山东黄河段沿线区域洪灾风险评价与防洪措施
|
摘要
山东黄河段位于黄河下游，是典型的“地上悬河”。受大陆性季风气候的影响，在每年的3-4月、6-8月、9-11月、12月至翌年2月容易发生春汛、伏汛、秋汛和凌汛，对山东黄河段的经济发展和人民的生产生活带来严重影响。本文通过选取多年汛期平均降水、降水变率、地形、水系、植被、人口密度、GDP密度、单位面积粮食产量、交通密度等危险性和易损性指标，运用层次分析法列出判断矩阵并确定各个指标的权重，构建了山东黄河段洪水灾害综合风险评价模型，借助GIS的空间分析功能对研究区的洪水灾害风险进行了评价和划分等级，得到研究区洪水灾害风险指数图和等级图。
山东黄河段的洪水灾害风险指数值在0.01-0.64之间，平均值为0.193，标准差为0.093，风险指数越接近1，说明发生洪水灾害的可能性越大，反之，则小。根据风险指数的平均值和标准差划分为五个等级，即低风险区、较低风险区、中等风险区、较高风险区和高风险区。由得到的洪水灾害风险等级图可知，低风险区占11%、较低风险区占47%、中等风险区占31%、较高风险区占7%、高风险区占4%。等级高、较高、中等的区域分布在鲁中地区，较低和最低的区域分布在鲁西南、鲁西北平原。利用GIS的统计分析功能计算出研究区各个县（市）的平均指数，并针对不同地区的区域特点，结合不同级别风险区的风险管理对策，论文最后提出了对应县（市）的防洪减灾建议和城市发展规划，从而达到防洪减灾从局部到整体、从自然到人为的控制，促进研究区经济和社会的可持续发展。
本文得出的结论是：
①高风险区面积百分比超过50%的有3个，分别是桓台县、济南市、济宁市，在0-20%之间的有博兴县、商河县、邹平县、章丘市、齐河县、淄博市、长清县、泰安市、肥城市、汶上县、兖州市、嘉祥县、邹城市、微山县、鱼台县。这些地区社会经济易损性影响度最高，降水丰富，靠近主要河流（黄河、京杭大运河）和湖泊（南四湖），地形平坦的地方，容易积水，坡度大的地方就容易发生山洪，影响度大，叠加后的综合风险度高。
②较高风险区超过50%的有德州市、淄博市、泰安市、肥城市、曲阜市、兖州市，在50%以下的有桓台县、陵县、博兴县、广饶县、高青县、禹城市、邹平县、齐河县、长清县、莱芜市、平阴县、东平县、新泰市。
③中等风险区超过50%的有鱼台县、定陶县、邹城市、嘉祥县、鄄城县、汶上县、宁阳县、梁山县、新泰市、东平县、东阿县、长清县、聊城市、齐河县、章丘市、邹平县、禹城市、临邑县。
④较低风险区超过50%的有东营区、庆云县、乐陵市、宁津县、阳信县、陵县、滨州市、惠民县、济阳县、博兴县、武城县、平原县、广饶县、高青县、商河县、夏津县、高唐县、临清市、荏平县、冠县、莱芜市、莘县、平阴县、阳谷县、郓城县、泗水县、巨野县、东明县、微山县、金乡县、成武县、曹县、单县。
⑤低风险区超过50%的有无棣县、沾化县、利津县、垦利县、河口区、沂源县。
本研究对得出的洪水灾害风险等级区划图与山东黄河段各县（市）的历史洪水灾害的频次相比较，研究结果表明两者情况大致相符，说明本文具有一定的实用价值，可以为有关部门的决策和措施提供依据。
本文肯定了治水新思路对于防洪的重要性，在强化工程措施的同时，大力实施非工程措施，并根据风险评价的结果，提出一些非工程措施方面的建议。高和较高风险区需要做好雨情预报系统，中等风险区要对防洪工程进行加宽、加高和加固，对城市已有的洪水排泄系统进行重新规划，使其更加适应现代城市的发展，较低和低风险区则加强生态景观建设。
由于时间和能力有限以及数据获取的难度，论文在危险性和易损性指标选取方面不够全面，没有考虑到水文、泥沙、防洪工程等因素指标的影响。这也是今后要做的工作和研究的重点。
Shandong Yellow River section in the lower reaches of the Yellow River is is a typical "hangingriver".Affected by the continental monsoon climate,it is prone to spring flood, summer flood, autumnfloods and ice flood during March-April, June, August, September-November, December to nextFebruary,it has a serious impact on economic development and the production and living of the people onthe Yellow River segment. In this paper,we select ten indexs in years of flood season,use AnalyticHierarchy Process and judgment matrix to determine the weight of each index,Build disaster riskassessment model of the Shandong Yellow River section and evalue the level of flood risk in the study areawith the help of GIS spatial analysis function,at last,we get the map and level diagram of the study area.
