地球科学进展

地球科学进展 >

2021 , Vol. 36 >Issue 9: 911 - 921

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2021.083

综述与评述

深度不确定性下的灾害风险稳健决策方法评述

  • 单薪蒙 ,
  • 温家洪 ,
  • 王军 ,
  • 胡恒智
展开
  • 1.华东师范大学地理信息科学教育部重点实验室，上海 200241
    2.华东师范大学 地理科学学院，上海 200241
    3.华东师范大学上海城市公共安全研究中心，上海 200241
    4.上海师范大学 环境与地理科学学院，上海 200234
    5.上海商学院 酒店管理学院，上海 200235
单薪蒙（1994-），女，河南驻马店人， 博士研究生，主要从事自然灾害风险评估与管理研究. E-mail：xmshan@stu.ecnu.edu.cn

收稿日期: 2021-03-26

  修回日期: 2021-08-25

  网络出版日期: 2021-10-15

基金资助

国家社会科学基金重大项目“多灾种重大灾害风险评价、综合防范与城市韧性研究”(18ZDA105);上海市科委科技攻关项目“极端气候变化下上海多因子洪涝联合概率分析、危险性评估及应对技术研究”(19DZ1201505)

收起

Review of Robust Decision-Making Methods for Disaster Risk Under Deep Uncertainty

  • Xinmeng SHAN ,
  • Jiahong WEN ,
  • Jun WANG ,
  • Hengzhi HU
Expand
  • 1.Key Laboratory of Geographic Information Science of Ministry of Education，East China Normal University，Shanghai 200241，China
    2.School of Geographic Sciences，East China Normal University，Shanghai 200241，China
    3.Research Center for Urban Public Security，East China Normal Unirevsity，Shanghai 200241，China
    4.School of Environmental and Geographic Sciences，Shanghai Normal University，Shanghai 200234，China
    5.Department of Hospitality Management，Shanghai Business School，Shanghai 200235，China
SHAN Xinmeng (1994-), female, Zhumadian City, He'nan Province, Ph. D student. Research areas include disaster risk assessment and risk management. E-mail: xmshan@stu.ecnu.edu.cn

Received date: 2021-03-26

  Revised date: 2021-08-25

  Online published: 2021-10-15

Supported by

the Major Program of National Social Science Foundation of China "Study on risk assessment, comprehensive prevention and urban resilience of multiple major disasters"(18ZDA105);The Shanghai Science and Technology Support Program "Joint probability analysis, risk assessment and response method of floods in Shanghai under climate change"(19DZ1201505)

Fold

摘要

由于未来气候变化和城市化相互耦合作用，极端气候事件频发，尤其是沿海超大城市所面临的复合洪水风险持续上升。基于稳健决策方法，评估未来潜在适应措施的表现性能及经济效益，提出适应风险的实施路径，可有效管理极端灾害事件，降低灾害风险，增强城市韧性。首先分析了国际上处理深度不确定性的稳健决策方法理论基础，其次评述了被广泛应用于灾害风险领域的稳健决策、多目标稳健决策、动态适应性规划、适应对策路径、动态适应性对策路径及实物期权分析6种稳健决策方法，并进行系统对比分析。最后，提出未来可综合稳健决策和适应对策路径的优点，也可使用多目标稳健决策解决多目标问题、权衡多目标决策。此外，实物期权分析可量化适应措施的决策投资时机。这些稳健决策方法都为解决深度不确定性、降低灾害风险、制定适应气候变化策略提供了方法和工具。

关键词： 气候变化; 深度不确定性; 灾害风险; 稳健决策方法

本文引用格式

单薪蒙 , 温家洪 , 王军 , 胡恒智 . 深度不确定性下的灾害风险稳健决策方法评述[J]. 地球科学进展, 2021 , 36(9) : 911 -921 . DOI: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2021.083

Abstract

Due to the coupling of future climate change and urbanization， extreme climate events will occur frequently， and the risk of compound flooding faced by coastal megacities continues to increase. Based on robust decision-making methods， evaluate the performance and economic benefit of potential future adaptation measures， and propose an implementation path for adaptation risks， which can effectively manage extreme disaster events， reduce disaster risks， and enhance urban resilience. This sudy first analyzes the theoretical basis of international robust decision-making methods for dealing with deep uncertainty， and secondly reviews the robust decision-making and multi-objective robust decision-making， dynamic adaptive planning， adaptive strategy pathway， dynamic adaptive policy pathway and real option analysis， and approaches that are widely used in the field of disaster risk. The six robust decision-making methods of dynamic adaptive policy pathways are compared and analyzed. Finally， we propose the advantages of integrating robust decision-making and dynamic adaptive policy pathway in the future， and also using many objective robust decision making to solve multi-objective problems and weigh multi-objective decision-making. In addition， real option analysis can quantify the timing of investment decisions for adaptation measures. These robust decision-making methods all provide methods and tools for solving deep uncertainty， reducing disaster risks， and formulating strategies to adapt to climate change.

