@Article{ReyMSMTFRAQ:2020:CaStPr,
               author = "Rey, Wilmer and Mart{\'{\i}}nez-Amador, Miranda and Salles, 
                         Paulo and Mendoza, E. Tonatiuh and Trejo-Rangel, Miguel Angel and 
                         Franklin, Gemma L. and Ruiz-Salcines, Pablo and Appendini, 
                         Christian M. and Quintero-Ib{\'a}ņez, Juli{\'a}n",
          affiliation = "{Centro de Investigaciones Oceanograficas e Hidrograficas del 
                         Caribe (CIOH)} and {Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico 
                         (UNAM)} and {Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM)} and 
                         {Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM)} and {Instituto 
                         Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE)} and {Universidad Nacional 
                         Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM)} and {Universidad Nacional Autonoma de 
                         Mexico (UNAM)} and {Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico 
                         (UNAM)} and {Centro de Investigaciones Oceanograficas e 
                         Hidrograficas del Caribe (CIOH)}",
                title = "Assessing different flood risk and damage approaches: a case of 
                         study in progreso, Yucatan, Mexico",
              journal = "Journal of Marine Science and Engineering",
                 year = "2020",
               volume = "8",
               number = "2",
                pages = "e137",
                month = "Feb.",
             keywords = "flood hazard, flood vulnerability, hydrodynamic modeling, 
                         CENAPRED, Yucatan State.",
             abstract = "This study applies three different methods to assess the flood 
                         risk and damage from the strongest high-pressure cold front 
                         (locally known as 'Norte') event in terms of the residual tide 
                         from 30 years (1979-2008) of data for Progreso, Yucatan. The most 
                         important difference between the three methods is the estimation 
                         of flood vulnerability for Progreso. The first method, proposed by 
                         Mexico's National Center for the Prevention of Disasters 
                         (CENAPRED) and used by the Mexican government is based mostly on 
                         economic asset (household goods) values and flood impacts. The 
                         second (CENAPREDv2) and third (FRI) methods are proposals for 
                         assessing risk that include 17 socioeconomic indicators. The 
                         former includes economic asset values, as is the case for 
                         CENAPRED, while the latter does not. The main results of this 
                         study show that the modeled 'Norte' event flooded 25% of 
                         Progreso's city blocks, with an estimated economic flood risk of 
                         \$USD 16,266 (CENAPRED) and \$USD 223,779 (CENAPREDv2), and 
                         flood damage of \$USD 48,848 and \$USD 671,918, respectively. 
                         When calculating flood risk (FRI) and flood damage (FRI_FD) 
                         without monetary terms, the risk categories along the back-barrier 
                         behind Progreso varied spatially from 'very low' to 'high', while 
                         areas along the coastal side presented a 'low' and 'very low' 
                         risk. These categories increased for the flood damage because the 
                         exceedance probability of the flood was not considered as it was 
                         for flood risk in the three methodologies. Therefore, flood damage 
                         provides the losses caused by a given flood event without 
                         considering how probable that loss may be. In conclusion, this 
                         study proposes that the selection of the applied method depends on 
                         the main objectives and specific interests when assessing flood 
                         risk. For instance, if economic damage is the main concern, then 
                         the CENAPRED method should be used as it identifies where the 
                         larger economic impacts could occur; when a socioeconomic approach 
                         is needed then the FRI should be applied, but if both economic 
                         damage and socioeconomic aspects are needed, the CENAPREDv2 is 
                         recommended. Besides considering economic aspects, the FRI method 
                         also includes social variables that can help to map the most 
                         vulnerable population in terms of mobility, education, 
                         communication access and others. Therefore, the proposed FRI 
                         method is very relevant for disaster risk managers and other 
                         stakeholders interested in disaster risk reduction.",
                  doi = "10.3390/jmse8020137",
                  url = "http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jmse8020137",
                 issn = "2077-1312",
             language = "en",
           targetfile = "rey_assessing.pdf",
        urlaccessdate = "28 abr. 2024"
}