Shandong Yellow River section of the flood disaster risk index values between0.01-0.64, mean0.193, standard deviation of0.093. The risk index closer to1,greater the likelihood of occurrence of flooddisasters,on the contrary,it is small.According to the risk index of mean and standard deviation,we dividedit into five levels,it is low-risk areas, lower-risk areas, medium-risk areas, high-risk areas and high riskareas.Form the flood disaster risk rating chart,we know low-risk areas accounted for11%, lower-risk areasaccounted for47%, medium risk areas accounted for31%,7%higher risk areas, high-risk areas4%.High-risk is in the central region of Shangdong,Lower and the lowest regional distribution insouthwestern Shandong and Shandong northwest plains.We use GIS in statistical analysis to calculate theaverage of the study area,for different parts of the regional characteristics,combined different levels of riskareas with risk management strategies,finally,we put forward the recommendations of the flood control andurban development planning in the corresponding area,so as to achieve the flood control from the local to the whole, from nature to human control, and promote the study area's economic and social sustainabledevelopment.
The conclusions of this paper are as follows:
①There are three places whose high risk districts' area percentage is over50%,they are Huan taiCounty,Ji nan and Ji ning.The places whose high risk districts' area percentage is between0to20%are:Boxing county,hanghe county,Zouping county,Zhangqiu,Qihe county,Zibo,Changqing county,Taian,Feicheng,Wenshang county,Yanzhou,Jiaxiang county,Zoucheng,Weishan county and Yutai county.The degreeof vulnerability of social and economical of these places are highest,These places have plenty ofrainfall,and close to the main river(The Yellow river and Grand Canal) and lake(Nansi Lake),the flat terrainis likely to accumulated water,the mountain torrents is likely to occur in the high gradient places.Thesehave a big influence, and the synthesized risking degree is high when added toghter.
②The places whose higher risk districts' area percentage is over50%are Dezhou,Zibo,Taian,Feicheng,Qufu,Yanzhou,whose same percentage is under50%are:Huantai county,Ling county,Boxing county,Guangrao county,Gaoqing county,Yucheng,Zouping county,Qihe county,Changqing county,Lai wu,Pingyincounty,Dongping county,Xintai county.
③The places whose medium risk districts' area percentage is over50%are:Yutai county,Dingtaocounty,Zoucheng,Jiaxiang county,Juancheng county,Wenshang county,Ningyang county, Liangshan county,Xintai county, Dongping county, Donge county,Changqing county, Liaocheng, Qihe county, Zhangqiu,Zouping county, Yucheng and Linyi county.
④The places whose lower risk districts' area percentage is over50%are:Dongying district,Qingyuncounty,LeLing,Ningjin county,Yangxin county,Ling county,Binzhou,Huimin county,Jiyang county,Boxingcounty,Wucheng county,Pingyuan county,Guangrao county,Gaoqing county,Shanghe county,Xiajin county, Gaotang county,Linqing,Renping county,Guan county,Laiwu,Shen county,Pingyin county,Guyang county,Yuncheng county,Sishui county,Juye county,Dongming county,Weishan county,Jinxiang county, Chengwucounty, Cao county,Shan county.
⑤The places whose low risk districts' area percentage is over50%are:Wudi county,Zhanhua county,Lijin county,Kenli county,Hekou district,Yiyuan county.
Compared the results of this paper with the reality,they are approximately the same.So this paper haveits practical value,it can offer the decision and measure basis for the related department.
This paper confirm the importance of the new thinking of water control to prevent flood,Along withthe strengthen of the structural measures,to vigorously implement the nonstructural measures,and givesome suggests about the nonstructural measures according to the results of risk assessment.The high andhigher risk districts need to complete the forecast of rain condition system,the medium risk districts need towiden,heighten and consolidate the flood control works,and replanning the the flood discharge system ofthe city,to make it more accommodate with the development of the modern city.Well to the low and lowerrisk districts, the landscape ecological construction need to be strengthened.
Because of the limit of time and ability and the difficulty to abtain the data,this paper is notcomprehensive in the index choose of danger and vulnerability,and fail to consider the effect of hydrology,sediment and flood control system.And these will be the work and the key investigation for the future.
山东黄河段的洪水灾害风险指数值在0.01-0.64之间，平均值为0.193，标准差为0.093，风险指数越接近1，说明发生洪水灾害的可能性越大，反之，则小。根据风险指数的平均值和标准差划分为五个等级，即低风险区、较低风险区、中等风险区、较高风险区和高风险区。由得到的洪水灾害风险等级图可知，低风险区占11%、较低风险区占47%、中等风险区占31%、较高风险区占7%、高风险区占4%。等级高、较高、中等的区域分布在鲁中地区，较低和最低的区域分布在鲁西南、鲁西北平原。利用GIS的统计分析功能计算出研究区各个县（市）的平均指数，并针对不同地区的区域特点，结合不同级别风险区的风险管理对策，论文最后提出了对应县（市）的防洪减灾建议和城市发展规划，从而达到防洪减灾从局部到整体、从自然到人为的控制，促进研究区经济和社会的可持续发展。
本文得出的结论是：
①高风险区面积百分比超过50%的有3个，分别是桓台县、济南市、济宁市，在0-20%之间的有博兴县、商河县、邹平县、章丘市、齐河县、淄博市、长清县、泰安市、肥城市、汶上县、兖州市、嘉祥县、邹城市、微山县、鱼台县。这些地区社会经济易损性影响度最高，降水丰富，靠近主要河流（黄河、京杭大运河）和湖泊（南四湖），地形平坦的地方，容易积水，坡度大的地方就容易发生山洪，影响度大，叠加后的综合风险度高。
②较高风险区超过50%的有德州市、淄博市、泰安市、肥城市、曲阜市、兖州市，在50%以下的有桓台县、陵县、博兴县、广饶县、高青县、禹城市、邹平县、齐河县、长清县、莱芜市、平阴县、东平县、新泰市。
③中等风险区超过50%的有鱼台县、定陶县、邹城市、嘉祥县、鄄城县、汶上县、宁阳县、梁山县、新泰市、东平县、东阿县、长清县、聊城市、齐河县、章丘市、邹平县、禹城市、临邑县。
④较低风险区超过50%的有东营区、庆云县、乐陵市、宁津县、阳信县、陵县、滨州市、惠民县、济阳县、博兴县、武城县、平原县、广饶县、高青县、商河县、夏津县、高唐县、临清市、荏平县、冠县、莱芜市、莘县、平阴县、阳谷县、郓城县、泗水县、巨野县、东明县、微山县、金乡县、成武县、曹县、单县。
⑤低风险区超过50%的有无棣县、沾化县、利津县、垦利县、河口区、沂源县。
本研究对得出的洪水灾害风险等级区划图与山东黄河段各县（市）的历史洪水灾害的频次相比较，研究结果表明两者情况大致相符，说明本文具有一定的实用价值，可以为有关部门的决策和措施提供依据。
本文肯定了治水新思路对于防洪的重要性，在强化工程措施的同时，大力实施非工程措施，并根据风险评价的结果，提出一些非工程措施方面的建议。高和较高风险区需要做好雨情预报系统，中等风险区要对防洪工程进行加宽、加高和加固，对城市已有的洪水排泄系统进行重新规划，使其更加适应现代城市的发展，较低和低风险区则加强生态景观建设。
由于时间和能力有限以及数据获取的难度，论文在危险性和易损性指标选取方面不够全面，没有考虑到水文、泥沙、防洪工程等因素指标的影响。这也是今后要做的工作和研究的重点。
Shandong Yellow River section in the lower reaches of the Yellow River is is a typical "hangingriver".Affected by the continental monsoon climate,it is prone to spring flood, summer flood, autumnfloods and ice flood during March-April, June, August, September-November, December to nextFebruary,it has a serious impact on economic development and the production and living of the people onthe Yellow River segment. In this paper,we select ten indexs in years of flood season,use AnalyticHierarchy Process and judgment matrix to determine the weight of each index,Build disaster riskassessment model of the Shandong Yellow River section and evalue the level of flood risk in the study areawith the help of GIS spatial analysis function,at last,we get the map and level diagram of the study area.
Shandong Yellow River section of the flood disaster risk index values between0.01-0.64, mean0.193, standard deviation of0.093. The risk index closer to1,greater the likelihood of occurrence of flooddisasters,on the contrary,it is small.According to the risk index of mean and standard deviation,we dividedit into five levels,it is low-risk areas, lower-risk areas, medium-risk areas, high-risk areas and high riskareas.Form the flood disaster risk rating chart,we know low-risk areas accounted for11%, lower-risk areasaccounted for47%, medium risk areas accounted for31%,7%higher risk areas, high-risk areas4%.High-risk is in the central region of Shangdong,Lower and the lowest regional distribution insouthwestern Shandong and Shandong northwest plains.We use GIS in statistical analysis to calculate theaverage of the study area,for different parts of the regional characteristics,combined different levels of riskareas with risk management strategies,finally,we put forward the recommendations of the flood control andurban development planning in the corresponding area,so as to achieve the flood control from the local to the whole, from nature to human control, and promote the study area's economic and social sustainabledevelopment.
The conclusions of this paper are as follows:
①There are three places whose high risk districts' area percentage is over50%,they are Huan taiCounty,Ji nan and Ji ning.The places whose high risk districts' area percentage is between0to20%are:Boxing county,hanghe county,Zouping county,Zhangqiu,Qihe county,Zibo,Changqing county,Taian,Feicheng,Wenshang county,Yanzhou,Jiaxiang county,Zoucheng,Weishan county and Yutai county.The degreeof vulnerability of social and economical of these places are highest,These places have plenty ofrainfall,and close to the main river(The Yellow river and Grand Canal) and lake(Nansi Lake),the flat terrainis likely to accumulated water,the mountain torrents is likely to occur in the high gradient places.Thesehave a big influence, and the synthesized risking degree is high when added toghter.
②The places whose higher risk districts' area percentage is over50%are Dezhou,Zibo,Taian,Feicheng,Qufu,Yanzhou,whose same percentage is under50%are:Huantai county,Ling county,Boxing county,Guangrao county,Gaoqing county,Yucheng,Zouping county,Qihe county,Changqing county,Lai wu,Pingyincounty,Dongping county,Xintai county.
③The places whose medium risk districts' area percentage is over50%are:Yutai county,Dingtaocounty,Zoucheng,Jiaxiang county,Juancheng county,Wenshang county,Ningyang county, Liangshan county,Xintai county, Dongping county, Donge county,Changqing county, Liaocheng, Qihe county, Zhangqiu,Zouping county, Yucheng and Linyi county.
④The places whose lower risk districts' area percentage is over50%are:Dongying district,Qingyuncounty,LeLing,Ningjin county,Yangxin county,Ling county,Binzhou,Huimin county,Jiyang county,Boxingcounty,Wucheng county,Pingyuan county,Guangrao county,Gaoqing county,Shanghe county,Xiajin county, Gaotang county,Linqing,Renping county,Guan county,Laiwu,Shen county,Pingyin county,Guyang county,Yuncheng county,Sishui county,Juye county,Dongming county,Weishan county,Jinxiang county, Chengwucounty, Cao county,Shan county.
⑤The places whose low risk districts' area percentage is over50%are:Wudi county,Zhanhua county,Lijin county,Kenli county,Hekou district,Yiyuan county.
Compared the results of this paper with the reality,they are approximately the same.So this paper haveits practical value,it can offer the decision and measure basis for the related department.
This paper confirm the importance of the new thinking of water control to prevent flood,Along withthe strengthen of the structural measures,to vigorously implement the nonstructural measures,and givesome suggests about the nonstructural measures according to the results of risk assessment.The high andhigher risk districts need to complete the forecast of rain condition system,the medium risk districts need towiden,heighten and consolidate the flood control works,and replanning the the flood discharge system ofthe city,to make it more accommodate with the development of the modern city.Well to the low and lowerrisk districts, the landscape ecological construction need to be strengthened.
Because of the limit of time and ability and the difficulty to abtain the data,this paper is notcomprehensive in the index choose of danger and vulnerability,and fail to consider the effect of hydrology,sediment and flood control system.And these will be the work and the key investigation for the future.
引文
[1]史培军.灾害研究的理论与实践[J].南京大学学报(自然科学版),1991(11):37-42.
[2] EM-DAT.The OFDA／CRDA international disaster database.www.em-dat.Net.
[3]高评伦等.山东省主要自然灾害及减灾对策[M].地震出版社.1994.
[4] Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).Guidelines and specifications for flood hazardmapping partners [M].USA: Federal Emergency Management Agency,2003.
[5] Masatoshi Shidawara.Flood hazard map distribution [J].Urban Water,1999,1:125-129.
[6] Md.Monirul Islam, Kimiteru Sado.Flood hazard assessment in Bangladesh using NOAA-AVHRRdata with geographical information system[J].Hydrological Process,2000,14:605-620.
[7]王艳艳,吴兴征.中国与荷兰洪水风险分析方法的比较研究[J].自然灾害学报.2005,14(8):19-24.
[8] Biswajit Mukhopadhyay,Joe Comelius,Warren Zehner.Application of kinematic wave theory forpredicting flash flood hazards on coupled alluvial fan-piedmont plain landforms[J].HydrologicalProcess,2003,17:863-868.
[9] Joy Sanyal,X.X. Lu.Remote sensing and GIS-based flood vulnerability assessment of humansettlements:a case study of Gangetic West Bengal,India[J].HydrologicalProcesses,2005,19(18):3699-3716.
[10] Gerardo Benito,Miehel Lang,Mariano Barriendos etal.Use of Systematic,Palae of flood andHistorial Data for the improvement of Flood Disk Estimation.Review of scientific method[J].Natural Hazards,2004,31:623-643.
[11] Michael Fedeski,Julie Gwilliam.Urban Sustain ability in the Presenee of flood and geologiealhazards: The development of a GIS一based vulnerability and risk assessment. Methodology[J].Landescape and Urban Planning.2007,83(l):50-61.
[12] Jeremy G. Carterlain White,Juliet Richards.Sustainability appraisal and flood risk management[J].Environmental impact Assessment Review.2009,29,(1):7-14.
[13]魏一鸣,金菊良.洪水灾害评估体系研究[J].灾害学,1997,12(3):1-5.
[14]魏一鸣,金菊良.洪水灾害研究进展[J].大自然探索,1998,17(3):1-6.
[15]魏一鸣.洪水灾害研究的复杂性理论[J].自然杂志,1999,21(3):139-142.
[16]史培军.再论灾害研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,1996,5(4):6-17.
[17]史培军.三论灾害系统研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(3):01-09.
[18]史培军.四论灾害系统研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2005,14(6):01-07.
[19]史培军.五论灾害系统研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2009,18(5):01-09.
[20]潘华盛,张桂华,董淑华.黑龙江省洪水灾害等级评估模型——模糊综合评价法[J].黑龙江气象.2000,2:1-4.
[21]王顺久,张欣莉,侯玉,丁晶.洪水灾情投影寻踪评估模型[J].水文.2002,4(22):1-4.
[22]翟宜峰,殷峻暹,基于GIS/RS的洪水灾害评估模型[J].人民黄河.2003,4(25):6-14.
[23]张会,张继权,韩俊山.基于GIS技术的洪涝灾害风险评估与区划研究——以辽河中下游地区为例[J].自然灾害学报.2005,6(14):141-146.
[24]赵霞,王平,龚亚丽等.基于GIS的内蒙古中部区域洪水灾害风险评价[J].北京师范大学学报(自然科学版),2007,43(6):666-669.
[25]王雪臣,冷春香,冯相昭,邹骥,马珊.长江中游地区洪涝灾害风险分析[J].科技导报.2008,26(2):61-66.
