Articles | Volume 3, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-49-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-49-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
13 Mar 2020
Research article |
| 13 Mar 2020
| 13 Mar 2020
Communicating complex forecasts: an analysis of the approach in Nepal's flood early warning system
Mirianna Budimir
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Practical Action Consulting, Practical Action, Rugby, UK
Amy Donovan
Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Sarah Brown
Practical Action Consulting, Practical Action, Rugby, UK
Puja Shakya
Practical Action Consulting, Practical Action, Kathmandu, Nepal
Dilip Gautam
Practical Action Consulting, Practical Action, Kathmandu, Nepal
Madhab Uprety
Practical Action Consulting, Practical Action, Kathmandu, Nepal
Michael Cranston
RAB Consultants, Perth, UK
Alison Sneddon
Practical Action Consulting, Practical Action, Rugby, UK
Paul Smith
Waternumbers, Lancaster, UK
Sumit Dugar
Practical Action Consulting, Practical Action, Kathmandu, Nepal
Related authors
Mirianna Budimir, Alison Sneddon, Issy Nelder, Sarah Brown, Amy Donovan, and Linda Speight
Geosci. Commun., 5, 151–175, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-5-151-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-5-151-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper extracts key learning from two case studies (India and Mozambique), outlining solutions and approaches to challenges in developing forecast products. These lessons and solutions can be used by forecasters and practitioners to support the development of useful, appropriate, and co-designed forecast information for institutional decision-makers to support more effective early action in advance of disasters.
Joel C. Gill, Faith E. Taylor, Melanie J. Duncan, Solmaz Mohadjer, Mirianna Budimir, Hassan Mdala, and Vera Bukachi
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 187–202, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-187-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-187-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper draws on the experiences of seven early career scientists, in different sectors and contexts, to explore the improved integration of natural hazard science into broader efforts to reduce the likelihood and impacts of disasters. We include recommendations for natural hazard scientists, to improve education, training, and research design and to strengthen institutional, financial, and policy actions. We hope to provoke discussion and catalyse changes that will help reduce disaster risk.
Keith Beven, Trevor Page, Paul Smith, Ann Kretzschmar, Barry Hankin, and Nick Chappell
Proc. IAHS, 385, 129–134, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-129-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-129-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a method of deciding when a hydrological model might be fit for purpose given the limitations of the data that are available for model evaluation. In this case the purpose is to reproduce the peak flows for an application that is concerned with evaluating the effect of natural flood management measures on flood peaks. It is shown that while all the models fail to pass the test at all time steps, there is an ensemble of models that pass for the hydrograph peaks.
Trevor Page, Paul Smith, Keith Beven, Francesca Pianosi, Fanny Sarrazin, Susana Almeida, Liz Holcombe, Jim Freer, Nick Chappell, and Thorsten Wagener
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 2523–2534, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2523-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2523-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This publication provides an introduction to the CREDIBLE Uncertainty Estimation (CURE) toolbox. CURE offers workflows for a variety of uncertainty estimation methods. One of its most important features is the requirement that all of the assumptions on which a workflow analysis depends be defined. This facilitates communication with potential users of an analysis. An audit trail log is produced automatically from a workflow for future reference.
Mirianna Budimir, Alison Sneddon, Issy Nelder, Sarah Brown, Amy Donovan, and Linda Speight
Geosci. Commun., 5, 151–175, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-5-151-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-5-151-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper extracts key learning from two case studies (India and Mozambique), outlining solutions and approaches to challenges in developing forecast products. These lessons and solutions can be used by forecasters and practitioners to support the development of useful, appropriate, and co-designed forecast information for institutional decision-makers to support more effective early action in advance of disasters.
