System dynamics and hydrodynamic modelling approaches for spatial and temporal analysis of flood risk

References

• Ahmad, S. and Simonovic, S.P., 2000a. System dynamics modeling of reservoir operations for flood management. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 14 (3), 190–198. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2000)14:3(190)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad, S. and Simonovic, S.P., 2000b. Dynamic modeling of flood management policies. Proc., 18th int. conf. of the system dynamics society, sustainability in the third millennium, Bergen, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmad, S. and Simonovic, S.P., 2000c. System dynamics modeling of reservoir operations for flood management. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 14 (3), 190–198. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2000)14:3(190)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad, S. and Simonovic, S.P., 2004. Spatial system dynamics: new approach for simulation of water resources systems. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, ASCE, 18 (4), 331–340. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2004)18:4(331)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad, S.S. and Simonovic, S.P., 2007. A methodology for spatial fuzzy reliability analysis. Applied GIS, 3 (1), 1–42.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmad, S.S. and Simonovic, S.P., 2011. A three dimensional methodology for flood risk analysis. Journal of Flood Risk Management, 4 (1), 53–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad, S.S. and Simonovic, S.P., 2012. Spatial and temporal analysis of urban flood risk assessment. Urban Water Journal, 10 (1), 26–49. doi: 10.1080/1573062X.2012.690437
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akter, T. and Simonovic, S.P., 2005. Aggregation of fuzzy views of a large number of stakeholders for multi-objective flood management decision-making. Journal of Environmental Management, 77 (2), 133–134. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.02.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbara, P. and Donnell, 2006. User Guide to RMA2 WES Version 4.5. US Army, Engineer Research and Development Center, Waterways Experiment Station Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory.
   Google Scholar
• Bender, M.J. and Simonovic, S.P., 2000. A fuzzy compromise approach to water resources systems planning under uncertainty. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 115 (1), 35–44. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(99)00025-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolle, A., et al., 2006. Hydraulic modelling of the two-directional interaction between sewer and river systems. Proc., urban drainage modelling and water sensitive urban design, Monash Univ., Melbourne, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Borsuk, M., et al., 2001. Stakeholder values and scientific modeling in the Neuse river watershed. Group Decision and Negotiation, 10 (4), 355–373. doi: 10.1023/A:1011231801266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carr, R.S. and Smith, G.P., 2006. Linking of 2D and pipe hydraulic models at fine spatial scales. In: T. Fletcher and A. Deletic, eds. Urban drainage modelling and water sensitive urban design, Vol. 2. Melbourne: Monash Univ, 361–368.
   Google Scholar
• Chow, V.T., Maidment, D.R., and Mays, L.W., 1988. Applied hydrology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Coe, M., 1997. Simulating continental surface waters: an application to Holocene northern Africa. Journal of Climate, 10 (7), 1680–1689. doi: 10.1175/1520-0442(1997)010<1680:SCSWAA>2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coyle, R.G., 1996. System dynamics modeling. London: Chapman and Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Despic, O. and Simonovic, S.P., 2000. Aggregation operators for soft decision making. Fuzzy Sets System, 115 (1), 11–33. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(99)00030-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DHI, 2008a. MIKE11 user manual. Amsterdam, Netherlands: DHI Water and Environment.
   Google Scholar
• DHI, 2008b. Mike21 flow model, hydrodynamic flow module, user guide. Amsterdam, Netherlands: DHI Water and Environment.
   Google Scholar
• El-Baroudy, I. and Simonovic, S.P., 2004. Fuzzy criteria for the evaluation of water resource systems performance. Water Resource Research, 40 (10), 1–10. doi: 10.1029/2003WR002828
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher, E.J., 1998. The use of system dynamics as a decision support tool for the management of surface water resources. Proc., 1st Int. conf. on new information technologies for decision-making in civil engineering, Montreal, 909–920.
   Google Scholar
• Ford, A., 1999. Modeling the environment. An introduction to system dynamics modeling of environmental systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Forrester, J.W., 1961. Industrial dynamics. Williston, VT: Pegasus Communications.
   Google Scholar
• Haimes, Y.Y., 1998. Risk modeling, assessment, and management. New York: Wiley Series in Systems Engineering.
   Google Scholar
• HPS Inc, 2001. Tutorial and technical documentation STELLA 5.1.1. Hanover, NH: HPS.
