Figure - available from: Natural Hazards
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Flow chart of the floodplain evaluation matrix (FEM). In step I., different data sets are collected and analyzed. The next two main steps (II. and III.) represent essential tasks leading to the first two FEM outputs: delineated floodplains and selected FEM parameters. In step IV, the first three tasks (1., 2., 3.) are mandatory, while all other tasks are optional, dependent on research questions or goals. In this study, all options were applied and led to results/outputs (1., 2., 3a., 3b., 3c., 4). The available data and selected tasks for this study are highlighted by the dotted rectangle, while optional data and tasks are presented in italics
Source publication
This study presents a method to investigate the influence of active floodplains on flood protection, ecology, and socio-economics. We used and further developed the Floodplain Evaluation Matrix (FEM) to systematically assess the Danube River, known as the most international river worldwide. The study also aims to develop a method applicable to othe...
Similar publications
Urban flood risk management has been a hot issue worldwide due to the increased frequency and severity of floods occurring in cities. In this paper, an innovative modelling approach based on the Bayesian convolutional neural network (BCNN) was proposed to simulate the urban flood inundation, and to provide a reliable prediction of specific water de...
Citations
... It is possible to assess all three floodplain types with this method, and determine their value using the set of parameters. The active and potential floodplains identified in this paper were subsequently evaluated using the FEM; the results of this evaluation can be found in Eder et al. [49]. In this way, a basis for decision making is created, which could lead to the reconnection of identified potential floodplains, and support a fundamental principle of flood risk management, to providing more space for rivers [50,51]. ...
... Our developed method differs from previous methods, e.g., [1][2][3], as we introduce two delineation criteria to identify the main active floodplains (with the highest retention effects): (i) ratio of width Floodplain /width Channel ; (ii) minimum size. In a further step [49], we applied the Floodplain Evaluation Matrix (FEM), which requires delineated floodplains with a defined start-and endpoint. The two delineation criteria can vary and be adapted depending on the research question and the characteristics of the investigated river (e.g., basin size, river type). ...
... The second criterion is the minimum size, which we used to distinguish two groups of floodplains that fulfilled the chosen width ratio of Width Floodplain /Width Channel . This differentiation was required, since we focused on floodplains with the largest retention effects in the second stage of our research [49]. We assigned all floodplains larger than 500 ha to the 1st group. ...
Floodplains are a fundamental source of multiple functions and services. Despite their various benefits, a dramatic reduction in floodplain areas has occurred in most large river systems over the last few centuries, and is still ongoing. Human modifications (such as river regulation, dam construction, and land use changes) due to economic growth, increasing population size, etc., were and still are drivers of major floodplain losses. Therefore, studies offering solutions for floodplain preservation and restoration are of great importance for sustainable floodplain management. This paper presents methods to identify active, former, and potential floodplains, and their application to the Danube River. We used hydraulic data, historical sources, and recent geospatial data to delineate the three floodplain types. Fifty hydraulically active floodplains larger than 500 ha were identified. According to our results, the extent of Danube floodplains has been reduced by around 79%. With the support of different representatives from the Danube countries, we identified 24 potential floodplains. However, the share of active and potential floodplains in relation to former floodplains ranges between 5% and 49%, demonstrating the huge potential for additional restoration sites. This analysis contributes to an understanding of the current and the past floodplain situation, increases awareness of the dramatic floodplain loss along the Danube, and serves as a basis for future floodplain management.
Lateral connectivity between rivers and terrestrial landscapes is critical for both river and landscape health. Due to widespread anthropogenic degradation of riverscapes, river management is aiming to connect rivers to floodplains, riparian zones, and wetlands, putting a spotlight on lateral connectivity. However, there is currently no consensus on how to conceptualize and study lateral connectivity in rivers across disciplines. Here, we review lateral connectivity between riverscapes and terrestrial landscapes. We focus on the natural sciences, considering hydrology, geomorphology, ecology and biogeochemistry, but also consider social connectivity and the management and restoration of lateral connectivity. We emphasize the importance of considering the bidirectional nature of lateral connectivity, operating both into and out of river channels and the balance between these directions. The resulting “lateral connectivity balance” provides a framework to understand natural spatial and temporal variability in connectivity. Anthropogenic impacts have swung the balance of lateral connectivity, enhancing the transport of materials into and through river networks while suppressing fluxes from rivers to adjacent landscapes. We conclude that further research at the interfaces between the aquatic and terrestrial components of riverscapes is critical to advance our conceptual understanding of river and catchment systems. We propose that such research should be framed within the paradigm of “rebalancing” lateral connectivity, explicitly recognizing the natural bidirectionality of laterally connecting processes, the significance of the hydrologic, geomorphic, and biologic functions they support, and the value to society of the ecosystem services and climate change resilience they provide.