Enrico Tubaldi, Christopher J. White, Edoardo Patelli, Stergios Aristoteles Mitoulis, Gustavo de Almeida, Jim Brown, Michael Cranston, Martin Hardman, Eftychia Koursari, Rob Lamb, Hazel McDonald, Richard Mathews, Richard Newell, Alonso Pizarro, Marta Roca, and Daniele Zonta
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 795–812, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-795-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-795-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Bridges are critical infrastructure components of transport networks. A large number of these critical assets cross or are adjacent to waterways and are therefore exposed to the potentially devastating impact of floods. This paper discusses a series of issues and areas where improvements in research and practice are required in the context of risk assessment and management of bridges exposed to flood hazard, with the ultimate goal of guiding future efforts in improving bridge flood resilience.
Joel C. Gill, Faith E. Taylor, Melanie J. Duncan, Solmaz Mohadjer, Mirianna Budimir, Hassan Mdala, and Vera Bukachi
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 187–202, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-187-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-187-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper draws on the experiences of seven early career scientists, in different sectors and contexts, to explore the improved integration of natural hazard science into broader efforts to reduce the likelihood and impacts of disasters. We include recommendations for natural hazard scientists, to improve education, training, and research design and to strengthen institutional, financial, and policy actions. We hope to provoke discussion and catalyse changes that will help reduce disaster risk.
Paul J. Smith, Sarah Brown, and Sumit Dugar
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 423–437, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-423-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-423-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Risks from flooding are of global importance. Experience gained in Nepal is presented to demonstrate that empowering the communities impacted by flooding to be active participants in risk mitigation can have significant positive impacts. In part this is achieved through community involvement in the provision of warnings based on observations of river flow upstream. The success of simple, robust methodology for the early provision of such warnings based on predicting future river flows is shown.
K. J. Beven, S. Almeida, W. P. Aspinall, P. D. Bates, S. Blazkova, E. Borgomeo, K. Goda, J. C. Phillips, M. Simpson, P. J. Smith, D. B. Stephenson, T. Wagener, M. Watson, and K. L. Wilkins
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2015-295, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2015-295, 2016
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Uncertainties in natural hazard risk assessment are generally dominated by the sources arising from lack of knowledge or understanding of the processes involved. This is Part 2 of 2 papers reviewing these epistemic uncertainties and covers different areas of natural hazards including landslides and debris flows, dam safety, droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic ash clouds and pyroclastic flows, and wind storms. It is based on the work of the UK CREDIBLE research consortium.
K. J. Beven, W. P. Aspinall, P. D. Bates, E. Borgomeo, K. Goda, J. W. Hall, T. Page, J. C. Phillips, J. T. Rougier, M. Simpson, D. B. Stephenson, P. J. Smith, T. Wagener, and M. Watson
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-7333-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-7333-2015, 2015
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Uncertainties in natural hazard risk assessment are generally dominated by the sources arising from lack of knowledge or understanding of the processes involved. This is Part 1 of 2 papers reviewing these epistemic uncertainties that can be difficult to constrain, especially in terms of event or scenario probabilities. It is based on the work of the CREDIBLE research consortium on Risk and Uncertainty in Natural Hazards.
D. Leedal, A. H. Weerts, P. J. Smith, and K. J. Beven
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 177–185, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-177-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-177-2013, 2013
Related subject area
Subject: Open geoscience | Keyword: Risk communication
Seismic risk: the biases of earthquake media coverage
Maud H. Devès, Marion Le Texier, Hugues Pécout, and Claude Grasland
Geosci. Commun., 2, 125–141, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2-125-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2-125-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Exploring a corpus of 320 888 news articles published by 32 worldwide newspapers in 2015, this paper shows the following: news covers a very small proportion of the total number of earthquakes occurring in a year; the duration of coverage is very short, which does not allow for proper coverage of long-term issues; and there is a typical framing of the news about earthquakes that introduces major biases in representation, impeding proper appropriation of the seismic risk by the public.
Cited articles
Bell, H. M. and Tobin, G. A.: Efficient and effective? The 100-year flood in
the communication and perception of flood risk, Environ. Hazards-UK, 7,
302–311, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.08.004, 2007.