[26]李谢辉,王磊,谭灵芝,郑奕.渭河下游河流沿线区域洪水灾害风险评价[J].地理科学.2009,29(5):733-738.
[27]石林,曾光明,张硕辅等.基于GIS的复杂河网区域洪水灾害风险评价[J].湖南大学学报(自然科学版),2009,36(7):68-72.
[28]刘国庆,徐刚,刘颖.基于GIS的区域洪水灾害风险评价方法研究[J].安徽农业科学.2009,37(22):10562-10564.
[29]张婧,郝立生,许晓光等.基于GIS技术的河北省洪涝灾害风险区划与分析[J].灾害学,2009,24(2):51-56.
[30]郭永芳,查良松.安徽省洪涝灾害风险区划及成灾面积变化趋势分析.中国农业气象[J].2010,31(1):130-136.
[31]张继国,王慧敏.基于信息扩散原理的区域洪水灾害风险评价模型[J].水资源与水工程学报.2010,21(5):37-39.
[32]杜晓燕,黄岁樑.天津地区旱涝灾害危险性评价及区划研究[J].防灾科技学院学报,2011,13(1):75-81.
[33]程卫帅,陈进.未来洪灾风险与适应性洪水综合管理框架[J].长江科学院院报.2011,28(12):93-97.
[34]张翠英,张英,汪国平.浙江农业洪水灾害风险分析[J].江苏农业学报.2011,27(6):1222-1226.
[35]田玉刚,覃东华,杜渊会等.洞庭湖地区洪水灾害风险评估[J].灾害学,2011,26(3):56-60.
[36]邹强,周建中,周超,宋利祥,郭俊,杨小玲.基于可变模糊理论的洪水灾害风险分析[J].农业工程学报.2012,28(5):126-131.
[37]杜鹃,何飞,史培军等.湘江流域洪水灾害综合风险评价[J].自然灾害学报,2006,15(6):38-44.
[38]周成虎,万庆,王诗峰等.基于GIS的洪水灾害风险区划研究[J].地理学报,2000,55(1):15-24.
[39]万庆等.洪水灾害系统分析与评估[M].北京:科学出版社,1999.
[40]唐川,朱静.基于GIS的山洪灾害风险区划[J].地理学报.2005,60(1):87-94.
[41]何报寅,张海林,张穗,丁国平.基于GIS的湖北省洪水灾害危险性评价[J].自然灾害学报.2002,4(11):84-89.
[42]王静爱,王钰,叶涛.中国城市水灾危险性与可持续发展[J].北京师范大学学报.2004,3:138-143.
[43]路明浩.安徽沿江地区洪涝灾害风险时空演变研究[D].硕士论文.2011.
[44]李吉顺,冯强,王昂生.我国暴雨洪涝灾害的危险性评估:台风、暴雨灾害性天气监测、预报技术研究[M].北京:气象出版社,1996.
[45]赵士鹏.山洪灾情评估的系统集成方法研究:[中国科学院地理研究所博士论文].北京:中国科学院地理研究所,1995.
[46]汤奇成,李秀云.中国洪涝灾害的初步研究[M].见:刘昌明主编,第六次全国水文学会议论文集.北京:科学出版社,1997.
[47]黄诗峰,徐美,陈德清.GIS支持下的河网密度提取及其在洪水危险性分析中的应用[J].自然灾害学报.2001,4(10):129-132.
[48]毛德华.洞庭湖区洪涝危险性综合评价与分析[J].自然灾害学报,2001,10(4):104-107.
[49]黄诗峰,徐美,陈德清.GIS支持下的河网密度提取及其在洪水危险性分析中的应用[J].自然灾害学报,2001,10(4):129-132.
[50]蒋勇军,况明生,匡鸿海.区域易损性分析、评估及易损度区划-以重庆市为例[J].灾害学,2001,16(3):59-64.
[51]毛德华,王立辉.湖南城市洪涝易损性诊断与评估[J].长江流域资源与环境,2002,11(1):89-93.
[52]高吉喜,潘英姿,柳海鹰,黄诗峰,李岱青.区域洪水灾害易损性评价[J].环境科学研究.2004,6(17):30-34.
[53]高吉喜,中村武洋,潘英姿.洪水易损性评价——洞庭湖地区案例研究[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2004.
[54]张林鹏,魏一鸣,范英.基于洪水灾害快速评估的承灾体易损性信息管理系统[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(4):66-73.
[55]李闽.地质灾害人口安全易损性区划研究[J].中国地质矿产经济,2002,8:24-27.
[56]成小平,胡幸贤,帅向华.基于神经网络模型的房屋震害易损性估计方法[J].自然灾害学报,2000,9(2):68-73.
[57]李燕,李永文,史学建.黄河下游洪水风险管理信息平台建设与研究[J].水利水电技术.2009,2(40):50-56.
[58]丁大发,汪习文,韩侠,宋红霞.黄河下游溃堤洪水灾害与减灾对策研究[J].人民黄河.2003,3(25):22-25.
[59]陈新民,罗国煜.黄河下游悬河决口灾害的风险评价[J].科技导报.2000,2:32-50.
[60]韩传峰,陈建业,孙庆荣,吴启迪.黄河中下游灾害系统的脆性源控制[J].系统工程理论与实践.2006,6:135-140.
[61]魏一鸣.洪水灾害风险管理理论研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2002.1-n.
[62] WEI Y M,JIN J L.The general system for flood disaster evaluation and analysis[C].Proceedingsof IWGIS'97.1997,7:841-947.
[63] Eddy,J.A. et al..Global Change in the Greosphere Biosphere.National AcademyPress,Washington,D.C.,1986.
[64] Committee on Environmental and Natural Resources Research of the National Science andTechnology Council Our Changing Planet——The Fiscal Year1995,U.S.Global ChanquResearch Program.Wash-ington,D.C.,USA,1995.
[65] Parsons,M.L,Global Warming——the Truth Behind the Myth.Plenum Press,NewYork.London,1995.
[66] Philander,S.G..EL Nino,La Nina,and the Southern Oscillation.Academic press,Inc.,SanDiego,NewYork,1990
[67] Park,C.,Environment Issues,Progress in Physical Geography,1995；19(3):379-390.
[68] Maskrey A. Disaster Mitigation: A Community Based Approach [M]. Oxford: xfam,1989,22-32.
[69] United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs (UNDHA).Glossary:Interna-tionally.AgreedGlossary of Basic Terms Related to Disaster Management[M].Geneva,1993.
[70]魏一鸣,范英,金菊良.洪水灾害风险分析的系统理论[J].管理科学学报,2001,4(2):7-11.
[71]白海玲,黄崇福.自然灾害的模糊风险[J].自然灾害学报,2000,9(1):47-53.
[72]黄崇福.自然灾害风险分析[M].北京师范大学出版社,2001.
[73]黄崇福.用计算机仿真技术检验自然灾害模糊风险模型[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(1):44-51.
[74] Chongfu Huang,ClaudioMoraga,Yuan Xingguang. Calculation vs.subjective assessment withrespect to fuzzy probability [A].Computational Intelligence——Theory and Applications
[C].Reusch B.Heidelberg:Sp ringer.2001.393-411.
[75]左其亭,吴泽宁.模糊风险计算模型及其应用研究[J].郑州工业大学学报,2001,22(3):78-80.
[76]金菊良,魏一鸣.基于遗传算法的洪水灾害灾情评估模型探讨[J].灾害学,1998,13(2):6-11.
[77]白义志.洪水风险分析与洪水灾害评估[J].资源环境.2009,38(3):65-129.
[78]黄大鹏,刘闯,彭顺风.洪灾风险评价与区划研究进展[J].地理科学进展.2007,26(4):11-22.
[79]陈兆伟,曲志远等编著.山东黄河生态景观建设[M].北京:中国林业出版社,2009.
[80]张娟,于东明,韩新英.山东黄河沿岸防护工程景观建设分析[J].水利工程建设.2006,20:43-44.
[81] Toraichi K,Yang K,Kamada M et al.Two-dimensional spline interpolation for imagereconstruction[J].Pattern Recogn,1988,21(3):275-284.
[82]周成虎,万庆,黄诗峰,陈德清.基于GIS的洪水灾害风险区划研究[J].地理学报.2000,1(55):15-24.
[83]万庆.洪水灾害系统分析与评估[M].北京:科学出版社,1999.
[84]曾扬,刘志强.新形势下洞庭湖区防洪减灾对策浅析[J].湖南水利水电.2004.6:20-22.
[85]王银山,刘洪才,张玉初.从“96·8”洪水看山东黄河防洪[J].人民黄河.1997,5:44-50.
[2] EM-DAT.The OFDA／CRDA international disaster database.www.em-dat.Net.
[3]高评伦等.山东省主要自然灾害及减灾对策[M].地震出版社.1994.
[4] Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).Guidelines and specifications for flood hazardmapping partners [M].USA: Federal Emergency Management Agency,2003.
[5] Masatoshi Shidawara.Flood hazard map distribution [J].Urban Water,1999,1:125-129.
[6] Md.Monirul Islam, Kimiteru Sado.Flood hazard assessment in Bangladesh using NOAA-AVHRRdata with geographical information system[J].Hydrological Process,2000,14:605-620.
[7]王艳艳,吴兴征.中国与荷兰洪水风险分析方法的比较研究[J].自然灾害学报.2005,14(8):19-24.
[8] Biswajit Mukhopadhyay,Joe Comelius,Warren Zehner.Application of kinematic wave theory forpredicting flash flood hazards on coupled alluvial fan-piedmont plain landforms[J].HydrologicalProcess,2003,17:863-868.
[9] Joy Sanyal,X.X. Lu.Remote sensing and GIS-based flood vulnerability assessment of humansettlements:a case study of Gangetic West Bengal,India[J].HydrologicalProcesses,2005,19(18):3699-3716.
[10] Gerardo Benito,Miehel Lang,Mariano Barriendos etal.Use of Systematic,Palae of flood andHistorial Data for the improvement of Flood Disk Estimation.Review of scientific method[J].Natural Hazards,2004,31:623-643.
[11] Michael Fedeski,Julie Gwilliam.Urban Sustain ability in the Presenee of flood and geologiealhazards: The development of a GIS一based vulnerability and risk assessment. Methodology[J].Landescape and Urban Planning.2007,83(l):50-61.
