För modellering av risker vid naturkatastrofer är GIS ett grundläggande verktyg. HAZUS-MH är ett GIS-baserat riskanalysverktyg, utvecklat av den amerikanska myndigheten FEMA. HAZUS-MH har en välutvecklad metodologi för modellering av naturkatastrofer, vilket är något som efterfrågas på europeisk nivå inom ramen för översvämningsdirektivet. Därför föreligger ett intresse för implementering av HAZUS-MH för icke amerikanska förhållanden. Denna studies syfte är att fördjupa kunskaperna för implementering och användning av HAZUS-MH i Sverige. För att möjliggöra implementering behöver svenska data bearbetas för att matcha datastrukturen i HAZUS-MH. Metoden innefattar en litteraturgenomgång av tidigare studier och manualer samt databearbetning. Erfarenheter av databearbetningen samlades in för att bygga upp en manual för databearbetning samt för att utvärdera möjligheter och hinder för implementering i Sverige. Resultatet visar hur systemkrav och övriga inställningar för användning av HAZUS-MH ser ut. De övriga inställningarna berör koppling till HAZUS-MH databas med mera. För anpassning av svenska data beskrivs databehov (administrativ indelning, inventeringsdata och hydrologiska data), data-bearbetning (rekommenderad arbetsgång för att fylla shape-filer och tabeller med information) och dataimport. Vidare redogör resultatet för tillämpningen av HAZUS-MH med svenska data. Denna studie identifierar flera möjligheter hos HAZUS-MH. Möjligheterna att skapa risk- och sårbarhetskartor samt dataimport är de största. Tidsåtgången för att utföra anpassningen av svenska data var runt 15 arbetsdagar. Denna studie uppskattar att med hjälp av manualer för anpass-ningen kan denna tid kortas till 3 arbetsdagar. Om processen att anpassa svenska data automat-iseras kan tiden kortas ytterligare. Den största barriären enligt denna studie är insamling av data. För att kunna använda HAZUS-MH fulla potential behövs omfattande datainsamling. En annan barriär är begränsningar i hydro-logiska data, det är nödvändigt med externa hydrologiska data för en så korrekt analys som möjligt. Vidare forskning inom området bör enligt denna studie fokusera på metoder för att samla in data samt hur en automatisk process för att anpassa data skulle kunna se ut. / When modeling risks for natural disasters, GIS is a fundamental tool. HAZUS-MH is a GIS-based risk analysis tool, developed by the American authority FEMA. HAZUS-MH has a well-developed methodology for modeling natural disasters, which is something that is demanded at European level within the flood directive framework. Hence, there is an interest in implementing HAZUS-MH for non-US conditions. The aim of the study is to deepen the knowledge for the implementation and use of HAZUS-MH in Sweden. To enable implementation, Swedish data is required to be processed to match the data structure of HAZUS-MH. Methods for this study are a literature review of previous studies and manuals and data processing. Experiences of the data processing were collected to build a manual for data processing and to evaluate opportunities and obstacles for implementation in Sweden. The result shows how system requirements and other settings for using HAZUS-MH look like. The other settings include connection to the HAZUS-MH database et cetera. For adaption of Swedish data, requirements including data (administrative division, inventory data and hydrological data), data processing (recommended workflow to fill shape-files and attribute tables with information) and data import are described. The result also describes the application of HAZUS-MH with Swedish data. This study identifies several possibilities of HAZUS-MH. The opportunities for creating risk and vulnerability maps and data import are the largest. The time required to perform the adaptation of Swedish data was approximately 15 working days. This study estimates that with the help of manuals for the adaption, this time could be shortened to approximately 3 working days. If the process of adapting data is automated, this time could be shortened further. The largest obstacle under this study is the data collection process, to use the full potential of HAZUS-MH extensive data collection is needed. Another obstacle is the limitation of hydrological data, external hydrological data is necessary to get as accurate analysis as possible. Further research in the field should, according to this study, focus on methods of collecting data and development of an automatic process for managing data.