   Google Scholar
• Hydraulic Engineering Center, 2010. HEC-RAS river analysis system, hydraulic reference manual, version 4.1. Davis: United States Army Corps of Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Kacprzyk, J. and Nurmi, H., 1998. Group decision making under fuzziness. In: R. Slowinsky, ed. Fuzzy sets in decision analysis. Boston: Operation Research and Statistics, Kluwar Academic, 103–136.
   Google Scholar
• Keyes, A.M. and Palmer, R., 1993. The role of object-oriented simulation models in the drought preparedness studies. Proc., water management in the ’90s: a time for innovation, ASCE, New York, 479–482.
   Google Scholar
• Klohn-Crippen, 1999. Red River one-dimensional unsteady flow model. Richmond, BC: Final report submitted to International Joint Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Lowrance, W.W., 1976. Of acceptable risk. Los Altos, CA: William Kaufman.
   Google Scholar
• Matthias, R. and Frederick, P., 1994. Modeling spatial dynamics of sea-level rise in a coastal area. System Dynamics Review, 10 (4), 375–389. doi: 10.1002/sdr.4260100404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, J.R., Russell, G.L., and Caliri, G., 1994. Continental-scale river flow in climate models. Journal of Climate, 7 (6), 914–928. doi: 10.1175/1520-0442(1994)007<0914:CSRFIC>2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormsby, T., et al., 2004. Getting to know ArcGIS desktop. Redlands, CA: ESRI.
   Google Scholar
• Palmer, R. N., 1998. A history of shared vision modeling in the ACTACF comprehensive study: A modeler's perspective. In: W. Whipple Jr., ed., Proc., Special Session of ASCE's 25th Annual Conf. on Water Resources Planning and Management. Reston, VA: ASCE, 221–226.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, B.C., et al., 2005. 1D and 2D modelling of urban drainage systems using XP-SWMM and TUFLOW. Proc., 10th int. conf. on urban storm drainage, DTU, Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Prodanovic, P. and Simonovic, S.P., 2002. Comparison of fuzzy set ranking methods for implementation in water resources decision-making. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 29 (5), 692–701. doi: 10.1139/l02-063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royston, J., et al., 1999. Using system dynamics to help develop and implement policies and programs in health care in England. System Dynamics Review, 15 (3), 293–313. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1727(199923)15:3<293::AID-SDR169>3.0.CO;2-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sausen, R., Schubert, S., and Dumenil, L., 1994. A model of river runoff for use in coupled atmosphere-ocean models. Journal of Hydrology, 155 (3–4), 337–352. doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(94)90177-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonovic, S.P., 1997. Risk in sustainable water resources management. In: D. Rosbjerg, et al., eds. Sustainability of water resources under increasing uncertainty, IAHS Publ., 240, 3–17.
   Google Scholar
• Simonovic, S.P., 2009. Managing water resources: methods and tools for a systems approach. London: UNESCO and Earthscan James & Jameso. 576.
   Google Scholar
• Simonovic, S.P. and Ahmad, S.S., 2007. A new method for spatial analysis of risk in water resources engineering management. The Open Civil Engineering Journal, 1 (1), 1–12. doi: 10.2174/1874149500701010001
   Google Scholar
• Simonovic, S.P. and Nirupama, A. 2005. A spatial multi-objective decision making under uncertainty for water resources management. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 7 (2), 117–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonovic, S.P. and Fahmy, H., 1999. A new modeling approach for water resources policy analysis. Water Resources Research, 35 (1), 295–304. doi: 10.1029/1998WR900023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., 2000. The perception of risk. London: Earthscan Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, J., Phillips, B.C., and Yu, S., 2006. Modeling overland flows and drainage augmentations in Dubbo, Proceedings of the 46th floodplain management authorities conference, 28 February–2 March, Lismore.
   Google Scholar
• Sterman, J.D., 2000. Business dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Teegavarapu, R.S.V. and Simonovic, S.P., 2000. System dynamics simulation model for operation of multiple reservoirs. Proceedings of the 10th World Water Congress, Melbourne, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Vörösmarty, C.J., et al., 1989. Continental scale models of water balance and fluvial transport: an application to South America. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 3 (3), 241–265. doi: 10.1029/GB003i003p00241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WL|Delft Hydraulics, 2005. SOBEK River/Estuary user manual. Delft: SOBEK Help Desk.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, H.-J., 1996. Fuzzy set theory and its applications. 3rd ed. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar