When does risk become residual? A systematic review of research on flood risk management in West Africa.

Flood events in West Africa have devastating impacts on the lives of people. Additionally, developments such as climate change, settlement expansion into flood-prone areas, and modification of rivers are expected to increase flood risk in the future. Policy documents have issued calls for conducting local risk assessments and understanding disaster risk in diverse aspects, leading to an increase in such research. Similarly, in a shift from flood protection to flood risk management, the consideration of various dimensions of flood risk, the necessity of addressing flood risk through an integrated strategy containing structural and non-structural measures, and the presence of residual risk are critical perspectives raised. However, the notion of "residual risk" remains yet to be taken up in flood risk management-related academic literature. This systematic review seeks to approach the notion of residual risk by reviewing information on flood impacts, common measures, and recommendations in academic literature. The review reveals various dimensions of impacts from residual flood risk aside from material damage, in particular, health impacts and economic losses. Infrastructural measures were a dominant category of measures before and after flood events and in recommendations, despite their shortcomings. Also, spatial planning interventions, a more participatory and inclusive governance approach, including local knowledge, sensitisation, and early warning systems, were deemed critical. In the absence of widespread access to insurance schemes, support from social networks after flood events emerged as the most frequent measure. This finding calls for in-depth assessments of those networks and research on potential complementary formal risk transfer mechanisms. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10113-021-01826-7.

Drought risk for agricultural systems in South Africa: Drivers, spatial patterns, and implications for drought risk management.

The regular drought episodes in South Africa highlight the need to reduce drought risk by both policy and local community actions. Environmental and socioeconomic factors in South Africa's agricultural system have been affected by drought in the past, creating cascading pressures on the nation's agro-economic and water supply systems. Therefore, understanding the key drivers of all risk components through a comprehensive risk assessment must be undertaken in order to inform proactive drought risk management. This paper presents, for the first time, a national drought risk assessment for irrigated and rainfed systems, that takes into account the complex interaction between different risk components. We use modeling and remote sensing approaches and involve national experts in selecting vulnerability indicators and providing information on human and natural drivers. Our results show that all municipalities have been affected by drought in the last 30 years. The years 1981-1982, 1992, 2016 and 2018 were marked as the driest years during the study period (1981-2018) compared to the reference period (1986-2015). In general, the irrigated systems are remarkably less often affected by drought than rainfed systems; however, most farmers on irrigated land are smallholders for whom drought impacts can be significant. The drought risk of rainfed agricultural systems is exceptionally high in the north, central and west of the country, while for irrigated systems, there are more separate high-risk hotspots across the country. The vulnerability assessment identified potential entry points for disaster risk reduction at the local municipality level, such as increasing environmental awareness, reducing land degradation and increasing total dam and irrigation capacity.

Development and validation of risk profiles of West African rural communities facing multiple natural hazards.

West Africa has been described as a hotspot of climate change. The reliance on rain-fed agriculture by over 65% of the population means that vulnerability to climatic hazards such as droughts, rainstorms and floods will continue. Yet, the vulnerability and risk levels faced by different rural social-ecological systems (SES) affected by multiple hazards are poorly understood. To fill this gap, this study quantifies risk and vulnerability of rural communities to drought and floods. Risk is assessed using an indicator-based approach. A stepwise methodology is followed that combines participatory approaches with statistical, remote sensing and Geographic Information System techniques to develop community level vulnerability indices in three watersheds (Dano, Burkina Faso; Dassari, Benin; Vea, Ghana). The results show varying levels of risk profiles across the three watersheds. Statistically significant high levels of mean risk in the Dano area of Burkina Faso are found whilst communities in the Dassari area of Benin show low mean risk. The high risk in the Dano area results from, among other factors, underlying high exposure to droughts and rainstorms, longer dry season duration, low caloric intake per capita, and poor local institutions. The study introduces the concept of community impact score (CIS) to validate the indicator-based risk and vulnerability modelling. The CIS measures the cumulative impact of the occurrence of multiple hazards over five years. 65.3% of the variance in observed impact of hazards/CIS was explained by the risk models and communities with high simulated disaster risk generally follow areas with high observed disaster impacts. Results from this study will help disaster managers to better understand disaster risk and develop appropriate, inclusive and well integrated mitigation and adaptation plans at the local level. It fulfills the increasing need to balance global/regional assessments with community level assessments where major decisions against risk are actually taken and implemented.

Dealing with the white death: avalanche risk management for traffic routes.

This article discusses mitigation strategies to protect traffic routes from snow avalanches. Up to now, mitigation of snow avalanches on many roads and railways in the Alps has relied on avalanche sheds, which require large initial investments resulting in high opportunity costs. Therefore, avalanche risk managers have increasingly adopted organizational mitigation measures such as warning systems and closure policies instead. The effectiveness of these measures is, however, greatly dependent on human decisions. In this article, we present a method for optimizing avalanche mitigation for traffic routes in terms of both their risk reduction impact and their net benefit to society. First, we introduce a generic framework for assessing avalanche risk and for quantifying the impact of mitigation. This allows for sound cost-benefit comparisons between alternative mitigation strategies. Second, we illustrate the framework with a case study from Switzerland. Our findings suggest that site-specific characteristics of avalanche paths, as well as the economic importance of a traffic route, are decisive for the choice of optimal mitigation strategies. On routes endangered by few avalanche paths with frequent avalanche occurrences, structural measures are most efficient, whereas reliance on organizational mitigation is often the most appropriate strategy on routes endangered by many paths with infrequent or fuzzy avalanche risk. Finally, keeping a traffic route open may be very important for tourism or the transport industry. Hence, local economic value may promote the use of a hybrid strategy that combines organizational and structural measures to optimize the resource allocation of avalanche risk mitigation.