<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">NHESS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">NHESS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1684-9981</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/nhess-18-2859-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Towards risk-based flood management in highly productive paddy rice cultivation – concept development and application to the Mekong Delta</article-title><alt-title>Towards risk-based flood management in highly productive paddy rice cultivation</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Towards risk-based flood management in highly productive paddy rice cultivation}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{N.~V.~K.~Triet et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Triet</surname><given-names>Nguyen Van Khanh</given-names></name>
          <email>triet@gfz-potsdam.de</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Dung</surname><given-names>Nguyen Viet</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Merz</surname><given-names>Bruno</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5992-1440</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Apel</surname><given-names>Heiko</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8852-652X</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Section 5.4 Hydrology, Potsdam, 14473, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>SIWRR Southern Institute of Water Resources Research, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Institute of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, 14476, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Nguyen Van Khanh Triet (triet@gfz-potsdam.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>5</day><month>November</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>18</volume>
      <issue>11</issue>
      <fpage>2859</fpage><lpage>2876</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>25</day><month>July</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>6</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>14</day><month>October</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018.html">This article is available from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e118">Flooding is an imminent natural hazard threatening most river deltas, e.g. the Mekong Delta. An appropriate flood management is thus required for a
sustainable development of the often densely populated regions. Recently, the
traditional event-based hazard control shifted towards a risk management
approach in many regions, driven by intensive research leading to new legal
regulation on flood management. However, a large-scale flood risk assessment
does not exist for the Mekong Delta. Particularly, flood risk to paddy rice
cultivation, the most important economic activity in the delta, has not been
performed yet. Therefore, the present study was developed to provide the very
first insight into delta-scale flood damages and risks to rice cultivation.
The flood hazard was quantified by probabilistic flood hazard maps of the
whole delta using a bivariate extreme value statistics, synthetic flood
hydrographs, and a large-scale hydraulic model. The flood risk to paddy rice
was then quantified considering cropping calendars, rice phenology, and
harvest times based on a time series of enhanced vegetation index (EVI)
derived from MODIS satellite data, and a published rice flood damage
function. The proposed concept provided flood risk maps to paddy rice for the
Mekong Delta in terms of expected annual damage. The presented concept can be
used as a blueprint for regions facing similar problems due to its generic
approach. Furthermore, the changes in flood risk to paddy rice caused by
changes in land use currently under discussion in the Mekong Delta were
estimated. Two land-use scenarios either intensifying or reducing rice
cropping were considered, and the changes in risk were presented in spatially
explicit flood risk maps. The basic risk maps could serve as guidance for the
authorities to develop spatially explicit flood management and mitigation
plans for the delta. The land-use change risk maps could further be used for
adaptive risk management plans and as a basis for a cost–benefit of the
discussed land-use change scenarios. Additionally, the damage and risks maps
may support the recently initiated agricultural insurance programme in
Vietnam.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e128">Characterized by low topography, the Mekong Delta (MD) is subjected to
flooding caused by high river discharge, tidal backwater effects, and storm
surges. Floods in the Mekong Delta are annual events, mainly triggered by
the Asian monsoons, but also by tropical cyclones (typhoons). On the
positive side, floods bring various benefits to the MD with an estimated
annual value of USD 8–10 billion (MRC, 2012). These benefits
include provision of sediment to counter delta subsidence, increase in wild
fish catch and enhancement of soil fertility through deposited sediment
(Manh et al., 2014). On the other hand, extreme
floods can result in extensive damages as recorded during the floods in 2011
and 2000. For example, the 2000 flood, considered as a 20-year flood
(Le et al., 2007), resulted in over 450 fatalities and economic
losses of USD 250 million (MRC, 2012). Recent studies suggest that
the frequency of such extreme events is likely to increase (Delgado et
al., 2010; Hirabayashi et al., 2013). For instance, the 100-year flood in
the Mekong basin in the 20th<?pagebreak page2860?> century is projected to occur every 10–20 years in the 21st
century due to impacts of climate change
(Hirabayashi et al., 2013). Therefore, assessing hazards and risks
induced by extreme floods is a crucial task for developing flood
management strategies and climate change adaptation measures.</p>
      <p id="d1e131">Traditionally, flood management in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta (VMD) has
focussed on engineering solutions aiming at flood control. Structural flood
defence measures, such as sluice gates and dyke lines, were implemented
across the whole delta. The water level of the flood in 2000 was commonly
chosen as the design flood event. Flood risk assessments, taking into
account not only flood probabilities and water levels, but also flood losses,
were not undertaken to support flood management. Recently, non-structural
measures (e.g. shifting of cropping calendar) have gained more interest.
This alteration is in agreement with the global trend of moving from flood
hazard control toward flood risk management (Merz et al., 2010).
By definition, risk assessment is the evaluation of the frequency and
magnitude of floods, or flood hazard, and their consequences. Hence, damage
assessment is an essential task for the transition from traditional hazard
control to flood risk management.</p>
      <p id="d1e134">The majority of the literature on flood hazard assessments for the VMD
focusses on changes in delta inundation hazards driven by upstream
infrastructure development (e.g. hydropower dams), local flood control
(e.g. dyke systems), climate change impacts, and sea level rise by hydrodynamic
modelling (Le et al., 2007; Van, 2009; Dinh et al., 2012; Van et al.,
2012; Toan, 2014; Triet et al., 2017; Dang et al., 2018). A comprehensive
flood hazard analysis for the whole MD can only be found in the study of
Dung et al. (2015). They developed different copula-based bivariate
statistical models to quantify the probability of joint occurrence of peak
discharge and flood volume of the Mekong River at Kratie, commonly defined
as the upstream entrance of the MD. Apel et al. (2016) presented a
detailed probabilistic fluvial–pluvial flood hazard assessment for the city
of Can Tho in the centre of VMD using the results of Dung et al. (2015)
as a boundary condition for a fluvial 2-D urban flood model.</p>
      <p id="d1e137">Studies on flood damage are rare for the VMD. Damage assessments require
rather extensive data sets, such as land-use, cropping systems and crop
timing, asset values, damage functions for the different land-use types, and
damage data to calibrate and validate the damage models. Consequently, flood
damage and risk assessments have been conducted on the scale of districts or
provinces only. For example, Chinh et al. (2017) developed a model to
estimate flood losses using surveyed damage data of the flood in 2011 and
assessed flood risk for an urban district of Can Tho city. Similarly,
publications on agro-economic flood damage are practically non-existent for
the VMD. The literature search on damage to agriculture in the VMD resulted
in a single publication, a report by the Mekong River Commission
(MRC, 2009). The MRC developed a loss model for paddy rice in two
provinces in the VMD: An Giang and Dong Thap. Two damage functions were
developed using observed maximum water levels at two gauging stations, and
statistical damage data for the period of 2000–2007. These depth-damage
functions were then applied to estimate flood losses for the period
1910–2006. Since this model requires only the water level as input, it can
provide a quick assessment of flood damage to rice crops. Applying these
damage functions to the current situation is, however, not recommended due
to the massive changes in land use and cropping system over the last two
decades. For example, Le et al. (2018) calculated an annual
rate of change in land use in the VMD of 14.9 % during 2001–2012. Hence,
to our best knowledge, large-scale economic assessments of flood damage to
agriculture crops for the whole delta and appropriate damage models are
missing.</p>
      <p id="d1e141">Against this background, we provide the first large-scale flood risk
assessment for the agricultural sector covering the whole VMD. Our
assessment is focussed on paddy rice, the predominant land-use type in the
delta. We limit our calculation to direct losses, i.e. yield reduction as
consequence of physical contact with floodwater. The methodological novelty
is the detailed consideration of cropping calendar and plant phenology in
combination with synthetic probabilistic flood hydrographs mapping different
flood regimes of the Mekong. By this, the important aspect of plant phenology
and temporal occurrence of flood peaks is introduced into the probabilistic
flood risk assessment approach.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e146">Geographical location of the Mekong Basin <bold>(a)</bold>. The
Vietnamese Mekong Delta and its flood-prone area <bold>(b)</bold>. Deep-inundation region (above 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) marked in yellow, shallow-inundation
region (below 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) presented in green. Red dots are locations
of tidal gauges. Blue dots are locations of water level gauges. The numbers
above blue and red dots present station codes.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=\textwidth}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f01.pdf"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e175">The flood hazard is quantified following the methodology of Dung et al. (2015).
