International Journal of River Basin Management

ISSN: 1571-5124 (Print) 1814-2060 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/trbm20

A New Flood Vulnerability Index Adapted for the

Pre-Saharan Region

Ahmed Karmaoui & Balica Stefania

To cite this article: Ahmed Karmaoui & Balica Stefania (2019): A New Flood Vulnerability Index
Adapted for the Pre-Saharan Region, International Journal of River Basin Management, DOI:
10.1080/15715124.2019.1583668

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2019.1583668

Accepted author version posted online: 14

Feb 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 19

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=trbm20
Publisher: Taylor & Francis & International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and
Research

Journal: Intl. J. River Basin Management

DOI: 10.1080/15715124.2019.1583668

A New Flood Vulnerability Index Adapted for the Pre-Saharan

Region

Karmaoui, Ahmed1 and Stefania, Balica2

1. Southern Center for Culture and Sciences, Zagora - Department of Biology, Lycée Imam
Ali, Bni Zouli, Zagora, Zagora, Morocco
2. Independent, Romania

Abstract

Moroccan Pre-Saharan zone is an oasis system, which it is characterized by extreme events, like drought
and flood. The flood risks will likely increase in frequency and magnitude due to global and regional
climate change. Flood tends to have an important impact on isolated and poor regions such as oasis
regions. This extreme event impacts are seen at the same time in social and economic sectors and
accelerated by the dry land physical and environmental drivers like land use, topography, proximity to
rivers. In Morocco, the use of composite indices to evaluate natural disasters is new. The reduction of
flood vulnerability cannot be accomplished by one sector alone. Therefore, it is a need to use a
multidisciplinary approach to measure vulnerability. This paper aims to develop and analyzes the
applicability of a new index in the pre-Saharan region of Morocco, the Oasean flood Vulnerability
Index. It was determined for six components: climatic, physiographic, land use, anthropogenic,
economic and access to services. These components can help to find out the priority mechanisms and
sectors of flood vulnerability in order to take urgent measures. For this study five sub-catchments were
selected: The proposed methodology to calculate an OFVI provides an approach to quantify how much
floods are affecting or can affect a sub-catchment or an urban area in pre-Saharan regions.

Keywords: flood; vulnerability; oasis; environmental impact; climate change; adaptation

1
1. Introduction

Globally, dry land areas are estimated to be about 41 percent of the terrestrial surface, and
are homes to a third of humanity, and concentrate the high rate of poverty (Mortimore et al.,
2009). Dry lands are located mainly in poor countries: 72% of this area is found within
developing countries and only 28% within industrial zones (MEA, 2005). Morocco is one of
these countries. Geographically is located in the North-West corner of Africa, bordered by the
Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean on the North and West, by Algeria on the East, and
by Mauritania on the South. Its total land area is 710850 km2 and includes different land-forms,
like agricultural plains, river valleys, plateaus, and mountain chains (Anon, 2004). Most of these
lands are arid to semi-arid of which 75% is range-lands, 13% forests and 8% is cultivated
(Dahan, 2012). In the hyper-arid and arid dry lands (the desert biome), most agricultural
activities are in oasis, where the irrigation is by fluvial, ground, or local water sources (MEA,
2005; Karmaoui et al., 2014a & b; 2015a & b). This dependence of oasis on water makes this
area highly vulnerable to extreme events, like droughts and floods. Climate change can impact
the climate extremes (IPCC, 2012).According to this report, the impact of changes in floods are
highly dependent on how climate changes in the future. Human societies have developed in
trying to cope by limiting the impact. The impact of natural disasters is correlated to the
vulnerability of communities in developing countries, as previous socio-economic
vulnerabilities may accelerate these disasters, making the recovery very difficult (Vatsa &
Krimgold, 2000). Thus, the impact of such events increases the poverty (Carter et al., 2007).The
climate change may increase extreme events (like drought and floods) in an area already
affected by natural hazards, and then, as floods seem to be the most impacting hazard, we have
decided to focus on it. Historically, floods have damaged properties infrastructure and
thousands of populations. In Morocco, floods are the most dangerous natural disasters, as seen
in Table 1, Table 2 and Fig. 1. The number of affected people and lives lost due to floods
exceeds any other natural disasters in the past thirty years. The data related to human and
economic losses from disasters that have occurred between 1980 and 2010 in Morocco,
according to UNISDR (UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (www.preventionweb.net), can
be seen in Table 2). In order to adapt to these extreme events during this period (1980-2010),
the Moroccan government built 78 dams at national scale. These dams aim among others to
control floods (regulating service) by reducing fluctuations of the Wadis flow.

2
 Fig.1. Natural Disaster Occurrence. Source: UNISDR (UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction)

Table 1: Total number of people affected since 1963 due to flood in Morocco. Source: "EM-DAT: The
OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database. www.em-dat.net"
Date No Total Affected
22/01/1970 266444
25/11/2010 75003
21/01/1996 60000
11/1965 47813
1977 38000
12/1963 35010
17/08/1995 35000

Table 2: Human and economic losses from disasters occurred between 1980- 2010, in Morocco
Killed People Economic Damages
Disaster Date Killed Disaster Date Cost (US$ X 1,000)
Flood 1995 730 Drought 1999 900,000
Earthquake 2004 628 Earthquake 2004 400,000
Flood 2002 80 Flood 2002 200,000
Flood 1997 60 Flood 1996 55,000
Flood 1995 43 Flood 1995 9,000
Flood 2003 35 Flood 2001 2,200
Flood 2010 32 Extreme temp. 2000 809
Mass mov. dry 1988 31 Storm 2005 50
Flood 2008 30
Flood 1996 25

3
 In recent decades, Morocco has experienced several extreme events. These hydro-
meteorological events have caused significant damage to the socio-economic side. In this
context, can be cited a few examples of recent major floods occurred in Morocco and their
socio-economic consequences:
 On 25th of September 1950, a flash flood of 6m height flooded the city of Sefrou making
a hundred victims (Saidi et al., 2010);
 On 23rdof May 1963, a violent flood of 7200 m3/s of peak flow devastated the Moulouya
valley taking the left seat bank of the dam Mohammed V(according to the official website of
the Moroccan Ministry of water: www.water.gov.ma);
 Finally, the famous flood that affected watersheds Marrakech High Atlas on 17th of
August 1995. In this region, a flood of about 1030 m3/s occurs (RIAD, 2003), and made 730
victims and 35 000 affected (CSIG, 2008).

While the concept of vulnerability is frequently used within disaster research,

researchers’ notion of vulnerability has changed over the past two decades and consequently
there have been several attempts to define and capture what is meant by the term. McEntire et
al., (2010) and Hufschmidt (2011) analyse and compare a wide number of vulnerability
concepts to natural hazards, throughout the view of different schools. In the variety of
definitions to vulnerability, the definitions of exposed hazards differ to societies. Various
definitions of vulnerability refer to climate change (IPCC, 2007), others to environmental
hazards and there are several definitions of vulnerability to floods (Balica et al., 2009; Connor
and Hiroki, 2005). By now it is generally understood that “vulnerability is the root cause of
disasters” (Lewis, 1999) and “vulnerability is the risk context” (Gabor and Griffith, 1980). The
definition of Timmerman, (1981) includes the degree of a harm system at risk, the frequency
of a hazardous incident. The quality and the degree of the feedback are conditioned by system’s
resilience. Chambers (1989), described vulnerability “as a potential for loss”, with two sides:
the shocks and perturbations from outside exposure, and the ability or lack of ability from the
internal side, its resilience. In 1992, the International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC, 1992)
defined vulnerability as the degree of incapability to cope with the consequences of climate
change and sea-level rise, after years IPCC, defined it “as the extent to which climate change
may damage or harm a system; it depends not only on a system’s sensitivity but also on its
ability to adapt to new climatic conditions”. Lewis (1999) definition of vulnerability is
associated to shock and ability for resistance and recovery. Then the definition of vulnerability
was narrowed to elements at risk, exposure (damage potential) and (loss) susceptibility, instead

4
Pratt et al., (2004) is expressing vulnerability as a function of exposure, resilience and
resistance. A wide group of environmental researchers (IPCC, 2007), sees the vulnerability by
combining the concepts above into a function of vulnerability related to exposure, sensitivity
and resilience (adaptive capacity). Adger et al., (1999) define social vulnerability to hazards as
determined by their “existent state, that is, by their capacity” – or capacity to react and recover,
and to deal with the everyday stresses. It is seen as the residual impacts of climate change after
adaptation measures have been implemented. This definition includes the exposure,
susceptibility, and the capability of a system to recover, to resist hazards as a result of climate
change. Sarewitz et al., (2003) have three (quite similar) definitions which are
contemporaneous and express vulnerability as potential damage or harm caused to a system by
an extreme event or hazard. Adger (2006) focuses on “shocks and stressors” near “capacity for
adaptive action.” highlighting the vulnerability as the state of susceptibility to harm from
exposure to stresses associated with environmental and social change and from the absence of
capacity to adapt. McEntire et al., (2010) are addressing the vulnerability throughout an
integrated approach: the author takes into consideration two technocratic and two sociological
schools. “The physical science school stresses living in safe areas, the engineering school
concentrates on the built environment and ways to increase resistance. The structural school
concentrates on traditional notions of vulnerability more than the other three, and it stresses
susceptibility based on socioeconomic factors and demographic characteristics. However, the
organizational school stresses resilience or the effectiveness of response and recovery”, while
Hufschmidt (2011) analyses the concepts of vulnerability through the view of “human ecologist
school” and “structural view”. The vulnerability can be determined by the countries economics
and politics. Cutter (1996) defines vulnerability as a hazard which includes natural risks
together with social response and action. In 2003 he revises the definition considering
“vulnerability as the potential for loss and involves a combination of factors that determine the
degree to which a person’s life or livelihood is put at risk by a particular event” (Cutter et al.,
2003). Later, Cutter, (2006) mentioning the difficulty to evaluate vulnerability, the links and
mutual benefices among many systems to comprehend vulnerability to calamity. McEntire et
al., (2010) define vulnerability as an evaluation of exposure to harmful. In the past, United
Nations (1979) have defined flood vulnerability as the degree of loss to a given element (s), at
risk resulting from a flood of given magnitude and expressed on a scale from 0 (no damage) to
1 (total damage). Since the quantification of vulnerability can help in decision making
processes, parameters and indicators (indices) should be designed to produce information for
specific target areas and they should provide information to counter attack different hazards