[12] Jeremy G. Carterlain White,Juliet Richards.Sustainability appraisal and flood risk management[J].Environmental impact Assessment Review.2009,29,(1):7-14.
[13]魏一鸣,金菊良.洪水灾害评估体系研究[J].灾害学,1997,12(3):1-5.
[14]魏一鸣,金菊良.洪水灾害研究进展[J].大自然探索,1998,17(3):1-6.
[15]魏一鸣.洪水灾害研究的复杂性理论[J].自然杂志,1999,21(3):139-142.
[16]史培军.再论灾害研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,1996,5(4):6-17.
[17]史培军.三论灾害系统研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(3):01-09.
[18]史培军.四论灾害系统研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2005,14(6):01-07.
[19]史培军.五论灾害系统研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2009,18(5):01-09.
[20]潘华盛,张桂华,董淑华.黑龙江省洪水灾害等级评估模型——模糊综合评价法[J].黑龙江气象.2000,2:1-4.
[21]王顺久,张欣莉,侯玉,丁晶.洪水灾情投影寻踪评估模型[J].水文.2002,4(22):1-4.
[22]翟宜峰,殷峻暹,基于GIS/RS的洪水灾害评估模型[J].人民黄河.2003,4(25):6-14.
[23]张会,张继权,韩俊山.基于GIS技术的洪涝灾害风险评估与区划研究——以辽河中下游地区为例[J].自然灾害学报.2005,6(14):141-146.
[24]赵霞,王平,龚亚丽等.基于GIS的内蒙古中部区域洪水灾害风险评价[J].北京师范大学学报(自然科学版),2007,43(6):666-669.
[25]王雪臣,冷春香,冯相昭,邹骥,马珊.长江中游地区洪涝灾害风险分析[J].科技导报.2008,26(2):61-66.
[26]李谢辉,王磊,谭灵芝,郑奕.渭河下游河流沿线区域洪水灾害风险评价[J].地理科学.2009,29(5):733-738.
[27]石林,曾光明,张硕辅等.基于GIS的复杂河网区域洪水灾害风险评价[J].湖南大学学报(自然科学版),2009,36(7):68-72.
[28]刘国庆,徐刚,刘颖.基于GIS的区域洪水灾害风险评价方法研究[J].安徽农业科学.2009,37(22):10562-10564.
[29]张婧,郝立生,许晓光等.基于GIS技术的河北省洪涝灾害风险区划与分析[J].灾害学,2009,24(2):51-56.
[30]郭永芳,查良松.安徽省洪涝灾害风险区划及成灾面积变化趋势分析.中国农业气象[J].2010,31(1):130-136.
[31]张继国,王慧敏.基于信息扩散原理的区域洪水灾害风险评价模型[J].水资源与水工程学报.2010,21(5):37-39.
[32]杜晓燕,黄岁樑.天津地区旱涝灾害危险性评价及区划研究[J].防灾科技学院学报,2011,13(1):75-81.
[33]程卫帅,陈进.未来洪灾风险与适应性洪水综合管理框架[J].长江科学院院报.2011,28(12):93-97.
[34]张翠英,张英,汪国平.浙江农业洪水灾害风险分析[J].江苏农业学报.2011,27(6):1222-1226.
[35]田玉刚,覃东华,杜渊会等.洞庭湖地区洪水灾害风险评估[J].灾害学,2011,26(3):56-60.
[36]邹强,周建中,周超,宋利祥,郭俊,杨小玲.基于可变模糊理论的洪水灾害风险分析[J].农业工程学报.2012,28(5):126-131.
[37]杜鹃,何飞,史培军等.湘江流域洪水灾害综合风险评价[J].自然灾害学报,2006,15(6):38-44.
[38]周成虎,万庆,王诗峰等.基于GIS的洪水灾害风险区划研究[J].地理学报,2000,55(1):15-24.
[39]万庆等.洪水灾害系统分析与评估[M].北京:科学出版社,1999.
[40]唐川,朱静.基于GIS的山洪灾害风险区划[J].地理学报.2005,60(1):87-94.
[41]何报寅,张海林,张穗,丁国平.基于GIS的湖北省洪水灾害危险性评价[J].自然灾害学报.2002,4(11):84-89.
[42]王静爱,王钰,叶涛.中国城市水灾危险性与可持续发展[J].北京师范大学学报.2004,3:138-143.
[43]路明浩.安徽沿江地区洪涝灾害风险时空演变研究[D].硕士论文.2011.
[44]李吉顺,冯强,王昂生.我国暴雨洪涝灾害的危险性评估:台风、暴雨灾害性天气监测、预报技术研究[M].北京:气象出版社,1996.
[45]赵士鹏.山洪灾情评估的系统集成方法研究:[中国科学院地理研究所博士论文].北京:中国科学院地理研究所,1995.
[46]汤奇成,李秀云.中国洪涝灾害的初步研究[M].见:刘昌明主编,第六次全国水文学会议论文集.北京:科学出版社,1997.
[47]黄诗峰,徐美,陈德清.GIS支持下的河网密度提取及其在洪水危险性分析中的应用[J].自然灾害学报.2001,4(10):129-132.
[48]毛德华.洞庭湖区洪涝危险性综合评价与分析[J].自然灾害学报,2001,10(4):104-107.