To obtain spatially explicit flood hazard maps, a large-scale
hydraulic inundation model is driven by synthetic flood discharge time
series, which are associated with probabilities of occurrences. Based on
these hazard maps, crop damages are estimated using published damage
functions, and explicitly considering the temporal occurrence of high water
levels, the cropping calendar, and plant phenology. Finally, the consequences
of two land-use development scenarios proposed in the Mekong Delta Plan were
estimated in terms of crop damages by floods.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Study area and data</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Study area</title>
      <p id="d1e189">The VMD covers an area of approximately 40 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
in the south of Vietnam, where the Mekong River
discharges into the South China Sea through a number of estuary branches.
The landscape is dominated by flat floodplains formed by deposited river
sediments. Floodplain sedimentation is estimated to approximately 9.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">yr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
on average (Manh et al., 2013). The properties of the deposits
and the associated nutrients in combination with the tropical climate form
ideal conditions for high agricultural productivity. Official statistics
indicate that over 64 % of the delta (2.6 million <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) is used for
agriculture, with rice as the dominant crop (three-quarters of the total
cultivation land), followed by orchard<?pagebreak page2861?> farms and sugar cane (GSO, 2015).
Covering only 12 % of the total land area of Vietnam, the delta
contributes 52 % to the national food production and over 80 % to the
Vietnamese rice export (GSO, 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e227">From July to December, high discharge of the Mekong River triggered by the
Asian monsoons cause a large-scale inundation in the delta. Our study area,
referred to as the delta flood-prone region in Vietnam, comprises 2 million
hectares of nine provinces. The area is commonly divided into two ecological
regions on the basis of inundation depth, named “deep inundation” (above
1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and “shallow inundation” (below 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). The deep-inundation areas
(marked in yellow in Fig. 1) encompass the two most important floodplains in
the delta, i.e. the Plain of Reeds (PoR), and the Long Xuyen Quadrangle
(LXQ).</p>
      <p id="d1e244">Flooding in the VMD is characterized by slowly rising and receding rates,
with a mean value of 5–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">day</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
The flood hydrograph at Tan Chau and Chau
Doc (blue points 1 and 2 in Fig. 1) usually has two peaks. The first peak
normally falls from mid-July to mid-August. The second, often higher peak,
arrives from September to October. Floodwater from Cambodia enters the VMD via
three main routes. The mainstream branches of the Mekong, i.e. Mekong and
Bassac rivers, convey 90 % of the total flood volume. The remaining 10 %
are the transboundary overland flow from Cambodian lowlands to the PoR east
of the Mekong River, and the LXQ west of the Bassac River (Hung et al.,
2012; Tri, 2012). Besides inundation caused by high river discharge, tidal
floods occur in the vicinity of rivers/canals in the coastal areas,
characterized by short but repeated durations following the high tides of
the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand (Apel et al., 2016).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e266">Time series of the smoothed enhanced vegetation index (EVI) for
double <bold>(a)</bold> and triple <bold>(b)</bold> rice cropping fields in the Vietnamese Mekong
Delta. The blue lines denote paddy fields in the shallow-inundation zone. Red
lines represent paddy fields in the deep-inundation zone. The cropping season
ends 40 days after the EVI peak (Kotera et al., 2016).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=\textwidth}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f02.pdf"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<?pagebreak page2862?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Data</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Topography data, tidal levels and operation schemes of flood control
structures</title>
      <p id="d1e292">Tidal level data are used as downstream boundary condition of the flood
propagation model. Hourly tidal level records at 10 gauge stations were
collected, covering the entire flood season of the year 2011 from 1 June to 30 November.
The locations of these tidal gauges are given in Fig. 1. These
data were provided by the Southern Regional Hydro-Meteorology Centre of
Vietnam (SHRMC). To generate inundation maps, a high-resolution (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)
lidar-based digital elevation model (DEM) for the whole VMD was
acquired from the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources of Vietnam
(MONRE). The lidar data were collected and processed during 2009–2010.
Operation schemes of the flood control structures in 2011 were collected
from the Departments of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) of the
delta provinces.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>Rice cropping system and planting calendar</title>
      <p id="d1e320">The rice cropping system in the VMD is strongly related to water
availability, soil fertility and irrigation/drainage facilities (e.g. flood
control structures). Rice fields are generally encircled by dyke systems to
protect them against the regular flood pulse of the Mekong. These dyke
systems can be classified as low dykes and high dykes. Low dykes protect the
summer–autumn crop against the early flood peak from mid-July to mid-August.
They are regularly overtopped during the later stages of the flood period.
Farmlands protected by high dykes can be, however, completely cut off from
floodwater. The design level of the dykes was chosen to withstand water
levels observed during the historical flood in 2000
(Triet et al., 2017). The inundation of those areas
is thus controlled by the operation of sluice gates included in the dyke
lines.</p>
      <p id="d1e323">Traditionally, farmers were only able to grow a single rice crop per year
during the wet season. This crop was known as rainfed crop. Today, the
majority of rainfed crops have been replaced by irrigated rice, except
for small areas affected by saline water intrusion or poor soil quality
(acid sulphate soil). Farmers are able to grow two or even three crops per
year. One crop is planted in the dry season in November–December and
harvested in February–March (called winter–spring crop or Đông
Xuân). During the wet season, farmers plant one or two crops. The first
crop (summer–autumn crop or Hè Thu) is planted in April–early June and
harvested by July–early August. The second crop (autumn–winter crop or Thu
Đông) depends on how farmlands are protected against floodwater.
Farmlands with full protection (located in the deep-inundation region) plant
in August and harvest in November–December. In the shallow-inundation
region, farmers harvest in late August–early September, before the arrival
of the main flood peak.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e328">Panel <bold>(a)</bold> presents the land-use map of the Vietnamese Mekong Delta
in 2014. Panels <bold>(b)</bold> and <bold>(c)</bold> show plantation areas of the summer–autumn crop
(SAC) and the autumn–winter crop (AWC).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f03.pdf"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e346">The rice cropping system and planting calendar in the VMD have been well
studied using optical and radar satellite data (e.g. Bouvet et al., 2009; Bouvet and Le Toan,
2011; Nguyen et al., 2015). Figure 2 illustrates
the planting calendar in 2011 for four paddy fields positioned in the deep
versus shallow-inundation region for double- and triple-season rice fields.
There is a shift of 1–1.5 months in the planting calendar between the
shallow- and deep-inundation regions. The enhanced vegetation index (EVI)
time series used to<?pagebreak page2863?> construct this plot were provided by Akihiko Kotera (personal
communication, 1 March 2017). An EVI value of 0 indicates no vegetation
cover, whereas a value of 1 means complete vegetation cover. The methodology
used to derive the data set has been presented in Kotera et al. (2016) and
applied to assess economic flood damage to rice crop in the Chao Phraya
delta in Thailand from 2000 to 2011.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS3">
  <title>Land-use data</title>
      <p id="d1e355">The land-use map of 2014, with a resolution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, covering all 13
provinces in the VMD was provided by the German Aerospace Centre (DLR). The
VMD land use is part of the product MEKONG LC2010, covering the entire Mekong
Basin at a spatial resolution of 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. MEKONG LC2010 was developed within
the German–Vietnamese project “Water-related Information System for a
Sustainable Development of the Mekong Delta” (WISDOM, <uri>http://www.wisdom.eoc.dlr.de/</uri>, last access: 20 July 2018).
Land cover data were derived using the
Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) instrument aboard the
Terra and Aqua satellites. Different MODIS products were combined to provide
cloud free composites. The enhanced vegetation index (EVI) was calculated
following Eq. (1).
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M14" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>EVI</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>NIR</mml:mtext><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mtext>RED</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>NIR</mml:mtext><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mtext>RED</mml:mtext><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mtext>BLUE</mml:mtext><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the gain factor (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the coefficients of the aerosol resistance term, which
uses the 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> blue band of MODIS to correct aerosol influences on the red
band (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). L is the canopy
background adjustment (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Huete et al., 2002).</p>
      <p id="d1e533">Land-use classification was performed on the basis of the EVI time series
from 2001 to 2011 (for a detailed description see Leinenkugel et
al. (2013). Within the 12 classes of the VMD land-use raster, three classes
indicate rice cultivation areas: single-season rice, double-season rice, and
triple-season rice (values 5–7 in Fig. 3a).</p>
      <p id="d1e536">We reclassified the original product to two raster images presenting the
summer–autumn crop, hereafter referred as SAC, and the autumn–winter crop,
hereafter referred to as AWC, since their growth stages partially or fully
fall in the flood season. The SAC image was created by merging all pixels
with double-season and triple-season rice. The other land-use classes (e.g. orchards, sugar cane) were considered non-rice pixels (presented in Fig. 3b).