In this study, Hazus-MH (v 2.1 SP 2) flood-loss estimation tools were assessed for their sensitivity to an array of different building and model parameters. The purpose of this study is to help guide users of the Hazus-MH flood-loss modeling tool in the selection of most appropriate model parameters. Six model parameters (square footage of the building, building age, construction types, foundation types, first floor heights, and the number of stories in the building) were assessed for their impacts on flood losses using the Hazus-MH user defined and aggregate flood-loss models. Building stock databases for these analyses were developed using county assessor records from two Illinois counties. A validation assessment was also performed using observed flood-damage survey data collected after the 2011 Mississippi River Flood which inundated the Olive Branch Area in Alexander County, Illinois. This analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of the detailed Hazus-MH User Defined Facility (UDF) flood-loss modeling tool. The foundation types and its associated first floor heights and number of stories in the building were found to substantially impact flood-loss estimates using the Hazus-MH flood-loss modeling tool. The model building parameters square footage, building age and construction type had little or no effect on the flood-loss estimates. The validation assessment reveled Hazus-MH UDF flood-loss modeling tool is capable of providing a reasonable estimate of actual flood losses. The validation assessment showed the modeled results to be within 23% of actual losses. The validation study results attained in this study using the detailed UDF flood-loss modeling tool where more realistic (within 23% of actual losses versus > 50% of actual losses) than previous Hazus-MH flood-loss validation assessments. The flood-loss estimates could be further improved by modifying or choosing a more region specific depth-damage curve, using higher resolution DEM and improving the flood-depth grid by incorporating more detailed flood elevation data or estimates using detailed hydraulic models that better reflects the local inundation conditions.

This study combined flood-frequency analysis, 1-D (one-dimensional) hydraulic modeling using HEC-RAS, and flood-loss modeling using FEMA's Hazus-MH (Hazards U.S. Multi-Hazard) in order to: 1) quantify how different flood-frequency methodologies affect flood-risk assessments, and 2) quantify the impacts of different floodplain-management scenarios along the Middle Mississippi River (MMR). The nine scenarios tested here included various combinations of flood-frequency methodology, buyouts, and levee configurations. The levee configurations analyzed included: 1) current levee configuration, 2) no levees, 3) a 1500 m levee setback, 4) a 1000 m levee setback, and 5) a customized levee setback designed to maximize protection around existing infrastructure. Two study reaches were chosen: (1) an Urban Study Reach within St. Clair and northern Monroe Counties, IL, with levees designed to withstand the 500-year flood and (2) an Agricultural Study Reach within Union and Jackson Counties, IL, with <100-year levees. A flood-frequency analysis was completed for the St. Louis, MO gauging station, and detailed building inventories were used to estimate flood losses on a structure-by-structure basis (Hazus-MH UDF analysis) for an array of floods ranging from the 2- to the 500-year events. These flood-loss estimates were combined with a stochastic levee-failure model. Finally, estimated flood damages from Hazus-MH were integrated across the full range of flood recurrences in order to calculate expected annual damage (EAD). This study's flood-frequency analysis and corresponding flood-loss assessment demonstrate how differences in flood-frequency methodology can significantly impact flood-risk assessments. EAD based on the UMRSFFS (Upper Mississippi River System Flow Frequency Study) flood frequencies was 68% ($45.4 million) lower than EAD based on this study's flood frequencies. This decrease in EAD demonstrates that the UMRSFFS flood frequencies and corresponding stages may significantly underestimate flood risk within the Urban Study Reach. The 100-year discharge in the UMRSFFS appears to be underestimated by an estimated 17% (187,000 cfs), resulting in a 10% (1.6 m) underestimation of the 100-year flood level. Given the magnitude of the EAD, discharge, and stage differences documented here, a reanalysis of the MMR flood frequencies, flood profiles, and flood maps should be considered. The hydraulic modeling completed here showed that levee setbacks