Key words： Climate change; Deep uncertainty; Disaster risk; Robust decision-making methods

参考文献

1 IPCC. Climate change2021： the physical science basis， the working group I contribution to the sixth assessment report ［R/OL］. ［2020-08-10］. .
2 MARSOOLI R， LIN N， EMANUEL K， et al. Climate change exacerbates hurricane flood hazards along US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts in spatially varying patterns［J］. Nature Communications， 2019， 10： 3785.
3 YIN J， GENTINE P， ZHOU S. et al. Large increase in global storm runoff extremes driven by climate and anthropogenic changes［J］. Nature Communications， 2018， 9： 4389.
4 VOUSDOUKAS M I， MENTASCHI L， VOUKOUVALAS E， et al. Climatic and socioeconomic controls of future coastal flood risk in Europe［J］. Nature Climate Change， 2018， 8： 776-780.
5 GARNER A J， MANN M E， EMANUEL K A， et al. Impact of climate change on New York City's coastal flood hazard： increasing flood heights from the preindustrial to 2300 CE［J］. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of American， 2017， 114（45）： 11 861-11 866.
6 LIN N， KOPP R E， HORTON B P， et al. Hurricane sandy's flood frequency increasing from year 1800 to 2100［J］. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences， 2016， 113（43）： 12071.
7 UNISDR. The human cost of natural disasters：a global perspective［R/UL］. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disaster（CRED）， 2015. ［2020-08-10］. .
8 DUPUIS E M， GREENBERG M. The right to the resilient city： progressive politics and the green growth machine in New York City［J］. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences， 2019， 9（3）： 352-363.
9 LAGMAY A M F， AGATON R P， BAHALA M A C， et al. Devastating storm surges of Typhoon Haiyan［J］. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction， 2015， 11： 1-12.
10 LIU Xincheng， LU Yongjin， CUI Dong. Evaluation of flood prevention abilities of seawall and countermeasures in Shanghai［J］. China Flood and Drought Management， 2015， 25（6）： 48-52.
10 刘新成， 卢永金， 崔冬. 上海海塘防汛墙防汛能力评估及对策研究［J］. 中国防汛抗旱， 2015， 25（6）： 48-52.
11 HAASNOOT M， AALST M V， ROZENBERG J， et al. Investments under non-stationarity： economic evaluation of adaptation pathways［J］. Climatic Change， 2020， 161： 451-463.
12 BARTHOLOMEW A E， KWAKKEL J H. On considering robustness in the search phase of robust decision making： a comparison of many-objective robust decision making， multi-scenario many-objective robust decision making， and many objective robust optimization［J］. Environmental Modelling & Software， 2020， 127： 104699.
13 BOTZEN W J W， BOUWER L M， SCUSSOLINI P， et al. Integrated disaster risk management and adaptation［M］// MECHLER R， BOUWER L， SCHINKO T， et al. Loss and damage from climate change. Climate Risk Management， Policy and Governance. Springer， 2019： 287-315.
14 AL-AMIN A Q， NAGY G J， MASUD M M， et al. Evaluating the impacts of climate disasters and the integration of adaptive flood risk management［J］. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction， 2019， 39： 101241.
15 SCUSSOLINI P， TRAN T T V， KOKS E， et al. Adaptation to sea level rise： a multidisciplinary analysis for Ho Chi Minh City， Vietnam［J］. Water Resources Research， 2017， 53（12）： 10 841-10 857.
16 KWAKKEL J H， HAASNOOT M， WALKER W E. Comparing robust decision-making and dynamic adaptive policy pathways for model-based decision support under deep uncertainty［J］. Environmental Modelling Software， 2016， 86： 168-183.
17 WALKER W E， MARCHAU V A W J， SWANSON D. Addressing deep uncertainty using adaptive policies： introduction to section 2［J］. Technological Forecasting and Social Change， 2010， 77（6）： 917-923.
18 HU Hengzhi， GU Tingting， TIAN Zhan. Review for robust decision theories in reducing the flood risk under climate change background［J］. Climate Change Research， 2018， 14（1）： 77-85.
18 胡恒智， 顾婷婷， 田展. 气候变化背景下的洪涝风险稳健决策方法评述［J］. 气候变化研究进展， 2018， 14（1）： 77-85.
19 HAASNOOT M， BROWN S， SCUSSOLINI P， et al. Generic adaptation pathways for coastal archetypes under uncertain sea-level rise［J］. Environmental Research Communications， 2019， 1：071006
20 KWAKKEL J H. Is real options analysis fit for purpose in supporting climate adaptation planning and decision making［J］. Wiley Interdiplinary Reviews： Climate Change， 2020， 11（3）. DOI：10.1002/wcc.638.
21 KIM M J， NICHOLLS R J， PRESTON J M， et al. An assessment of the optimum timing of coastal flood adaptation given sea-level rise using real options analysis［J］. Journal of Flood Risk Management， 2019， 12： e12494.