To produce the AWC image, which is only grown in triple-season
cropping schemes, only pixels with original values of 7 were
considered (see Fig. 3c).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e541"><bold>(a)</bold> Procedure for estimating flood risk to rice production in the
Vietnamese Mekong Delta. <bold>(b)</bold> The four normalized discharge hydrographs at
Kratie, together with their probability of occurrence (Dung et al.,
2015) used for the derivation of synthetic flood events as the upper boundary of
the hydraulic model. <bold>(c)</bold> Stage-damage curve for paddy rice (Dutta et
al., 2003).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=\textwidth}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f04.pdf"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page2864?><sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Methodology</title>
      <p id="d1e566">For the large-scale flood risk assessment, the temporal relationship between
the inundation hazard and the rice planting calendar was taken into
consideration. The next sections describe the procedure that derives the area
of rice crops exposed to floods, flood damage (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) from a given extreme
event, and the expected annual damage (EAD). These risk indicators were
estimated for the current situation and for two land-use development
scenarios, namely the reduction or expansion of the triple-season rice area
as given in the Mekong Delta Plan of the Vietnamese government. The
methodology is outlined in Fig. 4a.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Determining event hydrographs corresponding to the $T$-year flood}?><title>Determining event hydrographs corresponding to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-year flood</title>
      <p id="d1e589">Synthetic flood events were estimated for station Kratie (Fig. 1, left
panel) with 10-, 20-, 50-, and 100-year return periods, referred to as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This station is commonly defined as the
upstream entrance of the MD and is used as upper boundary of the hydraulic
inundation model of the MD. The estimation of flood events is based on
Dung et al. (2015). The authors developed and tested different bivariate
copula-based statistical models on extreme values, using annual maximum
discharge <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and flood volume <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Both variables are important
for the characterization of the long-lasting annual floods in the MD. From
different models that were tested, the Gumbel–Hougaard copula was selected as
most suitable, with log-normal distributions describing the marginals of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The outcomes of the mentioned study is the very first
publication on flood frequency analysis for the MD, considering both peak
discharge and flood volume. We refer readers to the original paper for a
detailed description.</p>
      <p id="d1e681">Four pairs of peak discharge (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and volume at Kratie
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), corresponding to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
floods were selected from the bivariate copula model. The most probable
pairs were selected from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pairs with equal joint
probabilities corresponding to the return periods specified above. A full
probabilistic analysis using a large number of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pairs with
equal joint probabilities was not performed due to the high computational
demand of the large-scale hydraulic model (on average, 2–3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are
required for one simulation of the whole flood season June–November on a PC
installed with Intel i7-CPU 3.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GHz</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, 16 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GB</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> RAM). The selected <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values range from 56 500 to 66 000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and from 459 to 525 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, from the
different return periods.</p>
      <?pagebreak page2865?><p id="d1e862">Damages to agriculture crops are highly dependent on the time of occurrence
of flooding (Penning-Rowsell et al., 2003; Förster et al., 2008;
Klaus et al., 2016). To account for the timing, each of the four
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pairs were scaled to synthetic flood hydrographs covering
the whole flood season from 1 June to 30 November using four
typical hydrograph shapes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–4), representing different
flood patterns and, consequently, different possible damages. These shapes
were adapted from Dung et al. (2015) (see Fig. 4b). The shape
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has the highest possibility of occurrence (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The flood
in 2000 closely followed this shape, with a minor alteration as the first
peak arrived some days earlier. The other three hydrograph shapes have equal
probabilities of occurrence (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–0.23). The shape <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has an
early flood peak, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> shows a late peak. The disastrous flood
in 2011 resembled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e975">This procedure results in 16 synthetic discharge time series at Kratie. They
serve as the upper boundary condition for the flood propagation model. In
each simulation, the lower boundaries (i.e. tidal levels), dyke scenarios
and operation schemes of flood control structures were fixed as recorded in
2011, i.e. the most recent damaging flood. The scenarios are denoted using
the return period and the hydrograph shape. For example, scenario
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> corresponds to the 100-year return period of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the hydrograph <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Transformation of discharge to water levels</title>
      <p id="d1e1029">To transform the discharge series into spatially distributed inundation
water levels and associated timing in the VMD, a quasi-2-D, large-scale
hydraulic model was used. The model domain covers the entire MD, including
the VMD and Cambodia lowlands and the Tonle Sap Lake. It uses Kratie as the
upper boundary condition and the tidal level monitoring gauges along the
South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand as downstream boundaries.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1034"><bold>(a)</bold> Schematization of the quasi-2-D flood propagation model for the
Mekong Delta and the concept of simulation of compartmented floodplains in
the VMD. Comparison of observed inundation extent derived from satellite
data and simulated maximum inundation extent for the flood event in 2011 for
the whole delta <bold>(b)</bold>, and evaluation of inundation simulation <bold>(c)</bold> adapted
from Triet et al. (2017).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=\textwidth}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f05.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1051">The model was initially developed by Dung et al. (2011), using the 1-D
river model modelling package MIKE11-HD developed by Danish Hydraulic
Institute (DHI). The hydrodynamic module (HD) provides the full dynamic
solution of the 1-D Saint-Venant equations. The solution is based on an
implicit finite difference scheme developed by Abbott and Ionescu (1967).
Floodplain inundation (2-D flow) was presented by the 1-D model through wide
cross sections for the Cambodian part of the model domain, which is
appropriate for the comparatively low anthropogenic impacts on the channel
network, and natural inundation dynamics of in this part of the MD. In the
Vietnamese part of the delta, flood compartments were represented by
virtual canals and control structures presenting the dykes. The original
model was later refined and updated by Manh et al. (2014) and Triet et al. (2017) (see Fig. 5). The
model was calibrated and validated with gauged data and maximum inundation
extents derived from satellite data for a number of flood events, including
the moderate flood of 2009, the low flood of 2010, and the extreme floods in
2011 and 2000. For a detailed description of the 2-D model see the original
paper by Dung et al. (2011).</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Transformation of water levels to flood hazard indicators</title>
      <p id="d1e1061">The hydraulic simulations provided discharge and water level time series at
the model calculation nodes. Inverse distance weighting (IDW) was applied to
interpolate between nodes for complete spatial coverage. Inundation extent
and depth were then obtained by intersecting the water levels with the
lidar-based DEM.</p>
      <p id="d1e1064">Based on the rice cropping system and cropping calendar, three gridded
inundation maps were produced for each simulation scenario. The first map,
labelled “July”, was generated using the maximum water level of 61 days
from the beginning of simulation from 1 June to 31 July. It was applied to
calculate damage to the summer–autumn crop (SAC) in both shallow- and deep-submergence regions. The second map (August) was based on the maximum
water level from 1 June to 15 September in order to calculate damage to
the autumn–winter crop (AWC) in the shallow-submergence region. For the
AWC in the deep-submergence region, we used the map defined by the maximum
annual submergence (annual) within 1 September to  30 November. The
inundation grid cells of these maps were classified into three inundation
depth classes to assign a stage-damage curve (Fig. 4c) to each grid cell.
Exposed areas of rice crops were calculated by intersecting the inundation
maps with the two land-use maps presenting the SAC and the AWC, as
summarized in Table 1.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1070">Inundation maps for estimating damage to rice crops in the
Vietnamese Mekong Delta.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Inundation region</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Cropping system</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Rice crop</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Planting calendar</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">Input inundated raster </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">raster name</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">period</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shallow</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">double-season rice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Summer–autumn (SAC)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">mid-April–mid-July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1 Jun–31 Jul</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(below 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">triple-season rice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Summer–autumn (SAC)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">March–May/early June</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1 Jun–31 Jul</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Autumn–winter (AWC)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">mid-June–mid September</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">August</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1 Jun–15 Sep</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Deep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">double-season rice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Summer–autumn (SAC)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">May–July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1 Jun–31 Jul</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(above 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">triple-season rice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Summer–autumn (SAC)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">May–July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1 Jun–31 Jul</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Autumn–winter (AWC)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">September–November</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Annual</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1 Sep–30 Nov</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1276">All these procedures were performed using Python scripts (Python version 2.7)
and the Python-supported module of ArcGIS (ArcGIS 10.4).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Calculation of flood damage ($D$) and expected annual damage (EAD)}?><title>Calculation of flood damage (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and expected annual damage (EAD)</title>
      <?pagebreak page2866?><p id="d1e1294">Flood damage (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) was calculated on a pixel basis following equation (Eq. 2)
and aggregated to damage per province and to the whole study area.