and levee removal successfully reduce stages for all recurrence intervals. For the 100-year flood, average reductions ranged from 0.20 m for a 1000 m levee setback to 1.61 m with levees removed. In general, stage reductions increased with increasing discharge and with increasing setback distance. The flood-level reductions are attributed to increased floodwater storage and conveyance across the reconnected floodplain. Compared to the current conditions, the levee setback and levee removal scenarios tested here reduced flood losses for large, infrequent flooding events but increased flood losses for smaller, more frequent flood events. When combined with buyouts of unprotected structures, levee setbacks reduced flood losses for all recurrence intervals. The 1000 m and 1500 m levee setbacks required buyouts in order to reduce EAD; however, a levee setback carefully planned around existing high-value structures reduced EAD with or without buyouts. The planned levee setback configuration combined with buyouts resulted in the largest decreases in EAD: a $16.8 million (55%) decrease in the Urban Study Reach and an $8.3 million (93%) decrease in the Agricultural Study Reach. Overall, this project showed that levee setbacks in combination with buyouts are an economically viable approach for flood-risk reduction along the study reaches and likely elsewhere where levees are widely employed for flood control. Designing a levee setback around existing high-value infrastructure can maximize the benefit of the setback while simultaneously minimizing the costs. Potentially, this type of planned levee configuration could be used as a template for the replacement of aging or failing levee systems.

Manitoba’s flooding is one of the principal sources of costs associated with flood disasters. Despite the tremendous financial investments in structural mitigation, flood cost, continue to rise. Currently at the national and provincial level, there exists no standardized operational framework and tool for flood risk assessment. The primary role of this research was two-fold. First, Hazus-MH a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) tool was evaluated as a potential flood-loss estimation model in a Manitoba context. Secondly, to examine the application of a QRA tool in policy, a face-to-face questionnaire was completed with flood experts in municipal and provincial government and with consultants. The study results suggested that Hazus-MH has the potential to be applied as a standard QRA tool in Manitoba. This research found that developing a standard QRA tool in Manitoba, would empower communication between decision-makers, centralize data to support disaster planning, and reduce the cost of recovery. / May 2016

Determining where people are most likely to suffer losses and have difficulty in evacuating from a hurricane is important to developing a hurricane response strategy. This thesis proposes a methodology for modeling and assessing evacuation vulnerability to a specific hurricane and applies this method to study Pinellas County, Florida. The vulnerability of Pinellas County to evacuation problems and the degree of loss that may be suffered from a hurricane is quantified in the Hurricane Evacuation Vulnerability Index. This index is the sum of three indices that represent social, transportation, and geophysical aspects of hazards research. Social vulnerability is assessed with an existing social vulnerability model that uses census data to locate areas where people will have difficulty evacuating based on demographic variables. Areas where people are vulnerable to traffic problems due to the condition of the evacuation routes are identified with a model developed using GIS. The degree of damage these areas may suffer from a specific hurricane is modeled using a tightly coupled GIS program, HAZUS-MH. These loss estimates are used to identify areas where evacuation may be necessary. The Hurricane Evacuation Vulnerability Index is mapped to show the areas that are most vulnerable to evacuation problems and may suffer losses to the built environment and subsequent human displacement. The Hurricane Evacuation Vulnerability Index is a valuable tool for emergency planning. The results are useful in allocating and directing resources to facilitate the evacuation of vulnerable areas. Emergency management officials can prepare evacuation plans based on the modeled results. Traffic management strategies can be implemented to reduce traffic congestion along evacuation routes. Transportation resources, such as buses, can be directed to areas where people do not have the resources to evacuate.