5
which societies face, like floods (Davidson, 2004; Dinh et al., 2012). Vulnerability to floods is
defined as the extent to which a system is susceptible to floods due to exposure, a perturbation,
in conjunction with its ability (or inability) to cope, recover, or basically adapt (Balica et al.,
2009). In the socio-economic sciences Ramade (1989) includes human and socio-economic
terms in his approach of vulnerability, involving the predisposition of goods, people, buildings,
infrastructures and activities to be damaged, offering low resistance, as it was introduced in the
1980s in some geographical studies. These latter studies interpreted the vulnerability of a
geographical system as the result of different coping capacities in socially, economically and
technologically heterogeneous contexts (Quinn et al., 2010). The social vulnerability is
analyzed in the context of hazards and responses of communities to deal with resistance and
resilience. The social vulnerability is intrinsically tied to several processes: the fragility, the
susceptibility and lack of resilience of the exposed elements. Balica et al., (2009) call the
exposure, physical fragility and try to holistically integrate the contributions of physical and
social sciences to define a vision of indicators which create vulnerability. Vulnerability is the
degree of fragility of a (natural or socio-economic) community or a (natural or socio-economic)
system toward natural hazards. Vulnerability is a socially constructed issue, the social
inequalities divide people in vulnerable or not and conduct their activities in disasters or is the
social mind perception to adapt/cope. Vulnerability is a function of exposure, susceptibility,
resilience, and state of knowledge. As a dissimilarity to simulation-models, the methodology
indicator based approach is uncomplicated (frequently linear) and not explicit in time, but can
be used a predictive tool (Dinh et al, 2012).”

During the last decade, the notion of vulnerability has changed. After IPCC in 2001 hazards
such as climate change, defines vulnerability as “the degree to which a system is susceptible to
or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and
extremes”. During this change of definition, Connor & Hiroki (2005) developed a Flood
Vulnerability Index (FVI), which allows for a comparative analysis of flood vulnerability
between different river basins. This approach lets operators recognize the key causes of
conscience-stricken for the basin's vulnerability. The vulnerability is expected to happen under
certain conditions of exposure, susceptibility and resilience, measuring the extent of harm
(Fuchs et al., 2011). The present article will use the following definition of vulnerability
specifically related to flooding (Balica et al., 2009): the degree to which a natural or artificial
system is susceptible to floods due to exposure, a perturbation, in co-occurrence with its ability
(or inability) to cope, recover, or basically adapt. Managing risks from floods should be an

6
important component of climate change adaptation. This study focuses on an approach to assess
flood vulnerability and discuss the benefits of adaptation options at a city-scale and sub-
catchment-scale, by developing and applying the OFVI methodology developed in the pre-
Saharan region. The indicators used show the variables affecting the flood vulnerability in the
pre-Saharan region. It provides an important tool for decision makers to monitor and evaluate
changes over time. The OFVI is an indicator-based index which reflects the status of a scale’s
flood vulnerability. This index was determined to find out the priority components (climatic,
physiographic, land use, anthropogenic, economic, and access to services) and sectors of flood
vulnerability in order to take urgent measures.

2. Study area

Pre-Saharan North Africa constitutes a major indicator of climatic trends in the

Mediterranean region; is currently experiencing a rapid climatic deterioration and
desertification (RBOSM, 2008). This situation makes the region (Fig. 2) a vulnerable area.
Since the middle of the twentieth century, oases have borne increasing demographic and
investment pressures resulting in larger water abstraction, soil salinization, loss of surrounding
vegetation and soil erosion (MEA, 2005).

Fig. 2. Moroccan pre-Sahara: Oasean zone, including the sub-catchments of Guelmim, Tata,
Zagora (MDV), Ouarzazate (UDV) and Errachidia (Tafilalet)

7
 The study area corresponds to the perimeters of the oasean provinces of Zagora,
Ouarzazate, Guelmim, Tata and Errachidia. It is located in part of the Draa Basin (Upper,
Middle and lower Draa), and of Tafilalet basin. At the economic level of the entire area,
agriculture occupies a prominent place in the economy of these provinces; in fact, it is one of
the main sources of income and occupies the major part of the workforce (EVICC, 2011a).
Industrial activity is almost non-existent and the tourism activity remains well below the
existing potential. These oases basins are located near the Wadis (temporary rivers) to facilitate
the use of both water surface and groundwater in dry periods. The location near the Wadi beds
is important for the mobilization of water. However, it causes the exposure of these areas to
flood risk (EVICC, 2011e). The floods are rare in the basin of Draa (UDV, MDV, Tata sub-
catchment, and Guelmim Sub-catchment) but they are brutal and violent (PACC, 2012a).
The study area has experienced several floods, causing considerable socio-economic
damages; we will quote the most important in the study area:

Tafilalet

On the 5th of November 1965, a flood destroyed the Ziz valley (Tafilalet), leaving 25,000
people homeless and accelerating the decision to build the dam Hassan Addakhil (Saidi et al.,
2010). In Merzouga, the last important flood was recorded on the 26th of May 2006 after an
intense rainfall (112 mm in three hours) (Minoia & Kaakinen, 2012). The flood damages were
significant, with the destruction of 140 houses and hotels, deterioration of Taouz–Merzouga
road (Fig. 3, Photos: A & B) and of the ONEP (National Agency for drinking water and
sanitation) water supply pipe of Merzouga villages and Taouz (Kabiri, 2012).

A B
Fig. 3. A: Collapsed houses in Merzouga. B: State of the road after a flood, at the entrance of
Merzouga (Kabiri, 2012).

8
 In 1965 on the Rheris River (Tafilalet) an observed and measured average annual flow of
9.2m3/s took place (PACC, 2012a). The same thing was observed on the Dadès River (Upper
Draa Valley): between 1965 and 1966 the Dadès River and its tributary Assif Mgoun,
respectively recorded average flow of 7.8 m3/s and 12.3 m3/s with an annual contribution of
103.6 and 147 Million Cubic Meters in the same order.

Draa (UDV sub-catchment and MDV)

The drainage system of Upper Draa consists by temporary River Ouarzazate and Douchen
in the Westside and by perennial Oued Dades Mgoun in the Eastside. They are fed by karstic
aquifers that originate in the high mountains of the northeast of the High Atlas. This aquifer is
fed by melting snow and water infiltration. Upper Draa receives an average of 514 Mm3
(EVICC, 2011d).The drainage system of the Middle Draa is less dense and drained mainly by
the Draa and its tributaries. The average flow recorded in Zagora is 13.4m3/s and the maximum
that is ever recorded it is in 1965 and reached 213m3/s. However, in August of the same year,
into this zone flows only 0.13m3/s (Ait-Hamza et al., 2009).The violence of flood causes the
phenomenon of water erosion which reduces the fertility of agricultural land (EVICC,
2011d).The photos (Fig. 4) show an example of the 2009 flood that isolated several villages of
Beni Zouli from the national road N9, and then the stop of provisioning services for15 days.

A B

Fig. 4. A, Flood 2009 in Middle Draa Valley; B, Flood 2009

Guelmim sub-catchment

In the Guelmim sub-catchment, the drainage system is composed by Seyad Wadi, Oum El
Achar Wadi, Ourg Wadi, and Assaka Wadi. It is, therefore, subject to the risk of flooding due
to overflowing of these Wadis. The main tributaries of the Assaka Wadi (Seyad and
OumLaachar) used for the spreading of floodwater. Thus, seven thresholds derivation (small
dam) concrete, masonry or gabions have been constructed and are used to derive flow rates

9
from 15 to 30 m3/s per small dam, and a total capacity of a derivation of 174 m3/s (Water and
Environment Ministry).
On the 7th of January 1985, the Province of Guelmim was hit by flooding due to
overflowing of the Oum Laachar Wadi, 33mm in Guelmim center and 65 mm in Bouizakarne
in 53min, at a flow rate of 1000m3/s (EVICC, 2011b). The importance of these events is due to
the socio-economical vulnerability of this area. Unfortunately, human and economic damages
for these floods are not available.

Tata sub-catchment

Tata province has experienced several floods. History indicates that the floods that
overflow Akka River in 1995 are the major events (Table 3) that impacted the zone. The damage
is as follows: 13 deaths, 3 wounded, 4 missing and 350 families homeless; as well as the
destruction of 655 homes (EVICC, 2011b).

3. Methods

The OFVI creates a numerical basis for quantifying risk and providing guidance to
governments for prioritizing mitigation measures. The approach taken in creating the index was
based on the relationships already established in the studies of Connor & Hiroki, (2005) and
Balica et al., (2009) and applied in several parts at a global scale, such as: Japan, several river
basins in Europe, Asia, and the Philippines. These studies were used to construct indicators and
component of the OFVI.

In the construction of the OFVI, the following steps were applied and can be used to
identify a flood management process at regional scale:

1. Selection of the studied sites (urban and sub-catchment scales) and collection of data;
2. Use the appropriate variables common in the selected sites and associated with the flood
vulnerability;
3. Risk management study, plan determination, and its implementation.

Data were collected from a variety of sources (Appendix 2), including documents,
government and ministries. The data gathered pertained to the particular indicator to be
calculated for five oasean sub-catchments and five urban centers. The OFVI is an indicator-
based index which reflects the status of a scale’s flood vulnerability. This index was determined

10
for six components: climatic, physiographic, land use, anthropogenic, Economic and Access to
services.

The flood vulnerability indicators are heterogeneous. The data for each one was collected
through the technical literature from official websites and reports. There are three types of data
to calculate the OFVI:
1. Available data which provided by official organizations;
2. Values calculated using maps or dispersed data
3. Unavailable data was approximated using the survey;

In this paper, we used and normalized different variables (indicators) for each selected
spatial scale (at urban area and sub-catchment); in a numerical index that reflects the status of
a region’s flood vulnerability. The developed tool is the Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index. The
overall OFVI for each scale was determined by the calculating the index from the 36 indicators
for sub-catchment scale and 34 for urban scale. These indicators have been linked with the three
factors of vulnerability: susceptibility, exposure, and resilience (Table 3).

Table 3: Relationship between components and Exposure, Susceptibility, and Resilience

factors
Component Exposure Scale Susceptibility Scale Resilience Scale
Heavy rainfall (Hr) S.U
Evaporation rate (Er) S.U
Climate Frequency of occurrence
S
(Fo)
Evapo./Rainfall (Ev/R) S.U
Topography (T) Dams & storage capacity
S.U S.U
Physio- (Dsc)
graphic Proximity to river (Pr) S.U Roads (Rd) S.U
River discharge (Rds) S.U Dikes /levees (Dl) S.U
Degraded area (Da) Natural reservations (Nr) Recovery time to floods
S S U
(Rt)
Unpopulated land area Industries (In) Forested area (Fa)
Land use (Ula)
S U S
% of urbanize area (Ua) S Urban growth (Ug) S.U Green area (Ga) U
Contact with river (Cr) U Drainage system (Ds) U
Population density (Pd) S.U Past experience (Pe) S.U Warning system (Ws) S.U
Population in flood area Awareness &Preparedness Evacuation roades (Ed)
S.U S.U S.U
(Pfa) (A)
% of urban area (Ua) Communication penetration Emergency service (Es)
S S.U U
Anthro- (Cp)
pogenic Rural population (Rp) S Population growth U
Cultural heritage (C) U Child mortality S.U
HDI (H) S.U Disabled people S.U
Life expectancy Index Hospitals & Shelters (Hs)
S S.U
(Lex)
Proximity to river (Pr) Unemployment (Un) Dams & storage capacity
S.U S.U S.U
(Dsc)
Economic
% of urbanized area Inequality (In) Flood insurance (Fi)
S S.U S.U
(Ua)

11
 Amount of Investment Urban growth (Ug) Recovery time (Rt)
S S.U U
(Ai)
Child mortality (Cm) S.U Past experience (Pe) S.U
Dikes/levees (Dl) S.U
Economic recovery (Er) S.U
Disabled people (Dp) S.U Evacuation roades (Ed) S.U
Access to
Child mortality (Cm) S.U Hospitals& Shelters (Hs) U
services
Communication penetration Emergency service (Es)
S.U U
(Cp)
Where: S, represents Sub-catchment Scale; and U, represents Urban Scale

Societies are vulnerable to floods due to three main factors: exposure, susceptibility and
resilience (Balica et al., 2009). The vulnerability of any system (at any scale) is reflective of (or
a function of) the exposure and susceptibility of that system to hazardous conditions and the
resilience of the system to adapt and/or recover from the effects of those conditions (Smit &
Wandel, 2006). Exposure can be understood as the values that are present at the location where
floods can occur. These values can be goods, infrastructure, cultural heritage, agricultural fields
and people (UN, 2003). Exposure is generally described as patterns and processes that estimate
its intensity and duration (Balica et al., 2009). Fekete (2009) describes exposure as the measure
of susceptible elements within a region threatened by a hazard, while in Penning-Rowsell et al.,
(2005), exposure is defined as the likelihood that humans and/or physical items (goods,
infrastructure, cultural heritage…) will be impacted by flooding. In case of the Coastal Cities
Flood Vulnerability Index (CCFVI), exposure is defined as ‘‘the predisposition of a system to
be disrupted by a flooding event due to its location in the same area of influence’’. The concept
of susceptibility, or sensitivity, has developed through the years. For example, Penning-
Rowsell and Chatterton defined susceptibility in 1977 as “the relative damageability of property
and materials during floods or other hazardous events”. The IPCC (2001) argued susceptibility
as the degree to which a system is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate-related
stimuli. At this moment, the definition is still argued and is creating confusion between social
and natural scientists. Susceptibility relates to system characteristics, including the social
context of flood damage, mainly the awareness and preparedness (Messner & Meyer, 2006).
The susceptibility indicators embrace general information on social relations and population
with special needs (children, elderly or disabled) (e.g. Blaikie et al., 1994; Watts & Bohle,
1993). Holling (1973), originally, defined resilience as ‘‘a measure of persistence of systems
and their ability to absorb change and disturbance and still maintain the same relationships
between populations and state variables’’. According to Pelling (2003), Resilience is “the
capacity of any kind of system, community, society or environment, potentially exposed to
hazards to adapt to any change, by resisting or modifying itself, in order to maintain or to

12
achieve an acceptable level of functioning and structure”. Resilience is therefore analyzed
through a political, administrative, environmental and social organizational evaluation (Di
Mauro, 2006). Based on Le Chatelier’s principle (Hatta, 1987), ‘‘Any change in status quo
prompts an opposing reaction in the responding system’’. All systems are in hazard, but their
vulnerability reflects the possible damages that can be expected in the case of an event. All the
components of the system can be affected by floods. After each flooding event, the social
system usually becomes stronger and gives feedback to reduce the vulnerability to future floods.
A system at risk is more vulnerable when it is more exposed to a hazard and it is more
susceptible to its forces and impacts. However, the system will be less vulnerable when it is
more resilient and less exposed.

The general OFVI (Eq. (1)) links the values of all indicators to flood vulnerability
components (climatic, physiographic, land use, anthropogenic, Economic and Access to
services.) and factors (susceptibility, exposure, and resilience), without balancing or
interpolating from a series of data.
Exposure * Susceptibility
OFVI= -------------------------------------- Eq. (1)
Resilience

The indicators belonging to exposure and susceptibility increase the OFVI, therefore, they
are placed at the nominator; however the indicators belonging to resilience decrease the flood
vulnerability index, this is why they are placed at the denominator (Dinh et al., 2012). The
indicators increasing the flood vulnerability (exposure and susceptibility) are multiplied and
divided by indicators decreasing flood vulnerability (resilience indicators), and integrated in the
calculator (Excel Office for example).

The calculation of each component, both in the urban and sub-catchment scale is based on
the following equations:

Urban scale:

 Climatic component:
𝐸𝑣
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑐 = [𝐻𝑟, 𝐸𝑟, ] Eq. (2 )
𝐸𝑟

 Physiographic:
[𝑇, 𝑃𝑟, 𝑅𝑑𝑠]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑝ℎ = Eq. (3 )
[𝐷𝑠𝑐, 𝑅𝑑, 𝐷𝑙]

 Land use component:

13
 [𝐶𝑟, 𝐼𝑛, 𝑈𝑔, 𝐷𝑠]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑙𝑢 = Eq. (4)
[𝑅𝑡, 𝐺𝑎]

 Anthropogenic component:
[𝑃𝑟, 𝑃𝑓𝑎, 𝐶, 𝐻, 𝑃𝑒, 𝐴, 𝐶𝑝, 𝐶𝑚, 𝐷𝑝, 𝐻𝑠 ]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑎𝑛 = Eq. (5)
[𝑊𝑠, 𝐸𝑑, 𝐸𝑠]

 Economic component:
[𝑃𝑟, 𝑈𝑛, 𝐼𝑛, 𝑈𝑔, 𝐶𝑚 ]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑒𝑐 = Eq. (6)
[𝐷𝑠𝑐, 𝐹𝑖, 𝑅𝑡, 𝑃𝑒, 𝐷𝑙]

 Access to services component:

[𝐷𝑝, 𝐶𝑚, 𝐶𝑝 ]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑎𝑠 = Eq. (7)
[𝐸𝑑, 𝐻𝑠, 𝐸𝑠]

Sub-catchment scale

 Climatic component:
𝐸𝑣
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑐 = [𝐻𝑟, 𝐸𝑟, , 𝐹𝑜] Eq. (8)
𝐸𝑟

 Physiographic:
[𝑇, 𝑃𝑟, 𝑅𝑑𝑠]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑝ℎ = Eq. (9)
[𝐷𝑠𝑐, 𝑅𝑑, 𝐷𝑙]

 Land use component:

[𝐷𝑎, 𝑈𝑙𝑎, 𝑈𝑎, 𝑁𝑟, 𝑈𝑔]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑙𝑢 = Eq. (10)
[𝐹𝑎]

 Anthropogenic component:
[𝑃𝑟, 𝑃𝑓𝑎, 𝑈𝑎, 𝑅𝑝, 𝐻, 𝐿𝑒𝑥, 𝑃𝑒, 𝐴, 𝐶𝑝, 𝐶𝑚, 𝐷𝑝, 𝐻𝑠 ]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝐴𝑛 = Eq. (11)
[𝑊𝑠, 𝐸𝑑]

 Economic component:
[𝑃𝑟, 𝑈𝑎, 𝐴𝑖, 𝑈𝑛, 𝐼𝑛, 𝑈𝑔, 𝑆𝑚 ]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑒𝑐 = Eq. (12)
[𝐷𝑠𝑐, 𝐹𝑖, 𝑃𝑒, 𝐷𝑙, 𝐸𝑟]

 Access to services component:

[𝐷𝑝, 𝐶𝑚, 𝐶𝑝 ]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑎𝑠 = Eq. (13)
[𝐸𝑑]

Data for calculating the OFVI (and initially setting the response levels) were collected for
five oasis provinces: Guelmim, Tata, Zagora, Ouarzazate and Errachidia to provide some initial
testing of the model. This data was obtained from national and regional reports (Appendix 2).

A standardization method was used for adjusting indicator values in a scale from 0 to 1
(Table 4).The standardized formula of the OFVI is as follow Eq. (14)

14
 [𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑠𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑒 ]
𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 = Eq. (14)
[𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑚𝑎𝑥]

The Oasean flood vulnerability analysis was done using a detailed evaluation of the six
components of flood vulnerability: climatic component, physiographic component, land use
component, anthropogenic component, economic component and access to services. These
components were gathered and calculated to give the overall vulnerability.

The application of this formula for each component leads to six distinct OFV Iindices;

OFVIClimatic, OFVIPhysiographic, OFVILand use, OFVIAnthropogenic, OFVIEconomic, and OFVIAccess to

services, which aggregates into:

Total OFVI= ∑𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑐, 𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑝ℎ, 𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑙𝑢, 𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑎, 𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑒, 𝑂𝐹𝑉𝐼𝑎𝑠 Eq. (15)

The total OFVI is computed as a summation of the whole OFVIs of the sub-catchments and
urban components.

The OFVI of each of the social, economic, environmental and physical component is computed
using Eq. (1). The results of each OFVI component (climatic, physiographic, land use,
anthropogenic, Economic and Access to services.) are summed up in Eq.(15).The OFVI
methodology does not require researchers to judge the relative importance of different
components, i.e. they do not need to develop arbitrary weights for the indicators. The
Eq.(1)links the values of all indicators to flood vulnerability components and factors (exposure,
susceptibility, and resilience), without weighting, as suggested by Cendrero & Fischer (1997).
This is done because of the different number of rating judgments which, “lie behind combined
weights” or interpolating.

Table 4: Oasean Flood vulnerability designations as proposed based on the scale from 0 (no
damage) to 1 (total damage) defined by United Nations (1979) and from Balica, et al., (2014)
Index value Designations
<0.01 Very small vulnerability to floods
0,01 to 0,25 Small vulnerability to floods
0,25 to 0,5 Vulnerable to floods
0,5 to 0,75 High vulnerability to floods
0,75 to 1 Very high vulnerability to floods

15
4. Results

After data collection, the oasean flood vulnerability index was calculated for the six flood
vulnerability components and as the total OFVI. The indicator values are gathered, compiled
and standardized for five case studies selected from Moroccan pre-Sahara region, while the
total OFVI was determined by calculating it from the 36 indicators of each sub-catchment and
34 for each urban area.

4.1. At urban scale of the Moroccan Pre-Sahara

At the urban scale, we used the following equations: Eq.(2) for the climatic component,
Eq. (3)for the physiographic component, Eq. (4)for land use component, Eq. (5) for the
anthropogenic component, Eq. (6)for economic component and Eq. (7) for access to services
component. These equations lead in obtaining the results in Fig. 5.

Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index at Urban scale

1.00

0.80
Vulnerabilty

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00
Climate Physiogra Land use Anthropo Economi Access to Total
phic genic c Services
Ouarzazate 0.09 0.26 1.00 0.70 0.00 0.34 0.40
Zagora 0.10 0.02 0.11 0.70 0.09 0.64 0.28
Tata 0.19 0.02 0.67 0.87 0.12 0.46 0.39
Guelmim 0.78 0.28 0.34 1.00 1.00 0.12 0.59
Errachidia 1.00 1.00 0.54 0.93 0.01 1.00 0.75

Fig. 5. Oasean Flood vulnerability index of the five urban areas; The climatic
physiographic, land use, anthropogenic, economic, the access to services, and the total OFVI

The Fig.5 shows a comparison (Normalized values) between the five urban areas selected,
Ouarzazate city in Upper Draa Valley (Ouarzazate province), Zagora city in Middle Draa
Valley (Zagora province), Tata city in Lower Draa Valley (Tata province), Guelmim city in

16
Guelmim province and Errachidia city in Tafilalt or (Errachidia province), for the six
components and the total OFVI.

Climatic component

Errachidia (1) and Guelmim (0.78) has a very high vulnerability to floods; whereas, Tata
(0.19), Zagora (0.10) and Ouarzazate (0.09) are classified as having small vulnerability to
floods.

Physiographic component

Errachidia (1) has a very high vulnerability to floods; Guelmim (0.28) and Ouarzazate
(0.26) are vulnerable; whereas, Tata (0.02) and Zagora (0.02) are classified as small vulnerable
to floods.

Land use component

Ouarzazate (1) has a very high vulnerability to floods; Tata (0.67) and Errachidia (0.54) are
highly vulnerable; whereas Guelmim (0.34) is vulnerable and Zagora (0.11) is classified as
having small vulnerability to floods.

Anthropogenic component

Fourteen indicators are used to determine the Anthropogenic OFVI values as showed in
Table 3. These indicators emphasize clearly that Guelmim (1), followed by Errachidia (0.93)
and Tata (0.87) are very high vulnerable to floods because these cities are characterized by
widespread poverty, high rates of unemployment and illiteracy. During floods, planning and
measures taken into these cities are inadequate. As to the Ouarzazate and Zagora cities (0.7),
are highly vulnerable.

Economic component

The economic component is largely sensitive to the value of storage capacity of the study
area because the retention capacity improves the resilience of the cities. Guelmim city has very
high vulnerability to floods; Tata and Zagora cities have small vulnerability; whereas the
Ouarzazate and Errachidia city has very small vulnerability to floods. The highest vulnerability
of Guelmim city is due to the low storage capacity. The other four case studies present low
values of exposure. This relative small vulnerability or higher resilience is due to the relative
higher storage capacity. Effectively, the three cities (Zagora, Ouarzazate and Errachidia) take
advantages of the following dams (www.water.gov.ma) and small reservoirs (Ouhajou, 1996).
17
  Mansour Eddahbi Dam (560 Mm³) near the Ouarzazate city and upstream of the Zagora
city, plus five more small reservoirs in Zagora province: Agdez (3.14 m3/s), Tansikht
(6.77 m3/s), Ifly (11 m3/s), Azghar (3.3-11 m3/s) and Bounou (4 m3/s), where Agdez,
Tnasikht and Ifly are situated upstream of the Zagora city;
 To add Mansour Eddahbi Ouarzazate province has a second dam called Tiouine (100
Mm3);
 Hassan Edakhil(347.0 Mm3) located upstream of the Errachidia city;
 Inputs into the Dam Guelta Zerga are estimated between 160 and 200 million m3 / year.

However, in Guelmim, there are just seven thresholds derivation (small dams) concrete,
masonry or gabions have been constructed and are used to derive flow rates from 15 to 30 m3/s
per small dam, for a total derivation capacity of 174 m3/s in Guelmim province
(www.water.gov.ma).

Access to services component

According to Fig. 5, Errachidia (1) has very high vulnerability to floods, Zagora (0.46) has
high vulnerability, while Tata (0.46) and Ouarzazate (0.34) are vulnerable to floods. The low
vulnerability of Tata and Ouarzazate is due to the followings: low rainfall, low land use value,
and high evaporation/rainfall rate. The environmental vulnerability of Errachidia and Zagora to
floods is higher than in the three other cities studied. Fig. 5 illustrates that Errachidia city has a
higher environmental vulnerability to floods due to a relative large rainfall amount and the low
percentage of green areas.

Total Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index (OFVI total)

All the components together give the total value of the flood vulnerability index for each
case study (each urban area). Errachidia (0.75) is very high vulnerable, Guelmim (0.59) is
highly vulnerable to floods; while the three other cities (Ouarzazate (0.40), Tata (0.39), and
Zagora (0.28) are vulnerable to floods. Comparing these four later cities, the total OFVI makes
Errachidia and Guelmim the most vulnerable urban area, then Ouarzazate, Tata, and Zagora.
Flood management leads to decrease the flood impacts of the socio-economical sector in the
pre-Saharan region. The traditional management widely observed in developing countries and
vulnerable region take account mainly the economic loses than the environmental and social
components. As a measure to recover after a flooding event, i.e flood insurance, which provides
compensation for losses caused by the flood. Particularly, in the case studies, the insurance is

18
not included in the flood risks. The second measure is rehabilitation. The post-flood
management problems can be pre-planned. In order to achieve this, objective surveys need to
be carried covering human casualties and material damage. On the basis of an objective
assessment of hazard, economic, social, and environmental factors, the government should
impose that the future development projects will be compliant with the local flood vulnerability.

4.2. At Sub-catchments scale of the Moroccan Pre-Sahara

The calculating of the OFVI at sub-catchment scale in Moroccan Pre-Sahara requires a

total of 36 indicators. Eq.(8) was used for the climatic component, Eq.(9) for the physiographic
component, Eq. (10)for the land use component, Eq. (11) for the anthropogenic component,
Eq.(12)for the economic component, and Eq.(13)for the access to services component. These
equations lead in obtaining the results in Fig. 6.

Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index at Sub-catchment scale

1.000
0.900
Vulnerability

0.800
0.700
0.600
0.500
0.400
0.300
0.200
0.100
0.000
Climate Physiogr Land use Anthropo Economi Access to Total
aphic genic c Services
UDV 0.747 1.000 0.048 0.137 0.003 0.578 0.419
MDV 0.840 0.067 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.818
Tata 1.000 0.114 0.004 0.004 0.000 0.692 0.302
Guelmim 0.514 0.251 0.157 0.404 0.000 0.767 0.349
Errachidia 0.500 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.548 0.176

Fig. 6. Flood vulnerability index of the five sub-catchments areas for the climatic,
physiographic, land use, anthropogenic, economic, and access to services components, and
the total OFVI

Fig. 6 shows a comparison (Normalized values) between the five sub-catchments areas
selected, Upper Draa Valley, Middle Draa Valley (Zagora province), Tata sub-catchment
(Lower Draa Valley or Tata province), Guelmim sub-catchment in Guelmim province and
Errachidia sub-catchments city in Tafilalt or (Errachidia Province), for the six components

19
(Climatic component, Physiographic component, Land-use component, Anthropogenic
component, Economic component, the Access to services component) and the total OFVI.

Climatic component

The five sub-catchments are all vulnerable to the climatic component. Tata sub-catchment
(1), Middle Draa Valley (0.84) and Upper Draa Valley (0.74) are the most vulnerable to floods.

Physiographic component

Six indicators are used to determine the values of the physiographic component of the five
case studies. The UDV (1) sub-catchment is physically the highest vulnerable to flood (very
high vulnerable) due to the effect of large terrain varying between 4000 and 1000 (m.a.s.l.),
while Guelmim is vulnerable (0.25), Tata (0.11) having small vulnerability, while MDV (0.065)
and Errachidia (0.006) being respectively, small and very small vulnerable to flood.

Land use component

Regarding land use component, MDV (1) shows a very high score of vulnerability,
however, Guelmim (0.15) have a small vulnerability and UDV (0.048). The value for the OFVI
Lu of Errachidia and Tata are near to zero. These values can be explained by the low
anthropogenic influence. These values can help the flood vulnerability analysis to define
strategies for the reduction of the land use OFVI for the areas having the very high vulnerability.

Anthropogenic component

Comparing the five sub-catchments, MDV (1) is socially the most vulnerable to floods
(very high vulnerability), flowed by Guelmim that is vulnerable. This vulnerability is due to the
high number of rural population, most disabled people, and the non-functional warning system
than the others sub-catchments. Regarding the other sub-catchment, the UDV (0.13) is small
vulnerable, but Errachidia and Tata are very small vulnerable to floods.

Economic component

The OFVI shows that the MDV sub-catchment has the high vulnerability to floods than the
other pre-Saharan sub-catchments. These later sub-catchments score values 0 to values close to
0), with a small difference between them. The storage capacity has a large influence on the
economic OFVI component. Its economic OFVI reflects that it is not economically vulnerable
to floods. Industrial facilities are very small and not vulnerable.

20
Access to services component

According to Fig. 5, MDV (1) and Guelmim (0.76) have very high vulnerability to floods,
while. Tata (0.69), UDV (0.57) and Errachidia (0.54) sub-catchments have high vulnerability.
The relative high vulnerability of these sub-catchments is due to the followings: the small
number of equipped Hospitals and Emergency service, the high rate of child mortality and the
low Communication penetration.

Total Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index (OFVI total)

The components (climatic, physiographic, land use, anthropogenic, Economic and Access
to services.) together give the total value of the Oasean flood vulnerability index of each sub-
catchment. The Tata (0.55), Guelmim (0.54), and roughly UDV (0.5), have very similar values.
These values lead to classifying the three sub-catchments as vulnerable to floods. Regarding
the two other sub-catchments, can be seen that MDV (0.81) is very high vulnerable, however,
Errachidia (0.17) has the small vulnerability to flood. Comparing the whole components, the
MDV sub-catchment is the most vulnerable, with the exception of the physiographic
component. Developing plans to reduce these components may reduce the total OFVI of the
MDV.

5. Discussion

The challenges posed by climate change increase the importance of adaptation in Moroccan
pre-Saharan region. Reduced vulnerability and adaptation to CC cannot be achieved by one
sector alone, but all sectors that depend directly or indirectly on services provided by this
environment. The impact of these practices include the loss of land and other natural resources
(loss of biodiversity and reduced agricultural).

Together, these effects cause a deterioration of living conditions and poverty especially in
the rural population. Today, CC aggravates these problems. This paper also provides from its
results basic management of flood risk and informs decision-makers in development and urban
planning. At the urban scale, the anthropogenic vulnerability is very high, and the government
should reduce vulnerability mainly in Guelmim and Errachidia, but also reduce economic
vulnerability in Guelmim, the land use vulnerability in Ouarzazate and Tata and physiographic
vulnerability in Errachidia.

21
 The violent storms (reached 250 mm in a few hours in high altitudes) have occurred in
November 2014 affecting at least 32 fatalities and damages and were declared a “disaster area”
(Theilen-Willige et al., 2015). What results the breaking of the Oued levees, many roads were
closed and power and telephone networks were damaged, a hundred of houses were destroyed,
and dozens of roads blocked (Theilen-Willige et al., 2015).

For the sub-catchment scale, the government should create plans to reduce the climatic,
land use, anthropogenic, economic and access to services vulnerabilities mainly in Middle Draa
Valley, and mitigate physiographic vulnerability in Upper Draa Valley sub-catchment, climatic
vulnerability in Tata sub-catchment.

To increase the socio-economic level of the poorest people, the government must invest in
public transport; education (schools), appropriate housing (economical) (Khan, 2001).Reducing
social inequalities in flood vulnerability is the right thing to do (Walker & Burningham, 2011).
Reducing vulnerability also fight existing socio-economic problems. Because reducing
vulnerability is an interdisciplinary problem. It requires that physical, social and economic
scientists and engineers work together to take the lead on flood vulnerability issues.

The methodology used in this paper is based on several indicators for different factors and
two geographical scales, focusing on fluvial and urban floods. Various indicators were taken
into account to assess flood vulnerability.

The OFVI allows to give solutions by identifying the most and the less vulnerable
geographical scale in different sectors (climatic, physiographic, land use, anthropogenic,
economic and access to services.), and to also bring out an easy to use tool which can be applied
and used by the non-scientific community. The results of the OFVI study allow that increased
knowledge of these sectors can help to assess and manage presumptive floods. In this way, the
OFVI helps identify the exact areas of potential vulnerability for the particularity or elements
at risk disregarding of the intensity of the flood, which may occur. The OFVI approach
attempted to accomplish to take in social science knowledge to define the index indicators
individually and thus calculate their vulnerability. As a reminder, the limitation of existing work
shows that most collected data are descriptive. That is because most data is gathered and stored
in different ways and formats like this, in turn, can make comparisons difficult. Therefore, data
computation and preparation for such assessments help to derive higher accuracy. The OFVI
assessment demonstrated that the OFVI tool can be applied at arid zone (Moroccan pre-Sahara),

22
and can generate a range of information to help implement infrastructure projects and to identify
areas of risk. The OFVI study provides insights the natural and social susceptibility to flooding
for the six dimensions of the climatic component, physiographic component, land use
component, anthropogenic component, economic component and access to services component
for the urban scale. The results of the OFVI study could be used for planning of new or better-
protected settlement in the area.

Economic development is often associated with pressures on ecosystems and ecosystem

services by the mean of the overuse of forest woods, the urban development, water shortage,
etc.To fight against the effects of floods, two types of measures must be taken (structural and
non-structural measures). Several structural measures can be taken such as dams and dikes.
Planting trees in the upstream area of each sub-catchment can be seen as a method to protect
and combat soil erosion. However, the non-structural measures are the actions like; response,
preparedness, warning systems, rehabilitation planning, and flood fighting, etc. The oases
zones of Morocco are located near the river to facilitate the use of surface water. This location
near the watercourse beds causes the exposure of these areas to flood risk. The oasis is both
with high agricultural values, ecological, landscape and cultural and territories weakened.
Obviously as in other countries, reducing the hazard, while, minimizing impacts on the natural
environment and the socio-economic sector, through the construction of dams and facilities can
maintain flood-prone areas. The current policy, construction of big and small dams, against
flooding in the oasis basins can allow the reduction of the hazard of flooding.

Comparing the flood vulnerability of the urban areas with the sub-catchments, we see that
at urban scale in anthropogenic component in all selected urban centers and mainly in Guelmim,
the government should reduce vulnerability in Guelmim firstly and Errachidia secondly, and
reduce economic vulnerability in Guelmim, physiographic vulnerability in Errachidia and land
use in Ouarzazate and then in Guelmim. However, for sub-catchment the government should
firstly reduce vulnerability in Guelmim and secondly in the Middle Draa Valley, and reduce
access to services vulnerability in MDV and Guelmim sub-catchments, economic vulnerability
in the Middle Draa Valley (MDV) sub-catchment and physiographic.

For the applicability of Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index and as for all methods of
modeling numeric data, the OFVI is associated with some points of strengths and weaknesses.
The strengths of this method: the OFVI allows us to gather indicators for all aspects of flood
vulnerability; it allows also integrating quantitative and qualitative for different scales (sub-

23
catchment and urban scales) in order to compare local vulnerability to floods (in six different
components). However, the major weaknesses of this index are the data collection that is much-
dispersed data, difficulties of access and a high cost of data collection. For our case, we have
gathered, compiled, sometimes estimated all the necessary data from several documents and
official websites (as mentioned in appendix 2, column 5). As reported by Karmaoui &
Moumane, (2016), the use of this kind of composite indicators is affected by the data quality.
Another challenge, it is the qualitative character of this index. Uncertainty is not removed, but
is integrated into the assessment. On the other hand, the complexity of OFVI methodology is
also a negative point since it takes a long time and good knowledge of the area and the system
behind the OFVI to be able to implement it.

