2.1. Traditional Approach to Flood Risk Assessment

First they talk about what is a flood risk assessment you know because that is FRA, we call it as flood risk assessment that is a very basic key tool as a traditional approach in the traditional approach to understand and managing the flood risk.

Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is an essential tool used to analyze and manage the risks associated with flooding. It helps in understanding how floods can impact an area and assists in planning measures to mitigate these risks. In traditional approaches, FRA focuses primarily on quantifiable impacts such as financial losses and physical damages caused by flooding. This method emphasizes numerical data, allowing planners to determine the potential costs and damages more easily.

Think of flood risk assessment like preparing for a storm by checking the weather forecast. Just as you might look at past storms to understand how much rain fell and how strong the winds were to prepare your home, flood risk assessments look at historical flood data to predict future risks and prepare solutions.

So if you look at FRA techniques much of the work has been mostly focused on the quantitative aspects or the target based on how much has been impacted or the cause of them.

Traditional FRA techniques prioritize quantitative data, meaning they rely heavily on measurable aspects of flooding. They focus on the extent of damage, financial impacts, and how these can be quantified in numerical terms. This approach provides a clear picture of the damage and helps in identifying specific areas at risk.

Imagine you own a bakery that was flooded last year. A traditional FRA would calculate how much inventory you lost, the cost of repairs, and the total financial impact on your business, rather than also considering how the flood affected your ability to provide for your family or the memories tied to your shop.

And when it talks about these quantifiable impacts, do not reflect the entire effects of flooding you know that like, for instance, there is not only about the monetary aspects, there is a physical aspect, and there is also to do with the non-monetary aspects of the intangible aspects of it.

One significant limitation of traditional FRA is that it primarily focuses on quantitative variables, often neglecting important qualitative aspects. This means that while we can estimate financial losses or property damage, we may overlook intangible losses, such as the emotional impact on individuals or the loss of cultural heritage. These intangible aspects are difficult to measure but are vital for comprehensive risk assessment.

Consider a family heirloom that is destroyed in a flood. While the financial value of the item can be assessed, what about the emotional pain caused by losing a cherished family memory? This is the intangible loss that traditional assessments might miss.

So when we say about the hazard assessment of any floods that is where the hydrologist they talk about many hydrological models when it is a 1d model the 2d models and which actually talks about the represent the process by which rainfall is converted into the surface runoff.

Hazard assessment is critical in understanding how floods occur and their potential impact. Hydrologists use various models (1D, 2D) to simulate and predict flooding based on rainfall and how that rainwater turns into surface runoff. The models help determine how much water will flow into specific areas during a flood and identify potential flooding hotspots.

Think of these models like a video game that simulates a river's flow. Just as a gamer's strategic decisions affect the game's outcome, hydrologists use data and models to predict how water behaves during different rain events, helping communities understand flood risks.

Whereas in the vulnerability assessment it actually has to it is often assessed using the site-specific indicators or measurements, and this is where the multiple aspects which has to be combined by multi-criteria methods.

Vulnerability assessment involves evaluating how susceptible a community or area is to flooding. This is often done through site-specific indicators like buildings' construction quality, the local population's preparedness, and social factors. By combining various criteria, a clearer picture of the overall vulnerability emerges, allowing for targeted interventions and planning.

Imagine testing a child's resilience in a storm. If they have a sturdy house, emergency supplies, and safety knowledge, they are less vulnerable than a child who lives in a flimsy structure without preparation. Similarly, communities can be assessed for their structural and societal resilience to floods.

But in this kind of conditions we need to look at the culture as an important cultural vulnerability.

Cultural vulnerability refers to the risk of losing cultural heritage and identity due to flooding. This is often overlooked in traditional assessments, but it is crucial for understanding the total impact of floods on a community. When cultural sites are damaged or destroyed, not only is property loss incurred, but also a loss of historical significance and community identity.

Consider a historical church that is central to a community's identity. If it were flooded and destroyed, the financial loss would be significant, but so would the loss of a place where generations gathered for important life events like weddings and baptisms, representing a deep-rooted cultural connection.

Where we call about R=risk=hazard when vulnerability adds on to it that is where the risk component comes to it and this is the risk perception approach how people how the communities percept this approach you know the risk.

Risk perception involves understanding how individuals and communities view flood risks. This approach recognizes that people's feelings, beliefs, and past experiences influence their awareness and preparedness for flooding. It highlights the importance of community engagement in shaping effective flood risk management strategies.

If a community has experienced multiple floods, they may be more cautious and prepared for future occurrences than a community that has never faced a flood. It's like how people who live in hurricane-prone areas often have emergency kits ready in their homes, while those in regions without such experiences may not feel the same urgency.

--