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M64" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mtext>MP</mml:mtext><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RD</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RD</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the total monetary damage (in USD). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and MP are the
average rice yield and market prices taken from official statistical data
for 2011: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ton per hectare, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>MP</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mtext>USD</mml:mtext><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">280</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> per
ton. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the total exposed areas classified as partial
and full losses. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RD</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RD</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the relative damage factors
specified on the basis of the damage curves adopted from Dutta et al. (2003)
(see Fig. 4c). The percentage of damage (i.e. in terms of yield
reduction) depends on the duration of contact with floodwater (in days) and
inundation depth, which was classified into two groups, i.e. below 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
and above 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. Because flooding in the VMD is characterized with a long
duration of submergence of 2–5 months (Toan, 2014), loss factor
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RD</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was set to 1 for the areas where inundation depth is above 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), while the partial loss factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RD</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was set to 0.5, which
is the maximum damage of this class in the damage functions, for areas with
inundation depth below 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
      <?pagebreak page2867?><p id="d1e1512">We calculated the EADs for each of the four
hydrograph shapes following Apel et al. (2016). EAD is defined as the
product of probability of exceedance of a given flood event and its damage:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M81" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>EAD</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">¯</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">¯</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> are calculated as follows:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M84" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">¯</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the increment of annual probability of
exceedance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> as the annual probability of
non-exceedance. In this work <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.95, 0.98 and 0.99 according
to the selected return periods; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the calculated damage induced by
the given event; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the numerator of the probability levels considered, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of probability levels.</p>
      <p id="d1e1741">The average estimated annual damage (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mtext>EAD</mml:mtext><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula>) of the four
hydrograph shapes was computed as the weighed sum of the EAD values, with
the probability of occurrence of the hydrograph (Pr) as weights (Eq. 6).
The average crop risk indicator was computed by dividing the average EAD
by the total annual rice plantation area.
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M93" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mtext>EAD</mml:mtext><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:munderover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Pr</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>EAD</mml:mtext><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <title>Estimation of risk variation as a result of two land-use
scenarios</title>
      <p id="d1e1804">In the final step, we investigated how flood risk will change in two
land-use scenarios. Triet et al. (2017) proved that the
construction of high-dyke areas in the northern delta provinces An Giang and
Dong Thap increased the flood hazard in the centre of the delta. Thus, the
first scenario considers the opening of the sluice gates in the high-dyke
areas in these two provinces to introduce floodwater to the paddy fields
during the main flood period, September–October. In response to this change
in the flood management the farming system also changes: farmlands with
triple-season cropping are converted to double-season cropping, i.e. no
cultivation of the AWC. The second scenario considers an expansion of
high dykes, i.e. an increase in the height of the existing low dykes, in these two
provinces to enlarge the area with triple rice crop production. This
scenario follows the development scenario, the so-called “food production
scenario”, proposed in the Mekong Delta Plan (Deltares, 2013). Dyke
height was increased using information of dyke elevation from neighbouring
compartments and maximum water level of the historical flood in 2000, which
was chosen as the design event for flood control infrastructures in the
delta.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1809">Simulated maximum inundation extent for a 10-year return period
flood (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) for
three land-use scenarios. <bold>(a)</bold> No plantation of autumn–winter crop in An Giang
and Dong Thap, <bold>(b)</bold> present condition as of 2011, and <bold>(c)</bold> expansion of
high-dyke areas in An Giang and Dong Thap to enlarge triple-season rice
crops.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=\textwidth}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f06.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1847">The flood propagation model simulated the 16 synthetic floods for these two
dyke scenarios, while the lower boundary conditions were preserved as in
2011. Figure 6 exemplarily illustrates the simulated inundation extent for
the 10-year flood for three scenarios (current situation, expansion and
removal of high dykes).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>Validation of estimated damage</title>
      <p id="d1e1862">The damage estimation was validated by comparing the estimated damage for
the flood in 2011 with official damage data. The exposed cropping area was
overestimated by 18 %, i.e. 32 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in comparison with a reported
area of 27 000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (Tinh, 2012). We estimated rice crop losses of
USD 42.7 million. This number is equivalent to 81 % of the reported
agricultural damages from the National Steering Committee for Flood and
Storm Prevention and Control (USD 52.8 million) (MRC, 2011). Flood
damages to other agriculture crops and facilities, e.g. farmhouses, which
were included in the reported damages (lumped into a single value categorized
as agriculture losses), were not yet incorporated in the presented damage
estimation. Considering that paddy rice is the predominant crop in the
delta, it is very likely to share a large part of the reported losses. Paddy
fields derived from the land-use LC2014 raster account for 72 % of
whole agriculture land within the focus area of this study (deep- and shallow-inundation areas). Assuming a linear distribution of damages in the lumped
official reported damages with land-use proportion, it can be reasoned that
the simulated damages are in the range of the reported. However, it has to
be acknowledged that spatial distribution and market prices of different
crops are likely to be important for the damage estimation. In any case,
although not the ideal piece of information, the reported agriculture
losses were the only available data with which to evaluate our rice crop damage
calculation.</p>
      <p id="d1e1879">A large share of the overestimated exposed area of rice crops can be
attributed to the simulated inundation extents, although efforts have been
made to update, refine, and calibrate the model (Dung et al., 2011;
Manh et al., 2014; Triet et al., 2017). The main source of uncertainty stems
from the interpolation of 1-D model results to a 2-D raster, which could not
be reduced even by the high-resolution lidar DEM.
Triet et al. (2017) reported a flood area index
(FAI) of 0.64 for the comparison of modelled and observed inundated areas
for the whole VMD. The FAI was computed by dividing the sets of pixels
presenting the intersection of observed and simulated inundation with the
set of pixels presenting the union of observed and simulated (Eq. 3 in
Aronica et al., 2002). This value increased to 0.74 only if the
flood-prone area of the VMD was considered. According to Aronica et al. (2002),
who suggested that a FAI higher than 0.7 is considered acceptable
for an inundation simulation model, it can be concluded that the performance
of the inundation model for the VMD is acceptable for the flood-prone area of
the VMD, where the bulk of flood damages occur.</p>
      <?pagebreak page2868?><p id="d1e1882"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>A small share of the overestimation of the 2011 flood might stem from the
land-use data. Considering the rapid expansion of the triple-season rice
areas in the delta (Le et al., 2018), it can be expected
that the used land-use product of 2014 overestimates the spatial coverage of
triple-season rice paddies, possibly resulting in an overestimation of the
flood damage. Also, land-use data have a resolution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; therefore
the majority of inland canals (width 10–30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) were likely classified as rice
pixels (see Fig. 3). Considered the channel density in the delta of 14 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Hung et al., 2012), not separating these inland water
pixels might contribute with a small share to the overestimation.
Additionally, other important factors were not considered, such as dyke
failures and local flood management measures, i.e. early harvesting of rice
crops despite not being 100 % ripe or local raising of dyke segments with
sandbags.</p>
      <p id="d1e1929">Some of these error sources might be resolved by further refining the model.