Comparing the proposed index, the Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index with existing Flood
vulnerability index (Table 5), five components at two different scales were established. The
OFVI gives a new classification of three aspects of flood vulnerability, access to services, land
use, and anthropogenic).

Table 5. Comparison between the Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index (OFVI) and the Flood
vulnerability index (FVI) in the literature
OFVI FVI FVI CCFVI CBFVI FloodVI
Oasean Flood Flood Coastal Community FVI using
Flood Vulnerabili Vulnerabili CitiesFlood Based (Principal
Vulnera ty Index ty Index Vulnerabili Flood Component
In full
bility ty Index Vulnerabili Analysis &
Index. ty Index Cluster
Analysis)
(Villordon,
(Connor &
This (Balica et (Balica et & (Fernandez
Source Hiroki,
study al., 2009) al., 2012) Gourbesvill et al., 2016)
2005)
2016)
Urban & Urban, sub- Basins Cities Urban Neighborho
Scales subcatch catchment, od level
ments and basins
Pre- Limpopo, South Manila, 12 Portuguese
Sahara Nile, Loire, Asia,Africa Osaka, communitie municipality
Amazon, , South Casablanca, s of Vila Nova
Mekong, America, Rotterdam, (Dumaguet de Gaia
Danube, Europe Calcutta, e City
Regions
Rhine, Dhaka, Philippines
Pre-Sahara Marseille, )
Shanghai,
and Buenos
Aires
Climatic C + +
Hydro-climatic C +
Social C + + + + +

24
 Hydro-geologic + +
C
Physiographic C +
Economic C + + + + + +
Physical C + +
Environmental C + +
Countermeasure +
C
Access to +
services C
politico- + +
administrative C
Socio-behavioral +
C
Land use C +
Anthropogenic C +
FVI, Flood Vulnerability Index ; C, component; + presence

6. Conclusion

The methodology used in this paper is based on several indicators for different factors and
two geographical scales, focusing on fluvial and urban floods. Various indicators were taken
into account to assess flood vulnerability. The Oasean Flood vulnerability Index was used for
these case studies at two scales (sub-catchment scale and area scale). A lot of data was needed
to estimate the flood vulnerability indicators for each of the two areas. An accurate assessment
of flood vulnerability is difficult, due to the lack of official necessary data. However, in order
to complete this evaluation, more data were collected via social questionnaires, official
documents, and websites (see Appendix 2).
The OFVI can show readily implicit and readily communicated results that can help decision-
makers in identifying the most effective measures to be taken.

Social indicators are difficult to quantify. On the other hand, such a parametric method can
give a basic way of characterizing what in reality is an intricate system. Such results will help
giveing an indication of whether a system is resilient, susceptible or exposed to flooding risks
and help identify which measures would reap the best return on investment under a changing
climate and population and development expansion.

At urban area (Fig. 7), Errachidia (0.75) is very high vulnerable, Guelmim (0.59) is highly
vulnerable to floods; while the three other cities (Ouarzazate (0.40), Tata (0.39), and Zagora
(0.28) are vulnerable to floods. Comparing these four later cities, the total OFVI makes
Errachidia and Guelmim more vulnerable urban area, then Ouarzazate, Tata, and Zagora.
25
Regarding the sub-catchment scale (Fig.7), the Tata (0.55), Guelmim (0.54), and roughly UDV
(0.5) have very similar values. These values lead to classifying the three sub-catchments as
vulnerable to floods. Regarding the two other sub-catchments, can be seen that MDV (0.81) is
very high vulnerable, however, Errachidia (0.17) has the small vulnerability to flood.
Thereafter, the MDV sub-catchment is the most vulnerable.

Fig. 7. Total scores of the oasean flood vulnerability index

Concerning the applicability of Oasean Flood Vulnerability Index methodology can be

summarized as follows:
 The flood vulnerability can be reflected by exposure, susceptibility and resilience
factors;
 The sub-catchment and urban systems can be damaged regarding six different
components estimated in the result section.
 The OFVI is adaptable to different uses in the Moroccan pre-Saharan region and all
oasean regions of the North Africa (Algeria, Tunisia, Libya…).
 This tool allows to identify the risks and the management methods to assess flood
vulnerability;
 Find out the priority components and sectors of flood vulnerability in order to take
urgent measures;
 The OFVI is applicable in sub-catchment and urban area scales in the pre-Saharan
region.

26
Acknowledgments
The first author acknowledges support and helped the interviewed people. Their help and
support is highly appreciated. We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their
comments.

References
Adger, W. N. (1999). Social vulnerability to climate change and extremes in coastal Vietnam.
World development, 27(2), 249-269.
Adger, W. N. (2006). Vulnerability. Global environmental change, 16(3), 268-281.
Anon.(2004). Chiffres clés 2004. Rabat: Haut Commissariat au Plan. Direction de la statistique.
http://www.statistic-hcp.ma/
Balica, S., Dinh, Q., Popescu, I., Vo, T. Q., & Pham, D. Q. (2014). Flood impact in the Mekong
Delta, Vietnam. Journal of Maps, 10(2), 257-268.
Balica, S. F., Wright, N. G., & van der Meulen, F. (2012). A flood vulnerability index for
coastal cities and its use in assessing climate change impacts. Natural hazards, 64(1),
73-105. DOI 10.1007/s11069-012-0234-1
Balica, S. F., Douben, N., & Wright, N. G. (2009). Flood vulnerability indices at varying
spatial scales. Water science and technology, 60(10), 2571-2580.
Balica, S.F., & Wright, N. G. (2009). A network of knowledge on applying an indicator‐based
methodology for minimizing flood vulnerability. Hydrological processes, 23(20),
2983-2986.
Balica, S. F., Douben, N., & Wright, N. G. (2009). Flood vulnerability indices at varying spatial
scales. Water science and technology, 60(10), 2571-2580.
Balica, S.F., & Wright, N. G. (2010). Reducing the complexity of the flood vulnerability index.
Environmental Hazards, 9(4), 321-339.
Balica, S. F., Wright, N. G., & van der Meulen, F. (2012). A flood vulnerability index for coastal
cities and its use in assessing climate change impacts. Natural hazards, 64(1), 73-105.
Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., & Wisner, B. (2004). At risk: natural hazards, people's
vulnerability and disasters. Routledge.
Carter, M. R., Little, P. D., Mogues, T., & Negatu, W. (2007). Poverty traps and natural
disasters in Ethiopia and Honduras. World development, 35(5), 835-856.
Cendrero, A., & Fischer, D. W. (1997). A procedure for assessing the environmental quality of
coastal areas for planning and management. Journal of Coastal Research, 732-744.
Chambers, R. (1989). Editorial introduction: vulnerability, coping and policy. IDS bulletin,
20(2), 1-7.
Connor, R. F., & Hiroki, K. (2005). Development of a method for assessing flood vulnerability.
Water science and technology, 51(5), 61-67.
Coulson, D., & Joyce, L. (2006). Indexing variability: a case study with climate change impacts
on ecosystems. Ecological Indicators, 6(4), 749-769.
CSIG, (2008). Etude pour la réalisation d’une cartographie et d’un système d’information
géographique sur les risques majeurs au Maroc. Mission 1 identification des risques le
risque d’inondation. Version 1.0 Septembre-2008.

27
Cutter, S. L. (2006). Hazards, Vulnerability, and Environmental Justice. London and Sterling,
VA: Earthscan. 418 pp. Cutter, S. L., Boruff, B. and Shirley,W. L., (2003), Social
vulnerability to environmental azards. Social Sciences Quarterly, 84(2). 242–261.
Cutter, S. L. (1996). Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Progress in human geography,
20(4), 529-539.
Dahan R, Boughlala M, Mrabet R, Laamri A, Balaghi R and Lajouad L. (2012). A Review of
available knowledgs on land degradation in Morocco.ICARDA, International Center for
Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas.
Di Mauro C (2006). Regional vulnerability map for supporting policy definitions and
implementations. ARMONIA conference ‘‘multi-hazards: challenges for risk assessment,
mapping and management’’, Barcelona
Dinh, Q., Balica, S.F., Popescu, I., & Jonoski, A. (2012). Climate change impact on flood
hazard, vulnerability and risk of the Long Xuyen Quadrangle in the Mekong Delta.
International journal of river basin management, 10(1), 103-120.
DHS, (2004). PAUVRETE, DEVELOPPEMENT HUMAIN ET DEVELOPPEMENT
SOCIAL AU MAROC. Données cartographiques et statistiques. Septembre 2004.
EVICC, (2011a). Evaluation de la vulnérabilité et des impacts du changement climatique dans
les oasis du Maroc et structuration de stratégies territoriales d’adaptation. Mission 1.1 :
Bilan‐Diagnostic des vulnérabilités climatiques et des capacités d’adaptation en situation
actuelle Bassin oasien de Dadès‐ Draa ‐Mai 2011. Pages 64 et 65.
EVICC, (2011b). Evaluation de la vulnérabilité et des impacts du changement climatique
dans les oasis du Maroc et structuration de stratégies territoriales d’adaptation. Mission
1.1 : Bilan-Diagnostic des vulnérabilités climatiques et des capacités d’adaptation en
situation actuelle. Rapport complémentaire - Octobre 2011.
EVICC, (2011c). Evaluation de la vulnérabilité et des impacts du changement climatique dans
les oasis du Maroc et structuration de stratégies territoriales d’adaptation. Mission 1.1 :
Bilan‐Diagnostic des vulnérabilités climatiques et des capacités d’adaptation en
situation actuelle Bassin oasien du Ziz‐ Tafilalet ‐Mai 2011
EVICC, (2011d). Evaluation de la vulnérabilité et des impacts du changement climatique dans
les oasis du Maroc et structuration de stratégies territoriales d’adaptation. Mission 1.1 :
Bilan‐Diagnostic des vulnérabilités climatiques et des capacités d’adaptation en
situation actuelle Bassin oasien de Dadès‐ Draa ‐Mai 2011
EVICC, (2011e). Evaluation de la vulnerabilité et des impacts du changement climatique dans
les oasis du Maroc et structuration de stratégies territoriales d’adaptation. Mission 1.1 :
Bilan-Diagnostic des vulnerabilités climatiques et des capacités d’adaptation en
situation actuelle. Bassin oasien de Guelmim - Tata -Mai 2011.
Fekete, A. (2009). Validation of a social vulnerability index in context to river-floods in
Germany. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9(2), 393-403.
Fernandez, P., Mourato, S., Moreira, M., & Pereira, L. (2016). A new approach for computing
a flood vulnerability index using cluster analysis. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth,
Parts A/B/C, 94, 47-55.
Fuchs, S., Kuhlicke, C., & Meyer, V. (2011). Editorial for the special issue: vulnerability to
natural hazards—the challenge of integration. Natural Hazards, 58(2), 609-619.