Beven, K., Lamb, R., Leedal, D., and Hunter, N.: Communicating uncertainty
in flood inundation mapping: a case study, Int. J. River Basin Manag., 13,
285–295, https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2014.917318, 2015.
Bhandari, D., Uprety, M., Ghimire, G., Kumal, B., Pokharel L., and Khadka P.:
Nepal flood 2017: Wake up call for effective preparedness and response,
Practical Action, Rugby, UK, 5 pp., 2018.
Brown, S., Budimir, M., Sneddon, A., Lau, D., Shakya, P., and Crawford, S.:
Gender Transformative Early Warning Systems: Experience from Nepal and Peru,
Practical Action, Rugby, UK, 21 pp., 2019.
Bruen, M., Krahe, P., Zappa, M., Olsson, J., Vehvilainen, B., Kok, K., and
Daamen, K.: Visualizing flood forecasting uncertainty: some current European
EPS platforms – COST731 working group 3, Atmos. Sci. Lett., 11, 92–99,
https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.258, 2010.
Budimir, M. and Brown, S.: Communicating extreme weather event attribution:
Research from India and Kenya: Full report, Practical Action Consulting,
Rugby, UK, 16–76, 2017.
Budimir, M., Brown, S., and Dugar, S.: Communicating risk information and
early warnings: bridging the gap between science and practice, Youth
Science-Policy Interface Publication: Special Edition, Disaster Risk
Reduction: a road of opportunities, 13–18, available at:
https://www.preventionweb.net/go/53923 (last access: January 2020), 2017.
Cloke, H. and Pappenberger, F.: Ensemble flood forecasting: a review, J.
Hydrol., 375, 613–626, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.06.005,
2009.
Cools, J., Innocenti, D., and O'Brien, S.: Lessons from flood early warning
systems, Environ. Sci. Policy, 58, 117–122,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.006, 2016.
Demeritt, D., Nobert, S., Cloke, H., and Pappenberger, F.: Challenges in
communicating and using ensembles in operational flood forecasting,
Meteorol. Appl., 17, 209–222, https://doi.org/10.1002/met.194, 2010.
Demeritt, D., Nobert, S., Cloke, H. L., and Pappenberger, F.: The European
Flood Alert System and the communication, perception, and use of ensemble
predictions for operational flood risk management, Hydrol. Process.,
27, 147–157, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9419, 2013.
Donovan, A., Eiser, J. R., and Sparks, R. S. J.: Scientists' views about lay
perceptions of volcanic hazard and risk, J. Appl. Volcanol., 3,
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13617-014-0015-5, 2014.
Donovan, A., Eiser, J. R., and Sparks, R. S. J.: Expert opinion and
probabilistic volcanic risk assessment, J. Risk Res., 20, 693–710,
https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2015.1115425, 2015.
Doyle, E. E., McClure, J., Johnston, D. M., and Paton, D.: Communicating
likelihoods and probabilities in forecasts of volcanic eruptions, J.
Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 272, 1–15,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2013.12.006, 2014.
Eiser, J. R., Bostrom, A., Burton, I., Johnston, D. M., McClure, J., Paton,
D., Van Der Pligt, J., and White, M. P.: Risk interpretation and action: A
conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards, Int. J. Disaster Risk
Re., 1, 5–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.002, 2012.
Fakhruddin, S., Kawasaki, A., and Babel, M. S.: Community responses to flood
early warning system: Case study in Kaijuri Union, Bangladesh, Int. J.
Disaster Risk Re., 14, 323–331,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.08.004, 2015.
Faulkner, H., Parker, D., Green, C., and Beven, K.: Developing a
translational discourse to communicate uncertainty in flood risk between
science and the practitioner, Ambio, 36, 692–704,
https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[692:DATDTC]2.0.CO;2, 2007.
Gigerenzer, G., Hertwig, R., Broek, E. V. D., Fasolo, B., and Katsikopoulos,
K. V.: “A 30 % chance of rain tomorrow”: How does the public understand
probabilistic weather forecasts?, Risk Anal., 25, 623–629,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00608.x, 2005.