For instance, the land-use data set can be improved by considering the inland
canals when the crop areas are extracted. Enhancing model performance is,
however, not that straightforward considering the huge amount of data
required for the large-scale model domain. Despite these deficiencies, the
flood damage assessment proposed in this study can produce reliable results,
particularly when the typically large errors in flood damage estimation are
taken as a reference (e.g. Schröter et al., 2014). Thus, the
proposed method is judged to be appropriate to estimate flood hazard and
risk to rice cropping in the VMD.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" orientation="landscape"><caption><p id="d1e1936">Simulated annual maximum water level at key gauge stations in the
Vietnamese Mekong Delta in correspondence with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-year flood event. </p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.80}[.80]?><oasis:tgroup cols="17">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="14" colname="col14" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="15" colname="col15" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="16" colname="col16" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="17" colname="col17" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">Mekong River </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col8" align="center" colsep="1">Bassac River </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col9" nameend="col12" align="center" colsep="1">Plain of Reeds </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col13" nameend="col15" align="center" colsep="1">Long Xuyen Quadrangle </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col16" nameend="col17" align="center">Inland stations </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Tan Chau</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Vam Nao</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Cao Lanh</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">My Thuan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Chau Doc</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Long Xuyen</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Can Tho</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Moc Hoa</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Hung Thanh</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">Kien Binh</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">Tan  An</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">Xuan To</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">Tri Ton</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">Tan Hiep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">Vi Thanh</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17">Phung Hiep</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">[1]*</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[5]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">[3]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">[7]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">[2]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">[4]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">[6]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">[14]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">[13]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">[15]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">[16]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">[8]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">[9]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">[10]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">[11]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17">[12]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.69</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.04</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.27</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.58</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.80</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.01</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.01</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.88</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.83</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.07</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.30</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.61</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.91</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.04</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.03</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.98</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.09</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.33</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.64</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">5.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>2.02</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.08</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.05</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>3.07</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.11</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.35</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.67</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">5.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>2.09</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.11</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.07</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.53</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>1.99</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.22</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">1.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.50</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.66</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.96</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>1.98</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.64</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.02</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.25</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">1.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.54</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.74</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.99</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.76</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.05</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.28</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.58</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.83</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.02</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.02</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.84</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.06</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.30</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.60</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.91</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.03</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.03</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.79</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>1.95</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.21</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.50</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.83</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.94</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>1.95</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.92</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>1.98</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.25</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.53</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.95</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.96</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>1.97</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>3.06</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.01</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.28</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.56</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">5.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>2.07</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.99</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>1.99</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>3.17</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.04</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.33</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.88</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.60</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">5.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>2.14</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.02</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.03</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.55</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>1.96</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.19</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">1.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.47</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.65</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.94</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>1.96</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.67</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>1.99</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.22</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">1.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.51</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.74</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.96</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>1.98</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.80</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.02</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.88</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.25</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.55</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.85</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>0.99</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.00</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>Shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.89</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>2.04</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>2.27</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><bold>1.57</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">3.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15"><bold>1.93</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><bold>1.01</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col17"><bold>2.01</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e1946">* The numbers below the station names refer to the codes in Fig. 1b. Deep-inundation regions are indicated by plain text, shallow-inundation
regions are indicated in bold.<?xmltex \hack{\\}?>Stations are listed from upstream to downstream and grouped according to
their location as Mekong River, Bassac River, Plain of Reeds, Long Xuyen
Quadrangle, and inland stations.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Flood hazard assessment</title>
      <p id="d1e3435">The flood event time series at Kratie were transformed into four hazard
indicators: maximum water level, date of occurrence, inundation extent, and
depth. The simulated annual maximum water levels (AMWLs) at locations with
water level gauges in the VMD are summarized in Table 2. Figure 7 presents
the date of occurrence (DO) of the AMWLs at these points. The chosen
locations encompass nine gauges in the mainstream Mekong (i.e. Mekong River
and Bassac River), and seven inland gauges in the two most important
floodplains, i.e. LXQ (Long Xuyen Quadrangle) and PoR (Plain of Reeds).
Inundated areas were calculated for the three periods specified in Table 1
and aggregated to the flood-prone area of the VMD on the basis of the four
hydrograph shapes (Fig. 8).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3440">Date of occurrence (DO) of the annual maximum water level at key
monitoring gauges in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta <bold>(a)</bold> stations in the Mekong
branch, <bold>(b)</bold> stations in the Bassac branch, <bold>(c)</bold> stations in the Plain of
Reeds, and <bold>(d)</bold> stations in the Long Xuyen Quadrangle. The four hydrograph
shapes (indicated by colours) are shown in combination with different flood magnitudes
(indicated by markers).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=\textwidth}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f07.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><caption><p id="d1e3463">Frequency distributions of the maximum inundated area in July
(squares), in August (diamonds), and over the whole year (circles) corresponding to
the four flood patterns (different colours).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f08.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3473">The simulation results show that the AMWLs in the VMD vary substantially
depending on flood magnitude (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and hydrograph shapes. We estimated a
relative change of 10 %–20 % (40–60 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) in simulated AMWL for an event with
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the deep-submergence region (DSR), and
4 %–8 % (5–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the shallow-submergence region (SSR). The minor
increase in the SSR can be attributed to the strong tidal influence at these
stations. Hung et al. (2012) and Triet et
al. (2017) reported a tidal influence of 70 %–80 % to the river flow and
water level at Can Tho and My Thuan during the flood season. Towards the
northern part of the VMD the tidal influence reduces to below 2 % at Tan Chau
and Chau Doc at the border with Cambodia (Hung et al., 2012).</p>
      <?pagebreak page2869?><p id="d1e3523">The hydrograph shape also influences the AMWL: higher AMWL were obtained for
events with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The shape <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> resulted in
higher AMWL in the DSR, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> yielded higher AMWL in the SSR of
the delta. In contrast to this, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> caused lower
water levels. We found a difference in AMWL ranges from 9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> at SSR to
45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
at the DSR induced by the shapes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to the
other two hydrograph shapes. These results are explained by the date of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at Kratie: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> have the second and
higher peak in mid-September (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) or mid-October (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>),
about 1 month later than the other FP. When this peak is routed to the
VMD, it already meets partly filled floodplain compartments, and coincides
with the period of highest tidal levels in the year (October–November).
Therefore, the highest AMWL is caused by the hydrodynamic interaction
between the upstream and downstream boundaries, and preceding inundation
dynamics. Our simulation thus provides numerical evidence to confirm the
statement in Tri (2012) and Triet et al. (2017) that the superposition of river flood peaks with high tide periods
results in substantial backwater effects and higher water levels up to the
border with Cambodia.</p>
      <p id="d1e3685">The date of occurrence (DO) of the AMWL in the VMD is less sensitive to
changes in flood peak discharge and shape of hydrograph than the actual AMWL
(see Fig. 7). The DO can be divided into two groups. The first group is
composed of stations with prevailing tidal influence, e.g. Can Tho, My
Thuan, and Vi Thanh. For this group AMWL occurs in late October, similarly to the
period of maximum tidal levels in 2011, the downstream boundary conditions
of the flood propagation model. The second group contains gauges further
north or gauges far from the main rivers, where the tidal influence is
largely reduced. These gauges have the DO in the first half of October.</p>
      <?pagebreak page2870?><p id="d1e3688">Figure 8 illustrates the frequency distribution of maximum inundation extent
for three periods: July, August, and the whole year. This indicator varies
strongly depending on the hydrograph shapes. A 10-year flood event with
hydrograph shape <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> results in the same maximum extent as the
100-year flood with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This result proves the necessity to
incorporate the temporal evolution of flood events into flood hazard and
risk assessments in the MD. Our estimation of inundated areas from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> event changed from 5 % to 10 % of the size of the flood-prone
region of the VMD (2.0 million ha) in July, from 30 % to 50 % in August, and
from 60 % to 75 % for the annual maximum extent. This means that even for the 100-year
flood, 25 %–40 % of the flood-prone region was cut off from inundation by
the implementation of high dykes, initiated after the flood in 2000.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3738">Flood damage to rice crop aggregated to the province level and
converted to a percentage of the total damage.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="10">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Return period</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">An Giang</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Dong Thap</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Long An</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Kien Giang</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Can Tho</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Hau Giang</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Tien Giang</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Vinh Long</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2" morerows="3">10 year</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">50.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">18.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">13.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.8</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">8.9</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">30.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">11.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">7.2</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">36.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">29.8</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">18.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">4.7</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">42.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">23.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">8.8</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2" morerows="3">20 year</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">54.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">16.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">7.5</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">27.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">20.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">5.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">6.3</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">37.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">27.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">19.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.8</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.9</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">41.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">25.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">8.1</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2" morerows="3">50 year</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">61.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">5.7</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">25.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">14.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">7.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">5.9</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">40.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">24.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">19.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.2</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">43.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">25.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">13.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">6.6</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2" morerows="3">100 year</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">62.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">13.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">5.1</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">26.8</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">18.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">19.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">14.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">8.4</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">5.2</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">40.1</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">23.8</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">20.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.9</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>shp<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">44.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">24.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">13.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col10">5.8</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4609"><bold>(a)</bold> Total exposed areas of rice crop in the Vietnamese Mekong
Delta to floods of different return periods, calculated for the second and
third rice crops and aggregated to the whole year. <bold>(b)</bold> Total damage for
floods of different return periods.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f09.pdf"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <title>Exposed rice cropping area and flood damage</title>
      <p id="d1e4629">Exposed areas and flood damage (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) to rice crop were calculated on a pixel
basis and then aggregated to the eight provinces located in the study area
(Fig. 9 and Table 3). The average damage ranged from USD 39.0 million for a
10-year flood to USD 75.0 million for a 100-year flood. These numbers
account for 0.23 %–0.45 % of the total gross domestic product (GDP) of the
eight provinces in 2011. Since such assessments are not available for
neighbouring deltas in South Asia, e.g. Chao Phraya in Thailand or Irrawaddy
in Myanmar, a comparison of these deltas is not possible. Our worst
scenario, i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, resulted in damages of USD 115.7 million.