28
HCP, (2010). LE MAROC DES REGIONS 2010. ROYAUME DU MAROC. HAUT-
COMMISSARIAT AU PLAN
Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual review of ecology
and systematics, 4(1), 1-23.
Hufschmidt, G. (2011). A comparative analysis of several vulnerability concepts. Natural
hazards, 58(2), 621-643.
IPCC, (2012). Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change
adaptation. Special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change.Intergovernmental panel on climate change : 978-1-107-02506-6.
IPCC (2007). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, AR4, Fourth Assessment Report:
Climate Change 2007.
IPCC (2001). Intergovernmental panel on climate change, Climate change 2001: The scientific
basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Griffith, T. K., & Gabor, T. (1979). The assessment of community vulnerability to acute
hazardous materials incidents.
Kabiri, (2012.Desertification trends and local action in the oases of Tafilalt, South-East
Morocco. Encounters Across the Atlas : Fieldtrip in Morocco 2011.
http://hdl.handle.net/10138/37939). ISSN 0786-2172.
Karmaoui, A., Messouli, M., Khebiza, Y. M., & Ifaadassan, I. (2014a). Environmental
Vulnerability to climate change and anthropogenic impacts in dryland,(Pilot study:
Middle Draa Valley, South Morocco). Journal of Earth Science & Climatic Change,
(S11), 1. doi:10.4172/2157-7617.S11-002 .
Karmaoui, A., Messouli, M., Ifaadassan, I., & Khebiza, M. Y. (2014b). A multidisciplinary
approach to assess the environmental vulnerability at local scale in context of climate
change (Pilot study in upper draa valley, South Morocco). Glob. J. Technol. Optim, 6,
1-11.doi: 10.4172/2229-8711.1000167.
Karmaoui, A., Ifaadassan, I., Messouli, M.,& Yacoubi Khebiza, M., (2015a). Monetarization
of Ecosystem Services of Oasean Biome (Case study: provisioning services of Middle
Draa Valley Oases), British Journal of Applied Science & Technology. DOI:
10.9734/BJAST/2015/19689.
Karmaoui, A., Ifaadassan, I., Messouli, M.,& Yacoubi Khebiza, M., (2015b). Characterization
of Common Environmental Indicators of the Moroccan Oasean Biome, Pilot Study in
the Reserve Biosphere of Oases in Southern Morocco. Advances in Research. DOI:
10.9734/AIR/2015/19369.
Karmaoui A, & Moumane A, (2016). Changes in the Environmental Vulnerability of Oasean
System (desert oasis), Pilot Study in Middle Draa Valley, Morocco.Expert Opin Environ
Biol 5:3. doi:10.4172/2325-9655.1000135.
Khan, M. H. (2001). Rural poverty in developing countries: implications for public policy (Vol.
26). International Monetary Fund.
Klose, A. (2009). Soil characteristics and soil erosion by water in a semi-arid catchment (Wadi
Drâa, South Morocco) under the pressure of global change.
Lewis, J. (1999). Development in disaster-prone places: studies of vulnerability: Intermediate
Technology London.

29
McEntire, D., Gilmore Crocker MPH, C., & Peters, E. (2010). Addressing vulnerability through
an integrated approach. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built
Environment, 1(1), 50-64.
MEA, (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends. Dryland Systems,
David Niemeijer et al; 2005.
Messner, F., & Meyer, V. (2006). Flood damage, vulnerability and risk perception–challenges
for flood damage research. In Flood risk management: hazards, vulnerability and
mitigation measures (pp. 149-167). Springer, Dordrecht.
Minoia, P., & Kaakinen, I. (2012). Encounters Across the Atlas: Fieldtrip in Morocco 2011.
Molino, S., (2012). Report of the 2012 North East Victoria Flood Review, OFFICE of the
Emergency Services Commissioner , Trim Id: Cd/12/448164*, October 2012.
Mortimore, M., Anderson, S., Cotula, L., Davies, J., Faccer, K., Hesse, C., ... & Wolfangel, C.
(2009). Dryland Opportunies: A new paradigm for people, ecosystems and development.
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Ouhajou L, (1996). Espace Hydraulique et Société au Maroc. Cas des Systèmes d’Irrigation
dans laVallée du Dra (Doctoral thesis). Agadir: Université Ibn Zohr.
PACC, (2011). Projet d’adaptation au changement climatique au Maroc : vers des oasis
résilientes - mission 1 : mise en place d’un système d’alerte et de vigilance et d’alerte
contre les risques climatiques dans les régions des oasis du sud du Maroc. Composante
Guelmim – Tata. Mai 2011
PACC, (2012a). Projetd’adaptation au changement climatique au Maroc: vers des oasis
résilientes. Cap sur la résilience. Vers l’adaptation des territoires oasiens. Note de
communication. MAI 2012.
PACC, (2012b). Projet d’adaptation au changement climatique au Maroc : Vers des oasis
résilientes - mission 1 : Mise en place d’un système d’alerte et de vigilance et d’alerte
contre les risques climatiques dans les régions des oasis du sud du Maroc.
Penning-Rowsell, E., Floyd, P., Ramsbottom, D., & Surendran, S. (2005). Estimating injury
and loss of life in floods: a deterministic framework. Natural Hazards, 36(1-2), 43-64.
Pratt, C, Kaly, U. Mitchell, J. (2004). How to Use the Environmental Vulnerability Index,
UNEP/SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geo-science Commission, Technical Report 383,
On line at: www.vulnerabilityindex.net/Files/ EVI%20Manual.pdf.
Quinn, P. Hewet C. Popescu, I. Muste, M. (2010). Towards New Types of Water-centric
Collaboration: Instigating the Upper Mississippi River Basin Observatory Process, Water
Management, 163, 39–51
Ramade, F. (1989), Ecological Catastrophes, Futuribles, 1, 63-78.
RBOSM, (2008). Plan cadre de gestion de la Réserve de Biosphère des Oasis du Sud
Marocain (RBOSM) ; 2008. Version provisoire.
PFRRS, (2012.(Post-flood relief and recovery survey).Cambodia: Post-flood relief and
recovery survey, May 2012 (http://www.unicef.org/cambodia/)
RIAD, (2003). Typologie et analyse hydrologique des eaux superficielles 0 partir de quelques
bassins versants représentatifs du Maroc. Thèse en cotutelle université des sciences et
technologies de Lille & université IbnouZohr d’Agadir.
Saidi, M. E. M., Daoudi, L., Aresmouk, M. E. H., Fniguire, F., & Boukrim, S. (2010). The
Ourika floods (High Atlas, Morocco), Extreme events in semi-arid mountain context:

30
 Eventos extremos num contexto semi-árido montanhoso. Comunicações Geológicas,
113-128.
Smit, B., & Wandel, J. (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global
environmental change, 16(3), 282-292.
Theilen-Willige, B., Charif, A., Ouahidi, A. E., Chaibi, M., Ougougdal, M. A., & AitMalek, H.
(2015). Flash Floods in the Guelmim Area/Southwest Morocco–Use of Remote Sensing
and GIS-Tools for the Detection of Flooding-Prone Areas. Geosciences, 5(2), 203-221.
Timmerman, P. (1981). Vulnerability resilience and collapse ofsociety. A ReviewofModels and
Possible Climatic Appli-cations. Toronto, Canada. Institute for Environmental Studies,
University of Toronto.
United Nation (UN) (2003). Guidelines on participatory planning and management for flood
mitigation and preparedness, ix, 129 s.: ill., Water resources series, 0082-8130, no. 82,
United Nations: New York.
Vatsa, K., & Krimgold, F. (2000). Financing disaster mitigation for the poor. Managing
Disaster Risk in Emerging Economies, 129-136.
Villordon, M. B. B. L., & Gourbesville, P. (2016). Community-based flood vulnerability index
for urban flooding: Understanding social vulnerabilities and risks. In Advances in
Hydroinformatics (pp. 75-96). Springer, Singapore.
Walker, G., & Burningham, K. (2011). Flood risk, vulnerability and environmental justice:
Evidence and evaluation of inequality in a UK context. Critical social policy, 31(2), 216-
240.
Watts, M. J., & Bohle, H. G. (1993). The space of vulnerability: the causal structure of hunger
and famine. Progress in human geography, 17(1), 43-67.