22 WOODWARD M， KAPELAN Z， GOULDBY B. Adaptive flood risk management under climate change uncertainty using real options and optimization［J］. Risk Analysis， 2014， 34（1）： 75-92.
23 HAASNOOT M， MIDDELKOOP H， OFFERMANS A， et al. Exploring pathways for sustainable water management in river deltas in a changing environment［J］. Climatic Change， 2013， 115： 795-819.
24 RYU Y， KIM Y O， SEO S B. Application of real option analysis for planning under climate change uncertainty： a case study for evaluation of flood mitigation plans in Korea［J］. Mitigation Adaptation Strategies for Global Change， 2018， 23： 803-819.
25 GINBO T， CORATO L D， HOFFMANN R. Investing in climate change adaptation and mitigation： a methodological review of real-options studies［J］. AMBIO： A Journal of the Human Environment， 2021， 50： 229-241.
26 LEMPERT R，KALRA N，PEYRAUD S， et al. Ensuring robust flood risk management in Ho Chi Minh City［M］// Policy research working paper No. WPS6465. Washington DC： The World Bank， 2013.
27 MINVILLE M， BRISSETTE F， LECONTE R. Uncertainty of the impact of climate change on the hydrology of a nordic watershed［J］. Journal of Hydrology， 2008， 358（1）： 70-83.
28 MOBLEY W， ATOBA K O， HIGHFIELD W E. Uncertainty in flood mitigation practices： assessing the economic benefits of property acquisition and elevation in flood-prone communities［J］. Sustainability， 2020， 12： 2098.
29 HERMAN J D， ZEFF H B， REED P M， et al. Beyond optimality： multistakeholder robustness tradeoffs for regional water portfolio planning under deep uncertainty［J］. Water Resource Research， 2014， 50（10）： 7 692-7 713.
30 KASPRZYK J R， NATARAJ S， REED P M， et al. Many objective robust decision making for complex environmental systems undergoing change［J］. Environmental Modelling Software， 2013， 42： 55-71.
31 REED P M， HADKA D， HERMAN J D， et al. Evolutionary multiobjective optimization in water resources： the past， present， and future［J］. Advances in Water Resources， 2013， 51： 438-456.
32 EKER S， KWAKKEL J H. Including robustness considerations in the search phase of many-objective robust decision making［J］. Environmental Modelling & Software， 2018， 105： 201-216.
33 HERMAN J D， REED P M， ZEFF H B， et al. How should robustness be defined for water systems planning under change［J］. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management， 2015， 141（10）. DOI： 10.1061/（ASCE）WR. 1943-5452. 0000509.
34 LEI T E VAN DER， ENSERINK B， THISSEN W A H， et al. How to use a systems diagram to analyse and structure complex problems for policy issue papers［J］. Journal of the Operational Research Society， 2011， 62（7）： 1 391-1 403.
35 LEMPERT R J， GROVES D G， POPPER S W， et al. A general， analytic method for generating robust strategies and narrative scenarios［J］. Management Science， 2006， 52（4）： 514-528.
36 REED A J， MANN M E， EMANUAL K A， et al. Increased threat of tropical cyclones and coastal flooding to New York City during the anthropogenic era［J］. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of American， 2015， 112： 12 610-12 615.
37 YAN D， LUDWIG F， HUANG H Q. Many objective robust decision making for water allocation under climate change［J］. Science of the Total Environment， 2017， 607/608： 294-303.
38 KWAKKEL J H， JAXA-ROZENo M. Improving scenario discovery for handling heterogeneous uncertainties and multinomial classified outcomes［J］. Environmental Modelling and Software， 2016， 79： 311-321.
39 KWAKKEL J H， WALKER W E， MARCHAU V A W J. Classifying and communicating uncertainties in model-based policy analysis［J］. International Journal of Technology， Policy and Management， 2010， 10： 299-315.
40 SINGH P， ASHURI B， AMEKUDZI-KENNED A. Application of dynamic adaptive planning and risk-adjusted decision trees to capture the value of flexibility in resilience and transportation planning［J］. Transportation Research Record： Journal of the Transportation Research Board， 2020， 2 674（9）： 298-310.
41 WISE R M， FAZEY I， STAFFORD SMITH M， et al. Reconceptualizing adaptation to climate change as part of pathways of change and response［J］. Global Environment Change， 2014， 28： 325-336.
42 KWADIJK J C， HAASNOOT M， MULDER J P， et al. Using adaptation tipping points to prepare for climate change and sea level rise： a case study in the Netherlands［J］. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews： Climate Change， 2010， 1（5）： 729-740.
