Exploring Options for Flood Risk Management with Special Focus on Retention Reservoirs

Nejc Bezak, Martina Kovačević, Gregor Johnen, Klaudija Lebar, Vesna Zupanc, Andrej Vidmar and Simon Rusjan
Additional contact information
Nejc Bezak: Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Martina Kovačević: Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
Gregor Johnen: Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45141 Essen, Germany
Klaudija Lebar: Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Vesna Zupanc: Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Andrej Vidmar: Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Simon Rusjan: Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13, issue 18, 1-20

Abstract: Floods are among the most frequent and deadliest natural disasters, and the magnitude and frequency of floods is expected to increase. Therefore, the effects of different flood risk management options need to be evaluated. In this study, afforestation, permeable concrete implementation, and the use of dry and wet retention reservoirs were tested as possible options for urban flood risk reduction in a case study involving the Glinš?ica river catchment (Slovenia). Additionally, the effect of dry and wet reservoirs was investigated at a larger (catchment) scale. Results showed that in the case of afforestation and permeable concrete, large areas are required to achieve notable peak discharge reduction (from a catchment scale point of view). The costs related to the implementation of such measures could be relatively high, and may become even higher than the potential benefits related to the multifunctionality and multi-purpose opportunities of such measures. On the other hand, dry and wet retention reservoirs could provide more significant peak discharge reductions; if appropriate locations are available, such reservoirs could be implemented at acceptable costs for decision makers. However, the results of this study show that reservoir effects quickly reduce with scale. This means that while these measures can have significant local effects, they may have only a minor impact at larger scales. We found that this was also the case for the afforestation and permeable concrete.

Keywords: floods; afforestation; green measures; retention reservoirs; hydrological modelling; flood damage model; hydraulic modelling; permeable concrete (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10099/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10099/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10099-:d:632078

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().