Appendix 1: Questions applied to the interview

(Adapted from Molino, 2012 andPFRRS, 2012)

SAMPLE OF STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

1. What was your organisation’s role in floods?

2. What was your role in the incident?
3. Was a seamless and integrated approach provided to the community by emergency
management organisation’s during the incident? Yes/no (reasons)
4. What could be improved to deliver a more seamless and integrated approach?
5. Did you experience or do you know of any interoperable issues during the incident? Yes/No
if so, what were they? (list issues)

31
6. Prior to the flood, did the community, individuals, businesses and emergency management
organizations understand their roles in the event of a flood emergency? Yes/No (reasons)
7. What plans were in place to ensure the incident was well managed, coordinated and
communicated?
8. Was the local plan activated during the incident? Yes/No (reasons)
9. How could the management of the incident be improved? (list ways)
10. How effectively were vulnerable people supported in the incident?
11. Were people well informed about how to access support and essential services such as
shelter, food, water and medical care? Yes/No (reasons)
12. Partners interested in helping the poorest households and reducing the impact of future
natural disasters

13. Additional financial support, in the form of targeted social safety net activities, is needed
by the poorest and most vulnerable households to protect against the deterioration of the health
and nutritional status of their families, particularly children.
14. Was this provided in a timely way? Yes/No (reasons)
15. Did people continue to receive essential and critical services during the incident? Yes/No
(reasons)
16. Were the social, economic and environmental impacts rapidly assessed to develop the
recovery plan? Yes/No
17) Preparedness and recovery efforts will best be directed towards hygiene education, as well
as strategic prepositioning and continued distribution of water treatment materials in high-risk
and flood affected areas.

32
Appendix 2: Reference Data Sources
Urban area

Name Definition Units References

There is an important EVICC, 2011a ; 2011c, 2011d; and 2011e
Population people/k
1 exposure to a given hazard
density m2
if population is concentrated
Population in EVICC, 2011a ; EVICC, 2011e
Number of people living in
2 flood prone people
flood prone area
area
Number of historical Survey
Cultural buildings, museums, etc., in Monographic reports (2008, 2011)
3
Heritage danger when flood occurs, if
none take 1
% of the population growth Monographic reports (2008, 2011) provincial
Population
4 in urban areas in the last 10 % and regional www.hcp.com
growth
years
% of population with any www.hcp.com
Disabled kind of disabilities, also
5 %
People people less 15 and more
than 65
Human www.hcp.com
* HDI = 1/3(LEI) + 1/3(EI)
6 Development
+1/3(GI)
Index
Number of children less www.hcp.com and DHS, 2004
Child
7 than 1 year old, died per
Mortality
1000 births
Past # of people affected in last Survey and interviews
8 people
Experience 10 years because floods;
Awareness & Survey and interviews
9 Range between 1-10 (help)
Preparedness
Communicati www.hcp.com
1 on % of households with
%
0 Penetration sources of information
Rate
1 Shelters/Hospit Number of shelters per km2, Survey and interviews
#/km2
1 als including hospitals
If No WS than the value is EVICC, 2011b and c
1 Warning
1, if yes WS than the value
2 system
is 10
1 Emergency Number of people working Survey
#
3 Service in this service
1 Evacuation Monographie 2011
% of asphalted roads %
4 roads
# of industries or any types Monographie 2008..
1
Industries of economic activities in #
5
urban area
1 Contact with Distance of city along the Google earth
km
6 River river
UM = www.hcp.com
1 Unemployme
[ #of_people_unempl /Total_Pop_AptTo %
7 nt
Work ] * 100
2004
1 Gini Coefficient for wealth GINI:http://www.memoireonline.com/12/06/305/real
Inequality
8 inequality, between 0 and 1 isation-objectifs-du-millenaire-developpement-
maroc-optimisation-spatiale.html

33
 The number flood survey
1 Flood
insurances per 100
9 Insurance
inhabitants, if 0 than take 1
2 Amount of Ratio of investment over the Calculated from regional GDP
0 Investment total GDP HCP, 2010
2 Dikes_ Earth google and interviews
Km of dikes/levees km
1 Levees
Storage capacity in m3 of EVICC, 2011b, 2011cand 2011d
2 Dams_Storag
dams, polders, etc., m3 www.water.gov.ma
2 e capacity
upstream of the city
Amount of time needed by Survey
2 Recovery the city to recover to a
days
3 time functional operation after
flood events
2 www.water.gov.ma
Rainfall The average rainfall/year m/year
4 EVICC, 2011b, 2011cand 2011d
2 Area destined for green Google earth
Green Area %
5 areas inside the urban area
% of increase in urban area Historic of googleearth
in last 10 years; Fast urban
2 Urban growth may result in poor
%
6 Growth quality housing and thus
make people more
vulnerable
2 Evaporation Yearly decrease rate in EVICC, 2011b, 2011cand 2011d
m/year www.water.gov.ma
7 rate groundwater level
2 http://www.toutcalculer.com/batiment/calculer-
Topography Average slope of the city
8 une-pente.php
Maximum discharge in www.water.gov.ma
2 River
record of the last 10 years, m3/s
9 Discharge
m3/s
3 Evaporation Yearly Evaporation over Calculated from 24 and 27 indicators
0 rate/Rainfall yearly rainfall
The total volume of water, www.water.gov.ma
3 Dams Storage which can be stored by EVICC, 2011b, 2011cand 2011d
m 3
1 capacity dams, polders, etc. (amount
of storage capacity)
3 Drainage Km of canalization in the Survey and interviews
km
2 system city
Average www.water.gov.ma
3 Average River discharge at
River m3/s
3 the mouth
Discharge
Storage EVICC, 2011b, 2011cand 2011d
Amount of storage capacity
3 capacity over www.water.gov.ma
over the yearly average
4 yearly
runoff volume
discharge

Sub-catchment area

Name definition Units References

1 There is an important exposure to a EVICC, 2011a ; 2011c; & 2011d; and
Population people/k 2011e
given hazard if population is
density m 2
concentrated
2 Population
Number of people living in flood EVICC, 2011a ; EVICC, 2011e
in flood people
prone area prone area
3 Urbanized
% of total area which is urbanized %
Area

34
4 Rural % of population living outside of EVICC, 2011a ; EVICC, 2011e
%
population urbanized area
5
Disabled
% of population with any kind of www.hcp.com
People disabilities, also people less 15 and %
more than 65
6 Human www.hcp.com
Developme * HDI = 1/3(LEI) + 1/3(EI) +1/3(GI)
nt Index
7 Child Number of children less than 1 year www.hcp.com
Mortality old, died per 1000 births EVICC, 2011c, 2011d, 2011e,
8 Past # of people affected in last 10 years
people
Survey and interviews
Experience because floods;
9 Awareness Survey and interviews
&
Preparednes
Range between 1-10 (help)
s
1 Communica www.hcp.com
0 tion % of households with sources of
%
Penetration information
Rate
1 Warning If No WS than the value is 1, if yes EVICC, 2011a ; EVICC, 2011e
1 system WS than the value is 10
1 Evacuation
% of asphalted roads %
2 Roads
1 Proximity to average proximity of populated areas Google earth, survey and
km
3 river to flood prone areas interviews
1 % area used for industry, agriculture, Land use
Land Use %
4 any types of economic activities
1
Unemploym
UM = www.hcp.com
5 ent
[ #of_people_unempl /Total_Pop_Ap %
tToWork ] * 100
1 2004 GINI:
6 Gini Coefficient for wealth http://www.memoireonline.com/12/06/30
Inequality 5/realisation-objectifs-du-millenaire-
inequality, between 0 and 1 developpement-maroc-optimisation-
spatiale.html
1 Life
7 expectancy LEI = (LE - 25) / (85 - 25)
Index
1 Flood The number flood insurances per 100 Survey and interviews
8 Insurance inhabitants, if 0 than take 1
1 Amount of Ratio of investment over the total Calculated from regional GDP
9 Investment GDP HCP, 2010
2 Dikes_ Km of dikes/levees over total length Google earth and survey
%
0 Levees of river
2 Dams_Stora Amount of storage capacity over area www.water.gov.ma
m
1 ge capacity of sub-catchment
2 Economic How affected is the economy of a region Survey and interviews
2 Recovery at a large time scale, because of floods
2 The average rainfall/year of a whole EVICC, 2011b, 2011cand 2011d
m/
3 Rainfall RB www.water.gov.ma
year
= mm / (1000 * year) = m / year
2 Degraded Land use
% of degraded area %
4 Area

35
2 % of increase in urban area in last 10 Historic google earth
5 UrbanGrow years; Fast urban growth may result in
%
th poor quality housing and thus make
people more vulnerable
2 Forested Monographie, 2008 and 2011
% of forested area %
6 Area EVICC, 2011b, 2011cand 2011d
2 Evaporation m/ www.water.gov.ma
Yearly evaporation rate
7 rate year EVICC, , 2011b, 2011c and 2011d
2 Natural % of natural reservation over total
%
8 Reservation SC area
2 Unpopulate % of area with density of population
%
9 d Area less than 10 pers/km2
3 MNT and
0 Topography Average slope of sub-catchment http://www.toutcalculer.com/batiment
/calculer-une-pente.php
3 River Maximum discharge in record of the
m3/s www.water.gov.ma
1 Discharge last 10 years, m3/s
3 Frequency
2 of Years between floods years
occurrence
3 Evaporation Yearly Evaporation over yearly www.water.gov.ma
3 rate/Rainfall rainfall
3 Dams The total volume of water, which can be www.water.gov.ma
4 Storage stored by dams, polders, etc. (amount of m3
capacity storage capacity)
3 Average
Average River discharge at the www.water.gov.ma
5 River m3/s
Discharge mouth
3 Storage www.water.gov.ma
6 capacity Storage capacity divided by yearly
over yearly volume runoff
discharge

36