This value is less than half of the reported overall damage of the
flood in 2000 (USD 250 million; reported in MRC (2012), scaled to
USD 500 million with 2011 price levels by Chinh et al., 2016), which
is considered a 20-year flood in the MD (Le et al., 2007).
Although the damage figures from the event in 2000 were the overall damages,
of which agricultural damages were an unknown part, this indicates that a large
reduction in flood losses can be linked to the flood management and
adaptation measures being implemented in the VMD following the Decision
No. 99/1996 from the Government of Vietnam (The Government of Viet
Nam, 1996). Note that the plan was initiated in 1996, but was implemented to
a large extent after the flood in 2000 had occurred.</p>
      <p id="d1e4655">The hydrograph shape has a substantial effect on damage to rice crops in the
VMD. The shape <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> resulted in a high amount of damage, roughly 1.5 times
higher than the average damage. Flood hydrograph <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> closely matched
the average damage (85 %–90 %), while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> resulted
in approximately 60 %–70 % of the average damage (Fig. 9b). These findings
support our hazard and risk assessment approach and point to the relevance
of the temporal evolution of the flood event for damage estimation. For
example, the total flood damage from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (USD 57.8 million)
was about 10 % higher than the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> event (USD 51.0 million).</p>
      <p id="d1e4735">The results provide evidence that rice cropping in the VMD is most
vulnerable to flooding stemming from the early flood pulse in
August–September when the total plantation area is expected to be at its
maximum. During this period damage occurs to the second crop (SAC) in both
DSR and SSR, and the AWC in the SSR. This finding is in line with<?pagebreak page2871?> the
extremely high damages during the flood in 2000, which had a first peak at Tan Chau
(point 1 in Fig. 1) on 2 August, i.e. 1 month earlier than usual
(Xo et al., 2015). In contrast, damage from late flood events, i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>shp</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, are limited to the AWC in the DSR due to
failure of dyke structure, or flood levels overtopping the current dyke
height, similar to the flood damages recorded in 2011.</p>
      <p id="d1e4760">Aggregating the mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values per province showed that the two northern
provinces, An Giang and Dong Thap, accounted for about two-thirds of the total
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of the VMD, with flood damage in An Giang being about 1.5 times higher
than in Dong Thap. This difference increases up to a factor of 3 in the case
of late flood peaks (Table 3). This can be explained by the larger areas
with triple rice crops in An Giang. This third crop in the DSR is
particularly vulnerable to inundation in October–November (see Fig. 3b).
Damages for the other two provinces in the DSR also showed remarkable
differences, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % of the total flood damage
calculated for Long An located in the Plain of Reeds. This is 10–15 times
higher than the share of Kien Giang (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in Kien Giang is less than 2 % of
the total <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), although the rice cropping area is larger in Kien Giang
(Bouvet and Le Toan, 2011; Nguyen et al., 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e4802">The remaining SSR provinces accounted for about a quarter of the total <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>,
which can be linked to their smaller rice cultivation areas in combination
with their flood control measures. Our calculated flood damage to rice crop
for Can Tho is, on average, in the range USD 2.9–6.3 million from the
10-year to the 100-year flood. These figures amount to about
60 % of the estimated urban damages of Can Tho (USD 5.0-9.7 million)
for events with similar magnitudes (Chinh et al., 2017). Since Can
Tho has the highest urban<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>rural area ratio compared to the other delta
provinces, it is likely that<?pagebreak page2872?> agriculture losses have an equal or higher
share in flood damages compared to urban losses in the other provinces of the
delta.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4821"><bold>(a)</bold> Total flood damage for different return periods corresponding
to two land-use scenarios. <bold>(b)</bold> Average crop risk as specific loss for each
hydrograph shape.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4837">Flood risk for rice crops in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta.
Specific loss is calculated in USD/ha/a for three land-use scenarios: <bold>(a)</bold>
current land use, <bold>(b)</bold> no autumn–winter crop (AWC) in An Giang and Dong Thap,
and <bold>(c)</bold> expansion of the AWC in these two provinces.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=\textwidth}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/18/2859/2018/nhess-18-2859-2018-f11.pdf"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <title>Rice cropping flood risk</title>
      <p id="d1e4861">For the current land use, the EAD for rice cropping in the whole delta
amounts to USD 4.5 million (see Fig. 10b), with an average crop risk of
USD 1.0–4.6 for each unit of land [ha] (see Fig. 11a). The
highest risk was calculated for the provinces located in the deep-submergence region (DSR), except for Kien Giang, where the EAD was very
low.</p>
      <p id="d1e4864">An expansion of areas with triple rice cropping in An Giang and Dong Thap, as
defined in the expansion development scenario, would increase the exposure
to flooding. Figure 10b shows that this expansion of AWC would triple the
EAD to above USD 15.0 million. The expansion of triple rice cropping
also means that the current low-dyke system must be raised to a higher
design level in order to support the cultivation of AWC during
September–November. This, in turn, would lead to higher inundation hazards
and risks in downstream provinces (Triet et al.,
2017). Figure 11c shows both effects: a substantial increase in EAD in
Dong Thap and An Giang, and a slight increase in EAD in the downstream
provinces resulting from a higher-inundation hazard caused by the high-dyke
development.</p>
      <p id="d1e4867">The second development scenario – introducing floodwater to the paddy
fields after the SAC and no cultivation of AWC in An Giang and Dong Thap
– resulted in smaller <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and EAD values, as expected. Abandoning AWC
cultivation would result in an EAD decrease of about 40 % (Fig. 10b). The
majority of these changes in both scenarios stems from changes in An Giang
and Dong Thap. The other provinces account for 5 %–15 % of the changes in
EAD only.</p>
      <p id="d1e4877">The full flood control measures (high dykes) supporting the expansion of
AWC areas in An Giang and Dong Thap after the flood in 2000 have been
continuously debated. Triet et al. (2017) revealed
that the change from low-dyke to high-dyke systems in this upstream part of
the delta increased the inundation hazard in downstream areas, e.g. by an
increase of 9–13 cm in AMWL at Can Tho and My Thuan. Howie (2005) and
Käkönen (2008) challenged the claim that farmers could have
greater benefit by being able to add another harvest to the cropping system,
because of more investment cost for mineral fertilizers to counter the
losses of natural fertilization by deposited sediment
(Manh et al., 2014), together with negative social
and environmental consequences. The profitability of triple rice farming was
reported to reduce from initially 57 % to 6 % after 15 years compared to
double rice counterparts due to higher production costs (Tran
et al., 2018). These arguments and findings might make the expansion of AWC
less attractive.</p>
      <p id="d1e4881">On the other hand, rice cultivation areas in the southern part of the delta
are likely to decrease due to increased salinity intrusion following higher
sea levels (Smajgl et al., 2015; Hak et al., 2016) and land subsidence
(Laura et al., 2014; Minderhoud et al., 2017). Expansion
of AWC in the northern part of the delta is an option for countering such
losses and ensuring food security. Our results could support an evaluation
of the costs and benefits of further high-dyke development and triple rice
cropping expansion and thus provide important information for future flood
management and land-use planning in the delta. Additionally, the damage and
risks maps can serve as a basis for flood management. They could support the
agricultural insurance, initiated in 2011 by the decision of the Prime
Minister of Vietnam. In this programme the insurance premium depends on the
rice yield only, and the spatial pattern of the flood hazard is not
considered (The Government of Viet Nam, 2011).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS5">
  <title>Uncertainties, limitation and future research directions</title>
      <p id="d1e4891">One of the major sources of uncertainties in our estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and EAD
is associated with the inundation maps. The process of interpolating from 1-D
water levels to 2-D inundation raster inherits uncertainties from the
hydraulic model and from the DEM used for interpolation (Brandt,
2016). A full 2-D modelling approach might enhance the quality of flood
inundation mapping, but this comes at a cost: the set-up of a full 2-D
hydraulic model on that scale is challenging because of the high density of
man-made channels and hydraulic infrastructure, which need to be implemented
in the model with high accuracy to substantially improve the simulations.
Additionally, model runtime becomes critical in detailed large-scale 2-D
hydraulic simulations within a risk assessment requiring a large number of
model simulations. Large-scale approaches building on coarse-resolution
modelling with sub-grid parameterization (Sampson et al., 2015)
still cannot provide sufficient accuracy to properly map the hydraulic
dynamics in such a complex system with flat topography, where details matter
a lot. However, refining this approach in high resolution, including all relevant
hydraulic structures, and implementation in a highly parallelized
environment (e.g. on GPUs) could provide a viable path for reducing the
uncertainties in hydraulic modelling of the MD.</p>
      <p id="d1e4901">Another uncertainty source is the land-use maps used to quantify flood
exposure of rice crops. The land-use raster was produced using satellite
data from 2014; thus it is somewhat outdated considering the dynamics of
agricultural land-use change in the MD. The area of triple-season rice has
very likely increased from 2014 to the present. An updated and higher-resolution
land-use data set would certainly provide more up-to-date results.</p>
      <p id="d1e4904">Another uncertainty source is the limited number of return periods used to
calculate EAD. Ward et al. (2011) showed that the
number and choice of the selected return periods can introduce a significant
bias in the EAD estimates. They also pointed out the importance of
considering damages to frequently occurring low damage floods, in line with
the findings of Merz et al. (2009). However, as the
agricultural<?pagebreak page2873?> system in the MD is well adapted to frequently occurring floods
(in fact these floods are the basis for the current practice of paddy rice
cropping), this effect is likely not as important as in the European studies
listed above.</p>
      <p id="d1e4907">Our work does not consider flood damage to other agriculture crops (e.g. orchard farms) or land-use types (e.g. shrimp farms). Although these
production types are smaller than rice cropping in terms of area, they
generate much higher economic value per cultivation unit. Therefore, it is
highly recommended to include these crops in future studies on agricultural
flood risk in the VMD. To facilitate such assessments, efforts need to be
made to collect data on crop and aquaculture type and area, plantation
calendar, and their vulnerability to inundation. Such risk assessments could
then be used for scenario planning by varying land-use types and cropping
patterns or changing boundary conditions by climate change and upstream
developments. In addition, dedicated efforts for validation and development
of crop damage curves for the VMD based on recorded flood damages at the
plot scale would increase the credibility of the presented risk analysis.
Our study is validated against large scale, aggregated damage data only, and
it is open to ensuring that small-scale variations, which could be important
for local adaptation measures, are represented sufficiently well.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page2874?><sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e4918">A top-down approach to estimate flood damages and risks to rice cropping in
the flood-prone areas of the Vietnamese Mekong Delta (VMD) is presented. The
work was motivated by recent publications stating that extreme floods in the
Mekong are likely to occur more frequently in the 21st century
(Delgado et al., 2010; Hirabayashi et al., 2013), but also by the
perceived need to shift flood management towards a risk-based approach. The
presented quantification of flood risks to rice crops, the predominant
land use in the region, is the first step in this direction, as a
large-scale flood risk assessment has not been implemented to date. This
work is thus the very first publication on a large-scale flood risk assessment
for the agricultural sector in the VMD.</p>
      <p id="d1e4921">The results showed that the timing of the floods, the high tides and the
cropping calendar are crucial factors for agricultural crop damage. Although
the cropping calendars are adapted to the general flood dynamics in the
different areas of the MD, large damages might still occur in the case of
extreme events. A reliable seasonal forecast of the annual floods would thus
be very helpful for a risk-based adaptive flood management of agricultural
production. The study suggests that flood mitigation measures by the
government and farmers, e.g. shifting of the cropping calendar and
construction of dykes and sluice gates, before and after the historical flood
in 2000 have greatly reduced potential agricultural flood damage.</p>
      <p id="d1e4924">The risk indicators, expected annual damage (EAD), and average crop risk
per province can serve as the basis on which to develop spatially explicit flood
management and mitigation plans for the delta. The crop risk maps,
corresponding to two land-use change scenarios which are frequently used in
the public and academic discussion, could be used as input for a
cost–benefit analysis to evaluate the alternative of enlargement of the
third rice crop in the two northern provinces.</p>
      <p id="d1e4927">Based on our findings, the following suggestions can be made to support
flood management in the region: (1) appropriate maintenance is necessary for
the flood control systems, with a strong emphasis on the low-dyke systems
providing protection against the early flood wave before September. (2) The
rice cropping scheme referred to as “ba nam tam vu”, meaning eight
rice crops every 3 years, should be reviewed. According to this scheme,
sluice gates will be opened to allow floodwater to inundate the
compartments in order to replenish the natural fertilization with deposited
sediment at least once every 3 consecutive years. However, the study of
Manh et al. (2014) revealed that during low flood
years the estimated deposited sediment in the VMD was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
times smaller than in years of extreme floods. Thus, opening flood
compartments during low flood year might result in little sediment
deposition in paddy fields. We propose to open the flood compartments
protected with high dykes in An Giang and Dong Thap during extreme events (i.e. larger than a 10-year return period). However, for a proper implementation of
such a scheme, a reliable seasonal forecasts of the expected floods are
required. Our estimation of flood damage (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) can be used as reference for
developing such management plans based on a thorough cost–benefit analysis
including a quantitative consideration of the benefits of natural
fertilization vs. mineral fertilizers. (3) The current pilot programme on
agriculture insurance should be revised, at least for rice cropping in the
VMD. Insurance premiums are preferably calculated based on the average rice
yield per province. Using our spatially explicit results would include the
actual flood hazard of the insured area. However, the damages should be
updated to current economic values, as the values of 2011 were used.</p>
      <p id="d1e4948">Finally, our inundation hazard maps can be used to quantify flood damages
and risks to other agricultural crops and land use in the MD if appropriate
land-use maps and damage models are available. In a similar manner changes
in flood hazard and risk inflicted by impacts of climate change, sea level
rise, the pronounced deltaic land subsidence, land-use changes, and upstream
hydropower development can be quantified systematically. These issues will
be addressed in future work.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e4955">The data used in this paper are not publicly accessible; however,
the authors can be contacted by email (triet@gfzpotsdam.de or heiko.apel@gfz-potsdam.de) for help in contacting
the persons or authorities to acquire such data and how this should be
acknowledged.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e4961">All authors contributed to the preparation of this paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e4967">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement">

      <p id="d1e4973">This article is part of the special issue “Flood risk
assessment and management”. It is a result of the EGU General Assembly 2018,
Vienna, Austria, 8–13 April 2018.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><?pagebreak page2875?><p id="d1e4979">The work leading to this publication was supported by the German Academic
Exchange Service (DAAD) with funds from the German Federal Ministry of
Education and Research (BMBF). We acknowledge Akihiko Kotera at Vietnam Japan University for providing processed
EVI data. The authors want to specially thank Pham The Vinh and various
colleagues at SIWRR for their support in providing the DEM and survey
data. We would like to thank Jorge Ramirez and the two anonymous
referees who reviewed the manuscript for their comments and
suggestions that helped to improve the paper.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>The article processing charges for this open-access <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> publication
were covered by a Research <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Centre of the Helmholtz Association.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: Dhruvesh Patel <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: Jorge Ramirez and two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Abbott, M. B. and Ionescu, F.: On the numerical computation of nearly
horizontal flows, J. Hydraul. Res., 5, 97–117, 1967.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Apel, H., Martínez Trepat, O., Hung, N. N., Chinh, D. T., Merz, B.,
and Dung, N. V.: Combined fluvial and pluvial urban flood hazard analysis:
concept development and application to Can Tho city, Mekong Delta,
Vietnam, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 941–961, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-941-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-16-941-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Aronica, G., Bates, P., and Horritt, M.: Assessing the uncertainty in
distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information
within GLUE, Hydrol. Process., 16, 2001–2016, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Bouvet, A. and Le Toan, T.: Use of ENVISAT/ASAR wide-swath data for timely
rice fields mapping in the Mekong River Delta, Remote Sens.