Gigerenzer, G., Gaissmaier, W., Kurz-Milcke, E., Schwartz, L. M., and Woloshin, S.: Helping
doctors and patients make sense of health statistics, Psychol. Sci. Publ.
Int., 8, 53–96, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2008.00033.x,
2007.
Hagemeier-Klose, M. and Wagner, K.: Evaluation of flood hazard maps in print and web
mapping services as information tools in flood risk communication, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 563–574, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-9-563-2009, 2009.
Haynes, K., Barclay, J., and Pidgeon, N.: Volcanic hazard communication using
maps: An evaluation of their effectiveness, Bull. Volcanol., 70, 123–138,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-007-0124-7, 2007.
IFRC: Manual for forecast based financing: Standard Operating Procedures for
Forecast-Based Financing, International Federation of the Red Cross, available at:
http://www.climatecentre.org/downloads/files/06_Standard_Operating_Procedures_For_Forecast_Based_Financing.pdf (last access: 20 November 2018), 2016.
ISET, ISET-N, Practical Action and Zurich: Urgent case for recovery: what we
can learn from the August 2014 Karnali River floods in Nepal?, Zurich,
Switzerland, 31 pp., 2015.
Keller, C., Siegrist, M., and Gutscher, H.: The role of the affect and
availability heuristics in risk communication, Risk Anal., 26, 631–639,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00773.x, 2006.
Kelman, I. and
Glantz, M.: Early Warning Systems Defined, in: Reducing Disaster: Early
Warning Systems For Climate Change, edited by: Singh, A. and Zommers, Z.,
89–108, Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8598-3_5, 2014.
Macherera, M. and Chimbari, M. J.: A review of studies on community based
early warning systems, Jàmbá, J. Disaster Risk Stud., 8, 1–11,
https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v8i1.206, 2016.
Merz, B., Thieken, A., and Gocht, M.: Flood risk mapping at the local scale:
concepts and challenges, in: Flood risk management in Europe: Innovation in
Policy and Practice, edited by: Begum, S., Stive, M. J. F., and Hall, J. W.,
Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 231–251, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4200-3_13, 2007.
Mileti, D. S. and Sorensen, J. H.: Communication of emergency public warnings:
A social science perspective and state-of-the-art assessment, Oak Ridge
National Lab., TN, USA, 71–83, 1990.
Morss, R. E., Demuth, J. L., and Lazo, J. K.: Communicating uncertainty in
weather forecasts: a survey of the U.S. public, Weather Forecast., 23,
974–991, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008WAF2007088.1, 2008.
Moser, S. C.: Communicating climate change: history, challenges, processes
and future directions, WIREs Clim. Change, 1, 31–53,
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.11, 2010.
NCVST (Nepal Climate Vulnerability Study Team): Vulnerability through the
Eyes of Vulnerable: Climate Change Induced Uncertainties and Nepal's
Development Predicaments, Nepal Climate Vulnerability Study Team,
ISET-International, Kathmandu, Nepal, 9–30, 2009.
Pappenberger, F., Stephens, E., Thielen, J., Salamon, P., Demeritt, D.,
Andel, S. J., Wetterhall, F., and Alfieri, L.: Visualizing probabilistic flood
forecast information: expert preferences and perceptions of best practice in
uncertainty communication, Hydrol. Process., 27, 132–146,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9253, 2013.
Paton, D.: Risk communication and natural hazard mitigation: how trust
influences its effectiveness, Int. J. Global Environ., 8, 2–16,
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGENVI.2008.017256, 2008.
Pidgeon, N. and Fischhoff, B.: The role of social and decision sciences in
communicating uncertain climate risks, Nat. Clim. Change, 1, 35–41,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1080, 2011.
Practical Action: Flood Early Warning Systems in Practice: experiences of
Nepal, Practical Action, Kathmandu, Nepal, 2016.
