PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 7, 2026SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología0 citationsOpen Access

Assessing the Effectiveness of Nature‐Based Solutions and Building‐Level Flood Risk Reduction Measures: An Open‐Source Coupled Model

View Full Paper
VBVeerle BrilJDJens deBruijnHDHans deMoel

Key Points

  • The aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of various flood adaptation measures using a coupled modeling approach.
  • Extended the GEB model by integrating a hydrodynamic and flood risk model.
  • Assessed interventions including dry-proofing, wet-proofing, retention ponds, reforestation, and natural grassland creation.
  • Focused on the Geul catchment, heavily flooded in July 2021, for practical application.
  • Conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the adaptation measures.
  • Reforestation and natural grassland reduced flood extent by 12% and average water depth by 10%.
  • Damage was decreased by up to 38% with these nature-based solutions.
  • Larger retention ponds provided minimal reduction in flood extent (3%) and damage (1.6%).
  • Building-level adaptations like dry-proofing reduced damages up to 95%, outperforming wet-proofing around 55%.
  • Several adaptation measures were found to be economically attractive.

Abstract

Abstract Floods are expected to increase in frequency and severity due to climate change. Recent floods have shown that many catchments worldwide are vulnerable to floods, highlighting the need for additional adaptation measures. This study extends the Geographical, Environmental, and Behavioral (GEB) model by coupling it to a hydrodynamic and a flood risk model to assess the effects of dry‐proofing, wet‐proofing, retention ponds, reforestation, and the creation of natural grassland. A key innovation is the integration of all local‐scale models, thereby allowing for a catchment‐wide assessment of the impacts of various measures on interlinked hydrological conditions, flood extents and depths, damages, and risk. We apply our method to the Geul catchment (shared between the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany), which was heavily flooded in July 2021. Our results show that reforestation and creation of natural grassland (both 10 km2) reduce flood extent by 12% and average water depth by 10%. Damage is decreased up to 38%. Larger retention ponds (1 m deeper) have a much smaller reduction in flood extent (3%), depth (0.5%) and damage (1.6%), due to limited storage capacity compared to excess rainfall. The building‐level adaptation scenarios outperform all nature‐based solutions, with dry‐proofing reducing more damage (up to 95%) than wet‐proofing (around 55%). A cost‐benefit analysis shows that several adaptation measures are economically attractive. Overall, our findings show a coupled model is essential for comparing the relative effectiveness of different flood adaptation measures and supporting informed risk management decisions. The open‐source model is transferable to other catchments worldwide to guide decision‐making.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bril et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69abc1b45af8044f7a4ea9b5https://doi.org/10.1029/2025wr041436
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper