|Keywords:||IPCC; EU; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; European Union; Floods Directive; TAR; Methodology; Projection Analysis; Causal Chain Analysis; Climate Scenario; Climate Change; Floods; Flooding; Projection; GIWA; Roskilde Fjord; Køge Bugt; Oversvømmelse; Risk Assessment|
|Full text PDF:||http://rudar.ruc.dk/handle/1800/22198|
This project applies two methodological prototypes, the Projection Analysis and Causal Chain Analysis, to make a comparative analysis of the methodologies behind the European Union Floods Directive and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, specifically in regards to sea level rise and floods attributed to climate change. In order to accomplish this comparison, a chapter has been dedicated to the physical basis of climate change, along with a chapter describing each of the two methodological approaches. Cases from the island of Zealand, Denmark are included as method-illustrations, as examples of adaptation plans and extreme weather events, to add a Danish context to the project. This project finds that the methodology behind the EU Floods Directive is an example of a semi-empirical model, which bases its projection of the future on past events. The method is simple and easy to implement, but it does not account for the fluctuations in the climate, which is inevitable under global climate change. The methodology of the IPCC is complementary to the process models, which are complex and includes a large range of variables, with the goal of simulating the processes found in the world. This method is difficult to comprehend and carries the risk of miscalculation in the many variables, but will provide a more detailed assessment. Lastly, this project has the objective of assessing the extent of which the two methodologies can be deemed successful.