Rogers, D. and Tsirkunov, V.: Costs and benefits of early warning systems:
Global Assessment Report, World Bank, 1–16, available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2011/en/bgdocs/Rogers_&_Tsirkunov_2011.pdf (last access: 11 March 2020), 2011.
Samaddar, S., Misra,
B., and Tatano, H.: Flood Risk Awareness and Preparedness: The Role of
Trust in Information Sources, in: 2012 IEEE International Conference on
Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), 3099–3104, Seoul, Korea (South), IEEE,
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.2012.6378267, 2012.
Scienseed: Communicating climate change and biodiversity to policy makers,
Bern Convention (Council of Europe), Madrid, Spain, 2–22, 2016.
Segoni,
S., Rosi, A., Fanti, R., Gallucci, A., Monni, A., and Casagli, N.: A
Regional-Scale Landslide Warning System Based on 20 Years of Operational
Experience, Water, 10, 1297, https://doi.org/10.3390/w10101297, 2018.
Smith, P. J., Brown, S., and Dugar, S.: Community-based early warning systems for
flood risk mitigation in Nepal, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 423–437, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-423-2017, 2017.
Sorensen, J. H.: Hazard Warning Systems: Review of 20 Years of Progress, Nat.
Hazards Rev., 1, 119–125,
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2000)1:2(119), 2000.
Star, S. L. and Griesemer, J. R.: Institutional Ecology, “Translations” and
Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of
Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39, Soc. Stud. Sci., 19, 387–420,
https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001, 1989.
Thieken, A. H., Kreibich, H., Müller, M., and Merz, B.: Coping with
floods: preparedness, response and recovery of flood-affected residents in
Germany in 2002, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 52, 1016–1037,
https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.52.5.1016, 2007.
UNISDR: Developing Early Warning Systems: A Checklist, available at:
http://www.unisdr.org/2006/ppew/info-resources/ewc3/checklist/English.pdf
(last access: 12 November 2018), 2006.
UNISDR: Global Assessment of Risk 2015, available at:
https://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2015/en/home/index.html
(last access: 12 November 2018), 2015.
Uprety, M.: Moving towards Forecast Based Flood Preparedness in Nepal:
Linking Science of Predictions to Preparedness Actions, Piloting Forecast
Based Financing (FbF) In Nepal, ResearchGate,
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.21044.71043, 2018.
Uprety, M., Gautam, D., Shakya, P., Dugar, S., Neupane, S., Kanel, D.,
Kshetri, M., Kharbuja, R., Parajuli, B., Sharma, R., and Acharya, S.: Moving
towards Forecast Based Flood Preparedness in Nepal: Linking Science of
Predictions to Preparedness Actions, Geophys. Res. Abstr.,
EGU2018-7393, EGU General Assembly 2018, Vienna, Austria, 2018.
Visschers, V. H., Meertens, R. M., Passchier, W. W., and De Vries, N. N.:
Probability information in risk communication: a review of the research
literature, Risk Anal., 29, 267–287,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01137.x, 2009.
Wachinger, G., Renn, O., Begg, C., and Kuhlicke, C.: The risk perception
paradox – implications for governance and communication of natural hazards,
Risk Anal., 33, 1049–1065,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01942.x, 2013.
Wilkinson, E., Budimir, M., Ahmed, A. K., and Ouma, G.: Climate information and services in BRACED countries, Resilience Intel, available at: https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/10128.pdf (last access: 11 March 2020), 2015.
WMO: Guidelines on communicating forecast uncertainty, WMO/TDNo.
1422, Geneva, 2008.
Short summary
Early warning systems for natural hazards have the potential to save lives and improve people's resilience to disasters. However, challenges remain in disseminating and communicating more complex warnings with longer lead times to decision makers and individuals at risk. Research was undertaken to analyse and understand the current flood early warning system in Nepal, considering available data and forecasts, information flows, early warning dissemination, and decision-making for early action.
Early warning systems for natural hazards have the potential to save lives and improve people's...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint