The centrality of engineering codes and risk-based design standards in climate adaptation strategies

被引:3
作者
Stakhiv, Eugene Z. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Environm Sci Studies Dept, Washington, DC 20036 USA
[2] UNESCO Int Ctr Integrated Water resources Managem, Alexandria, VA 22315 USA
关键词
Engineering codes; 'No regrets' climate adaptation; Risk-based design standards; Risk tolerance; Safety factors; FLOOD FREQUENCY; MANAGEMENT; STATIONARITY; FRAMEWORK; OPTIONS; MODEL;
D O I
10.2166/wp.2021.345
中图分类号
TV21 [水资源调查与水利规划];
学科分类号
081501 ;
摘要
Engineering codes, design standards and analytical criteria for hydraulic structures are the final determinative specifications for designing and constructing a water resources project. As such, they are the authoritative and legally accepted standards for project design and construction. Engineering codes and standards are developed to optimize public safety and performance by focusing on structural reliability, which includes a wide range of extreme conditions that encompass most contemporary climate uncertainties, and which are likely to overlap some portion of future climate non-stationary conditions. Current practices of risk-based planning and design standards have evolved incrementally, responding to each catastrophic natural disaster, whether it is geotechnical, floods, droughts or hurricanes. Design standards and building codes encompass an accumulation of changes that progressively reflect changing climate conditions, most notably because they focus on climate extremes. Design standards and embedded 'safety factors' that are based on extremes are likely to encompass a good deal of an anticipated non-stationary climate regime and its associated uncertainties. Modern risk analysis methods and risk-based standards, codes and methods comprise an important part of a progressive autonomous adaptation to climate change. They represent an essential component of 'no regrets' climate adaptation.
引用
收藏
页码:106 / 127
页数:22
相关论文
共 104 条
  • [1] A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data
    Anagnostopoulos, G. G.
    Koutsoyiannis, D.
    Christofides, A.
    Efstratiadis, A.
    Mamassis, N.
    [J]. HYDROLOGICAL SCIENCES JOURNAL, 2010, 55 (07) : 1094 - 1110
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2018, INT J SAF SECUR ENG, DOI DOI 10.2495/SAFE-V8-N2-287-298
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2006, KA ABWASSER ABFALL
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2011, 12 INT C URB DRAIN P
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2018, Cost-benefit analysis and the environment: Further developments and policy use, DOI DOI 10.1787/9789264085169-EN
  • [6] Arnbjerg-Nielsen K., 2008, 29 WAT POLL COMM SOC
  • [7] AsianDevelopment Bank (ADB), 2020, ADB SUSTAINABLE DEVE, V69
  • [8] Auld H., 2008, J PUBLIC WORKS INFRA, V1, P276
  • [9] Ayyub B., 2018, ASCE MANUALS REPORTS, V140, DOI [10.1061/9780784415191, DOI 10.1061/9780784415191]
  • [10] Ayyub B., 2019, CR191 ERDCCHL US ARM