Unit 1 - Essays - Flood Reduction and Prevention Flashcards
“Assess the extent to which it is possible to reduce the impacts of river floods, with reference to Bangladesh.”
Paragraph 1: Hard Engineering Strategies
Explanation: Define hard engineering (physical structures like embankments, flood walls).
Example: Bangladesh’s use of embankments, particularly after the 1998 floods.
Evidence: Over 7,000 km of embankments built post-1998.
Evaluation: Short-term effectiveness in protecting agricultural land and urban areas; long-term issues such as maintenance problems, shifting risks (e.g., erosion downstream), and failure during extreme floods (e.g., 1998 floods).
Judgment: Hard engineering provides some protection but has limitations in addressing long-term risks.
Paragraph 2: Soft Engineering – Forecasting and Early Warnings
Explanation: Define soft engineering (strategies like forecasting and warning systems).
Example: Bangladesh’s Flood Forecasting and Warning Centre (FFWC), developed after the 1998 floods.
Evidence: The FFWC provides 3-5 day warnings, successfully evacuating 1.5 million people during the 2020 floods.
Evaluation: Success in reducing loss of life during floods; spatial and technological limitations in rural areas (lack of access to timely warnings).
Judgment: Soft engineering is cost-effective but depends on access to information and quick action.
Paragraph 3: Community-Based Adaptation and Land Use Planning
Explanation: Define community-based strategies (local-level adaptation).
Example: Raised homes and floating agriculture (baira) in flood-prone areas like the Haor Basin.
Evidence: Over 50,000 households benefiting from flood-resistant homes. Floating farms ensure food security during floods.
Evaluation: Effective in rural areas but limited in urban settings (e.g., Dhaka) where flooding is caused by poor drainage and unregulated construction.
Judgment: Local adaptations are effective for specific areas but need to be integrated into national flood management plans.
Paragraph 4: Integrated Flood Management (Lessons from the 1998 Floods)
Explanation: Integrated flood management combines hard and soft engineering, community-based strategies, and environmental management.
Example: The Flood Action Plan (FAP), which addresses multiple types of flooding (riverine, flash, coastal).
Evidence: Coastal Embankment Improvement Project, protecting 35 million people.
Evaluation: Success in large-scale flood management; challenges in funding, political support, and adaptation to climate change.
Judgment: Integrated approaches are essential for addressing diverse flood risks but require robust long-term planning and funding.
Conclusion
Recap of key points: Hard engineering provides protection but creates new risks, soft engineering is cost-effective but needs better access, and community-based adaptations work well in rural areas.
Final judgment: The most effective flood management strategy in Bangladesh is an integrated approach combining both hard and soft engineering, addressing spatial, temporal, and scale variations in flood impacts.
‘Soft Engineering is more effective than hard engineering in the prevention of river floods.’ With the aid of examples, how far do you agree?
Main Body
Paragraph 1: Soft Engineering – Working with Nature
Explanation: Define soft engineering methods (e.g., planting trees, restoring wetlands, floodplain zoning).
Example 1: Bangladesh 1998: Explain how soft engineering (e.g., wetland restoration, afforestation) helped mitigate flood impacts, even though the flood was severe.
Pros: Sustainable, cost-effective, and works with natural processes.
Limitations: Can be less effective during extreme weather events if not supported by strong enforcement (e.g., Pakistan 2010).
Paragraph 2: Hard Engineering – Immediate Protection
Explanation: Define hard engineering methods (e.g., dams, levees, floodwalls).
Example 2: Boscastle 2004: Discuss how hard engineering (culverts, river channel modification) protected the village from future floods.
Pros: Provides immediate, localized protection, especially in high-density urban areas.
Limitations: Expensive, can fail during extreme floods, and often needs ongoing maintenance (e.g., Bangladesh 1998 embankment failures).
Paragraph 3: Environmental and Social Impact
Explanation: Compare the environmental and social impacts of soft and hard engineering.
Example 3: Pakistan 2010: Discuss how deforestation worsened the floods and how sustainable land use (soft engineering) could have reduced the impact.
Environmental Considerations: Soft engineering protects ecosystems, while hard engineering often disrupts natural processes and causes long-term problems (e.g., Bangladesh embankments).
Paragraph 4: Cost and Practicality
Explanation: Compare the cost-effectiveness and practicality of soft versus hard engineering.
Example 1: Pakistan 2010 flood recovery costs: Over $10 billion spent on hard engineering recovery measures.
Example 2: Boscastle 2004 flood defenses: £4.6 million for flood defenses that were more cost-effective on a small scale.
Cost Comparison: Soft engineering is generally cheaper and more feasible for developing countries, while hard engineering is costly and requires more resources.
Conclusion
Summary: Soft engineering is more sustainable, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly, but hard engineering provides essential protection in specific urban contexts.
Judgment: An integrated approach, combining both methods, offers the best flood prevention solution, with soft engineering being more effective for long-term, large-scale flood prevention.
