4.6 Article

Flood Risk Assessment and Its Mapping in Purba Medinipur District, West Bengal, India

期刊

WATER
卷 14, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/w14071049

关键词

pluvial flood; flood frequency; vulnerability; risk assessment; principal component analysis (PCA)

资金

  1. [PID2019-106834RB-I00]
  2. [MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study conducted flood risk mapping in Purba Medinipur, one of the coastal districts of West Bengal, India, by considering flood frequency and vulnerability of the people. The results identified Moyna as the highest flood risk prone block and Contai-I as the least flood prone block. The findings are important for minimizing the chances of flood-related damages and establishing effective disaster management plans.
Floods are one of the most common quasi-natural hazards in costal districts of West Bengal, India and thousands of people are affected every year. From the destruction of crop lands and buildings to the disruption of balance of the environment and the spreading of disease, floods can devastate entire regions. The risk of flood depends on the flood intensity, frequency, and duration, the vulnerability of the people, etc. The spatiality of flood risk is still insufficient at micro level study for the management of resource disasters. In consequence, the present study on 'flood risk mapping' is performed in Purba Medinipur (one of the coastal districts of West Bengal, India) by considering the flood frequency and vulnerability of the people as flood risk components. The frequency of floods from 2002 to 2019 is considered as a variable of assessment and twenty-five key indicators are employed to understand the vulnerability of the people of the region. From the analysis, Moyna emerges as the highest flood risk prone block and Contai-I is the least flood prone block of the district. The results can help to minimize the chances of death, injury, loss, or harm and establish a good disaster management plan against floods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据