By combining FEMA's HAZUS-MH (Hazards U.S. Multi-Hazard) flood-loss estimation software and the HEC-RAS hydraulic modeling package, this study was able to quantify potential beneficial and adverse impacts of flood-control and navigational structures along the Middle Mississippi River (MMR; between Mississippi-Missouri River confluence and Thebes, IL). The goal of this investigation was to assess changes in water-surface elevations and associated flood losses to: 1) quantify the potential exposure of flooding under different flood-control configurations along the Middle Mississippi River (MMR), and 2) assess the relative contributions of various engineered structures and flood-loss strategies to potential flood losses. Assessment of the impact of engineering structures was accomplished by modeling five scenarios for the 100- and 500- year floods: 1) current MMR levee configuration (levee protecting for ≤50-year flood); 2) removal of all flood-control structures on the MMR; 3) increasing the height of levees and floodwalls in metropolitan St. Louis to protect urban areas to the 500-year flood level while simultaneously removing all agricultural levees downstream; 4A) a less engineered MMR channel and floodplain with fewer flood control and navigation structures, simulating conditions from 65 years ago (1942-1947) with 1940's levees; and 4B) a less engineered MMR channel and floodplain with fewer flood control and navigation structures, simulating conditions from 65 years ago (1942-1947) with current levee configuration. Comparison of scenarios 2 and 3 relative to scenario 1 allows for quantitative assessment of the flood-control structures on stages and flood losses. Results from scenario 2 revealed that removing all levees along the MMR reduces the average stages from 2.2 m (100-year) to 2.5 m (500-year, but also increased economic and social impacts relative to scenario 1. Scenario 3 revealed that removing agricultural levees downstream of St. Louis on the MMR decreased stages by 1.4 m (100- and 500-year); however, flood losses for the 100-year flood were increased. Flood losses for the 500-year flood were decreased relative to scenario 1. These results suggest that agricultural levees along the MMR protect against medium size floods (50- or 100-year flood) but cause more damage than they prevent during large floods such as the 500-year flood. Comparison of scenarios 4A and 4B relative to scenario 1 allows for a quantitative assessment of river engineering structures and modern buildings constructed over the last 65 years. In scenarios 4A and 4B, a less engineered river decreased stages by 1.2 m (for the 100-year flood) relative to scenario 1. In scenario 4A, the 1940's levees expose modern buildings in the floodplain to flooding, causing economic building losses to increase; however, in scenario 4B, current levee configuration protects modern buildings in the floodplain from flooding causing, economic building losses to decrease. If the current flood-control structures were not built, it is likely that the land in the floodplain for scenarios 4A and 4B would not be developed and the land used would be more flood-tolerant. Sensitivity analyses were run to assess the impact of using the default HAZUS-MH national-level data; this was done by comparing results produced by using aggregate analysis (coarse data) versus results using UDF analysis (detailed data). The aggregate analysis estimated 51% fewer buildings damaged than the UDF analysis. Conversely, the aggregate analysis increased the economic building losses by 51% relative to the UDF analysis. Although collecting local data for a study is not always feasible, the large differences documented here need to be considered when discussing HAZUS-MH results. Overall, this project shows implications for historic and future flood-control and navigational structure projects on the MMR and other rivers. It also emphasizes the importance of studying the impact future engineering structures will have on water-surface elevations and flood losses before implementing them.

The purpose of this project is to evaluate the response of coastal community comprehensive plans to the threats posed by sea level rise. The communities evaluated are Chincoteague, VA, Ocean City, MD, and Rehoboth Beach, DE. The results of the evaluations illustrate to what extent these communities are prepared to deal with sea level rise and provide a basis for recommendations to improve plan quality. The level of community risk and the components of the individual comprehensive plans are evaluated using new models created for this project. Risk level is measured using computer disaster simulations, topographic and demographic data. The plan evaluation criteria include standard plan quality benchmarks and hazard mitigation and adaptation elements suggested by numerous agencies and resources. The plan evaluations range in quality from “poor” to “excellent”. These evaluations will be used to create policy strategies and recommendations for addressing the threat of sea level rise.