol R., 2005, Flooding and Environmental Challenges for Venice and Its Lagoon: State of Knowledge, P311
[6]   Safe Dike Heights at Minimal Costs: The Nonhomogeneous Case [J].
Brekelmans, Ruud ;
den Hertog, Dick ;
Roos, Kees ;
Eijgenraam, Carel .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2012, 60 (06) :1342-1355
[7]   Integrated ecological, economic and social impact assessment of alternative flood control policies in the Netherlands [J].
Brouwer, R ;
van Ek, R .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2004, 50 (1-2) :1-21
[8]   Classical decision rules and adaptation to climate change [J].
Clarke, Harry .
AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2008, 52 (04) :487-504
[9]   Anticipating catastrophes through extreme value modelling [J].
Coles, S ;
Pericchi, L .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES C-APPLIED STATISTICS, 2003, 52 :405-416
[10]   Effect of uncertainty in land use, damage models and inundation depth on flood damage estimates [J].
de Moel, H. ;
Aerts, J. C. J. H. .
NATURAL HAZARDS, 2011, 58 (01) :407-425