[49]黄诗峰,徐美,陈德清.GIS支持下的河网密度提取及其在洪水危险性分析中的应用[J].自然灾害学报,2001,10(4):129-132.
[50]蒋勇军,况明生,匡鸿海.区域易损性分析、评估及易损度区划-以重庆市为例[J].灾害学,2001,16(3):59-64.
[51]毛德华,王立辉.湖南城市洪涝易损性诊断与评估[J].长江流域资源与环境,2002,11(1):89-93.
[52]高吉喜,潘英姿,柳海鹰,黄诗峰,李岱青.区域洪水灾害易损性评价[J].环境科学研究.2004,6(17):30-34.
[53]高吉喜,中村武洋,潘英姿.洪水易损性评价——洞庭湖地区案例研究[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2004.
[54]张林鹏,魏一鸣,范英.基于洪水灾害快速评估的承灾体易损性信息管理系统[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(4):66-73.
[55]李闽.地质灾害人口安全易损性区划研究[J].中国地质矿产经济,2002,8:24-27.
[56]成小平,胡幸贤,帅向华.基于神经网络模型的房屋震害易损性估计方法[J].自然灾害学报,2000,9(2):68-73.
[57]李燕,李永文,史学建.黄河下游洪水风险管理信息平台建设与研究[J].水利水电技术.2009,2(40):50-56.
[58]丁大发,汪习文,韩侠,宋红霞.黄河下游溃堤洪水灾害与减灾对策研究[J].人民黄河.2003,3(25):22-25.
[59]陈新民,罗国煜.黄河下游悬河决口灾害的风险评价[J].科技导报.2000,2:32-50.
[60]韩传峰,陈建业,孙庆荣,吴启迪.黄河中下游灾害系统的脆性源控制[J].系统工程理论与实践.2006,6:135-140.
[61]魏一鸣.洪水灾害风险管理理论研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2002.1-n.
[62] WEI Y M,JIN J L.The general system for flood disaster evaluation and analysis[C].Proceedingsof IWGIS'97.1997,7:841-947.
[63] Eddy,J.A. et al..Global Change in the Greosphere Biosphere.National AcademyPress,Washington,D.C.,1986.
[64] Committee on Environmental and Natural Resources Research of the National Science andTechnology Council Our Changing Planet——The Fiscal Year1995,U.S.Global ChanquResearch Program.Wash-ington,D.C.,USA,1995.
[65] Parsons,M.L,Global Warming——the Truth Behind the Myth.Plenum Press,NewYork.London,1995.
[66] Philander,S.G..EL Nino,La Nina,and the Southern Oscillation.Academic press,Inc.,SanDiego,NewYork,1990
[67] Park,C.,Environment Issues,Progress in Physical Geography,1995；19(3):379-390.
[68] Maskrey A. Disaster Mitigation: A Community Based Approach [M]. Oxford: xfam,1989,22-32.
[69] United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs (UNDHA).Glossary:Interna-tionally.AgreedGlossary of Basic Terms Related to Disaster Management[M].Geneva,1993.
[70]魏一鸣,范英,金菊良.洪水灾害风险分析的系统理论[J].管理科学学报,2001,4(2):7-11.
[71]白海玲,黄崇福.自然灾害的模糊风险[J].自然灾害学报,2000,9(1):47-53.
[72]黄崇福.自然灾害风险分析[M].北京师范大学出版社,2001.
[73]黄崇福.用计算机仿真技术检验自然灾害模糊风险模型[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(1):44-51.
[74] Chongfu Huang,ClaudioMoraga,Yuan Xingguang. Calculation vs.subjective assessment withrespect to fuzzy probability [A].Computational Intelligence——Theory and Applications
[C].Reusch B.Heidelberg:Sp ringer.2001.393-411.
[75]左其亭,吴泽宁.模糊风险计算模型及其应用研究[J].郑州工业大学学报,2001,22(3):78-80.
[76]金菊良,魏一鸣.基于遗传算法的洪水灾害灾情评估模型探讨[J].灾害学,1998,13(2):6-11.
[77]白义志.洪水风险分析与洪水灾害评估[J].资源环境.2009,38(3):65-129.
[78]黄大鹏,刘闯,彭顺风.洪灾风险评价与区划研究进展[J].地理科学进展.2007,26(4):11-22.
[79]陈兆伟,曲志远等编著.山东黄河生态景观建设[M].北京:中国林业出版社,2009.
[80]张娟,于东明,韩新英.山东黄河沿岸防护工程景观建设分析[J].水利工程建设.2006,20:43-44.
[81] Toraichi K,Yang K,Kamada M et al.Two-dimensional spline interpolation for imagereconstruction[J].Pattern Recogn,1988,21(3):275-284.
[82]周成虎,万庆,黄诗峰,陈德清.基于GIS的洪水灾害风险区划研究[J].地理学报.2000,1(55):15-24.
[83]万庆.洪水灾害系统分析与评估[M].北京:科学出版社,1999.
[84]曾扬,刘志强.新形势下洞庭湖区防洪减灾对策浅析[J].湖南水利水电.2004.6:20-22.
[85]王银山,刘洪才,张玉初.从“96·8”洪水看山东黄河防洪[J].人民黄河.1997,5:44-50.