43 WALKER W E， HAASNOOT M， KWAKKEL J H. Adapt or perish： a review of planning approaches for adaptation under deep uncertainty［J］. Sustainability， 2013， 5（3）： 955-979.
44 DE RUIG L T， BARNARD P L， BOTZEN W J W， et al. An economic evaluation of adaptation pathways in coastal mega cities： an illustration for Los Angeles［J］. Science of the Total Environment， 2019， 678： 647-659.
45 DAVID R T， STEPHEN W C， JOHN W C. Strategic adaptation pathway planning to manage sea-level rise and changing coastal flood risk［J］. Environmental Science & Policy， 2018， 87： 92-101.
46 LAWRENCE J， BELL R， BLACKETT P， et al. National guidance for adapting to coastal hazards and sea level rise： anticipating change， when and how to change pathway［J］. Environmental Science Policy， 2018， 82： 100-107.
47 ROSENZWEIG C， SOLECKI W. Hurricane Sandy and adaptation pathways in New York： lessons from a first-responder city［J］. Global Environment Change， 2014， 28： 395-408.
48 AALST M VAN， SCHASFOORT F. Guideline for economic analysis of adaptation investment decisions under uncertainty in the Philippines［R］. Delft， Deltares Report， 2017： 1230750.
49 KUIJKEN W. The delta programme in the Netherlands： the delta works of the future［EB/OL］. .
50 RANGER N， REEDER T， LOWE J. Addressing 'deep' uncertainty over long-term climate in major infrastructure projects： four innovations of the Thames Estuary 2100 Project［J］. EURO Journal on Decision Process， 2013， 1： 233-262.
51 Delta Programme. Working on the delta. The decisions to keep the Netherlands safe and liveable［Z］. Delta Programme， The Hague， 2015.
52 HAASNOOT M， KWAKKEL J H， WALKER W E， et al. Dynamic adaptive policy pathways： a new method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world［J］. Global Environment Change， 2013， 23 （2）： 485-498.
53 DE NEUFVILLE R. Real options： dealing with uncertainty in systems planning and design［J］. Integrated Assess， 2003， 4： 26-34.
54 DIXIT A K， PINDYCK R S. Investment under uncertainty［M］. Princeton N J： Princeton University Press， 1994.
55 BELLMAN R. On the theory of dynamic programming. In proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United ［J］. PNAS， 1952， 38： 716-719.
56 YANG M， BLYTH W. Modeling investment risks and uncertainties with real options approach［R］. International Energy Agency. Working Paper LTO/2007/WP01， 2007.
57 WREFORD A， DITTRICH R， VAN DER POL T D. The added value of real options analysis for climate change adaptation［J］. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews： Climate Change， 2020， 11（3）. DOI： 10.1002/wcc. 642.
58 HINO M， HALL J W. Real options analysis of adaptation to changing flood risk： structural and nonstructural measures［J］. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems， Part A： Civil Engineering， 2017， 3（3）. DOI： 10. 1061/AJRUA60000905.
59 LIU H， WANG Y， ZHANG C， et al. Assessing real options in urban surface water flood risk management under climate change［J］. Natural Hazards， 2018， 94： 1-18.
60 MARU Y T， STAFFORD SMITH M. GEC special edition- reframing adaptation pathways［J］. Global Environment Change， 2014， 28： 322-324.
61 HADKA D， HERMAN J D， REED P M， et al. Open MORDM： an open source framework for many objective robust decision making［J］. Environmental Modelling Software， 2015， 74： 114-129.
62 GERSONIUS B， ASHLEY R， JEUKEN A. Accounting for uncertainty and flexibility in flood risk management： comparing real in options optimisation and adaptation tipping points［J］. Journal of Flood Risk Management， 2015， 8： 135-144.
63 GERSONIUS B， ASHLEY R， PATHIRANA A， et al. Climate change uncertainty： building flexibility into water and flood risk infrastructure［J］. Climatic Change， 2013， 116： 411-423.
64 LAWRENCE J， BELL R， STROOMBERGEN A. A hybrid process to address uncertainty and changing climate risk in coastal areas using dynamic adaptive pathways planning， multi-criteria decision analysis & real options analysis： a New Zealand application［J］. Sustainability， 2019， 11（2）. DOI： 10. 3390/su11020406.
65 DAVID R T， STEPHEN W C， JOHN W C. Strategic adaptation pathway planning to manage sea-level rise and changing coastal flood risk［J］. Environmental Science & Policy， 2018， 87： 92-101.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉

地址：甘肃省兰州市天水中路8号
QQ：114723517
电话：0931-8762293　E-mail：adearth@lzb.ac.cn
陇ICP备2021001824号-5　 甘公网安备62010202000687