Flood hazard and damage assessment in former Jalpaiguri district of West Bengal, India

Moitrayee Das; Anis Chattopadhayay; Ranjan Basu

Moitrayee Das Post Graduate Department of Geography, Chandernagore College, West Bengal, India
Anis Chattopadhayay Retd. Professor, Department of Geography, Presidency College, West Bengal, India
Ranjan Basu Department of Geography, University of Calcutta, West Bengal, India

Keywords: Flood damage, flood hazard, flood impact, threshold limit

Abstract

Flood is the most common and natural phenomena of any flood prone region and damage is also very common event related to flood hazard of any magnitude. Impact of flood in any particular area is always concerned with the damage created by the flood. Flood (Damage) Impact Assessment (FIA) is a technique to assess flood impact in flood prone regions. It helps to quantify and understand the extent of a given society will compromise with damage and the extent of the said society accepts the flood event as or a hazard, such that flood can be viewed either as flood threshold limit or as flood hazard. The threshold limits to predict or indicates how far the society will take flood as an event with its corresponding damages. Jalpaiguri is a district of West Bengal, which has faced flood almost every year. This flood causes damage over the district. However, the intensities of damage vary from year to year. Analysis of the actual amount of expost damage calculation of human effect, property and environment loss is too hard. Present papers have been analysed flood damage of the district or the flood impact assessment and assess the original hazardous condition of the district in past 43 years. Its also expressed in high flood situation (1998) the block-wise damage impact assessment of flood.

References

Fewtrell, L., Kay, D. and Ashley, R. (2008). Flooding and health - an evaluation of the health impacts of urban pluvial flooding in the UK. In: Fewtrell, L. & Kay, D. (eds.) Health Impact Assessment for Sustainable Water Management. IWA Publishing.
Messner, F. and Meyer, V. (2006). Flood damage, vulnerability and risk perception of challenges for food damage research. In: Schanze J, Zeman E, Marsalek J (eds) Flood risk management of hazards, vulnerability and mitigation measures. Springer. Pp.149-167.
Paul, A. and Chatterjee, S. (2010). A manual for coastal risk assessment in Bay of Bengal coast” 4th Session of the IAG Working Group on Geomorphological Hazards (IAGEOMHAZ) & International workshop on Geomorphological hazards. Smith, K. and Ward, R. (1998). Floods: Physical Processes and Human Impacts”. Chichester and New York: John Wiley.
Pramanik, S. and Karmakar, S. R. (2016). Cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of a common food additive monosodium glutamate in mice: a preliminary report. Int.J.Exp.Res. Rev. 8: 98-103.
Pramanik, S. and Karmakar, S. R. (2017). Predictive risk assessment of a common food additive monosodium glutamate : An in vivo biochemical, patho-physiological and molecular study. Int.J.Exp.Res. Rev. 10: 37-43.
Smith, K. (2001). Environmental Hazards, assessing risk and reducing disaster. Third edition, Routledge, London and New York. Pp. 69 -72.
Verger, P., Rotily, M., Hunault, C., Brenot, J., Baruffol, E. and Bard, D. (2003). Assessment of exposure to a flood disaster in a mental-health study. J. Expo. Anal. Environ. Epidemiol. 13: 436- 442.
White, G. F. (1974). Natural Hazards: Local, National, Global. New York: Oxford University Press.