Environ., 115, 1090–1101, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.12.014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rse.2010.12.014</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Bouvet, A., Le Toan, T., and Nguyen, L. D.: Monitoring of the Rice Cropping
System in the Mekong Delta Using ENVISAT/ASAR Dual Polarization Data, IEEE
T. Geosci. Remote, 47, 10,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2008.2007963" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/TGRS.2008.2007963</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Brandt, S. A.: Modeling and visualizing uncertainties of flood boundary
delineation: algorithm for slope and DEM resolution dependencies of 1D
hydraulic models, Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A., 30,
1677–1690, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-016-1212-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00477-016-1212-z</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Chinh, D., Dung, N., Gain, A., and Kreibich, H.: Flood Loss Models and Risk
Analysis for Private Households in Can Tho City, Vietnam, Water, 9, 313,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Chinh, D. T., Bubeck, P., Dung, N. V., and Kreibich, H.: The 2011 flood event
in the Mekong Delta: preparedness, response, damage and recovery of private
households and small businesses, Disasters, 40, 753–778, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12171" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/disa.12171</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Dang, T. D., Cochrane, T. A., Arias, M. E., and Tri, V. P. D.: Future
hydrological alterations in the Mekong Delta under the impact of water
resources development, land subsidence and sea level rise, J.
Hydrol.-Regional Studies, 15, 119–133, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2017.12.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ejrh.2017.12.002</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Delgado, J. M., Apel, H., and Merz, B.: Flood trends and variability in
the Mekong river, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 407–418, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-407-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-14-407-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Deltares: Mekong Delta Plan, Long-term vision and strategy for a safe,
prosperous and sustainable delta, available at:
<uri>https://www.deltares.nl/app/uploads/2014/01/Mekong-delta-plan-Long-term-vision-and-strategy.pdf</uri> (last access: 20 July 2018), 126, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Dinh, Q., Balica, S., Popescu, I., and Jonoski, A.: 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, 103–120,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Dung, N. V., Merz, B., Bárdossy, A., Thang, T. D., and Apel, H.: Multi-objective
automatic calibration of hydrodynamic models utilizing inundation maps and gauge
data, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 1339–1354, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1339-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-15-1339-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Dung, N. V., Merz, B., Bárdossy, A., and Apel, H.: Handling uncertainty
in bivariate quantile estimation – An application to flood hazard analysis in
the Mekong Delta, J. Hydrol., 527, 704–717, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Dutta, D., Herath, S., and Musiake, K.: A mathematical model for flood loss
estimation, J. Hydrol., 277, 24–49, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Förster, S., Kuhlmann, B., Lindenschmidt, K.-E., and Bronstert, A.:
Assessing flood risk for a rural detention area, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 8, 311–322, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-8-311-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-8-311-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
GSO: Statistical handbook of Vietnam 2015, General statistics office of Viet
Nam, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Hak, D., Nadaoka, K., Patrick Bernado, L., Le Phu, V., Hong Quan, N., Quang
Toan, T., Hieu Trung, N., Van Ni, D., and Pham Dang Tri, V.: Spatio-temporal
variations of sea level around the Mekong Delta: their causes and
consequences on the coastal environment, Hydrological Research Letters, 10,
60–66, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Hirabayashi, Y., Mahendran, R., Koirala, S., Konoshima, L., Yamazaki, D.,
Watanabe, S., Kim, H., and Kanae, S.: Global flood risk under climate
change, Nat. Clim. Change, 3, 816, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1911" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nclimate1911</ext-link>,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Howie, C.: High dykes in the Mekong Delta in Vietnam bring social gains and
environmental pains, Aquaculture News, 32, 15–17, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Huete, A., Didan, K., Miura, T., Rodriguez, E. P., Gao, X., and Ferreira, L.
G.: Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the MODIS
vegetation indices, Remote Sens. Environ., 83, 195–213, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00096-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00096-2</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Hung, N. N., Delgado, J. M., Tri, V. K., Hung, L. M., Merz, B.,
Bárdossy, A., and Apel, H.: Floodplain hydrology of the Mekong Delta,
Vietnam, Hydrol. Process., 26, 674–686, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8183" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.8183</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Käkönen, M.: Mekong Delta at the crossroads: more control or
adaptation?, AMBIO, 37, 205–212, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Klaus, S., Kreibich, H., Merz, B., Kuhlmann, B., and Schröter, K.:
Large-scale, seasonal flood risk analysis for agricultural crops in Germany,
Environ. Earth Sci., 75, 1289, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6096-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s12665-016-6096-1</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Kotera, A., Nagano, T., Hanittinan, P., and Koontanakulvong, S.: Assessing
the degree of flood damage to rice crops in the Chao Phraya delta, Thailand,
using MODIS satellite imaging, Paddy Water Environ., 14, 271–280, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Laura, E. E., Steven, M. G., and Howard, A. Z.: Groundwater extraction, land subsidence,
and sea-level rise in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam, Environmental Research Letters, 9, 084010, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Le, T. N., Bregt, A. K., van Halsema, G. E., Hellegers, P. J. G. J., and
Nguyen, L.-D.: Interplay between land-use dynamics and changes in
hydrological regime in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta, Land Use Policy, 73,
269–280, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.030" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.030</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Le, T. V. H., Nguyen, H. N., Wolanski, E., Tran, T. C., and Haruyama, S.:
The combined impact on the flooding in Vietnam's Mekong River delta of local
man-made structures, sea level rise, and dams upstream in the river
catchment, Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci., 71, 110–116, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2006.08.021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ecss.2006.08.021</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page2876?><ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Leinenkugel, P., Kuenzer, C., Oppelt, N., and Dech, S.: Characterisation of
land surface phenology and land cover based on moderate resolution satellite
data in cloud prone areas – A novel product for the Mekong Basin, Remote
Sens. Environ., 136, 180–198, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.05.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rse.2013.05.004</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Manh, N. V., Merz, B., and Apel, H.: Sedimentation monitoring including uncertainty
analysis in complex floodplains: a case study in the Mekong
Delta, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3039–3057, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3039-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-17-3039-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Manh, N. V., Dung, N. V., Hung, N. N., Merz, B., and Apel, H.: Large-scale suspended
sediment transport and sediment deposition in the Mekong
Delta, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3033–3053, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3033-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-18-3033-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Merz, B., Elmer, F., and Thieken, A. H.: Significance of “high probability/low damage” versus “low probability/high damage”
flood events, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 1033–1046, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-9-1033-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-9-1033-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Merz, B., Kreibich, H., Schwarze, R., and Thieken, A.: Review article “Assessment of economic
flood damage”, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 10, 1697–1724, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-10-1697-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-10-1697-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Minderhoud, P. S. J., Erkens, G., Pham, V. H., Bui, V. T., Erban, L., Kooi, H.,
and Stouthamer, E.: Impacts of 25 years of groundwater extraction on subsidence
in the Mekong delta, Vietnam, Environ. Res. Lett., 12, 064006, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7146" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/aa7146</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
MRC: Flood Damages, Benefits and Flood Risk in Focal Areas, Mekong River
Commission, 184 pp., 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
MRC: Flood situation report 2011, MRC Technical Paper No. 36, Mekong River
Commission, Phnom Phenh, 57 pp., 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
MRC: The Impact and Management of Floods and Droughts in the Lower Mekong
Basin and The Implications of Possible Climate Change, Mekong River
Commission, 129 pp., 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Nguyen, D. B., Clauss, K., Cao, S. M., Naeimi, V., Kuenzer, C., and Wagner, W.:
Mapping Rice Seasonality in the Mekong Delta with Multi-Year Envisat ASAR WSM Data, Remote Sensing, 7, 15868–15893, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71215808" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs71215808</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Penning-Rowsell, E. C., Wilson, T., and Centre, F. H. R.: The benefits of
flood and coastal defence: techniques and data for 2003, Middlesex
University, London, UK, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Sampson, C. C., Smith, A. M., Bates, P. B., Neal, J. C., Alfieri, L., and
Freer, J. E.: A high-resolution global flood hazard model, Water Resour.
Res., 51, 7358–7381, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016954" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015WR016954</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Schröter, K., Kreibich, H., Vogel, K., Riggelsen, C., Scherbaum, F., and
Merz, B.: How useful are complex flood damage models?, Water Resour.
Res., 50, 3378–3395, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Smajgl, A., Toan, T. Q., Nhan, D. K., Ward, J., Trung, N. H., Tri, L. Q.,
Tri, V. P. D., and Vu, P. T.: Responding to rising sea levels in the Mekong
Delta, Nat. Clim. Change, 5, 167–174, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2469" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nclimate2469</ext-link>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
The Government of Viet Nam: Decision No. 99/TTg on water resources,
infrastructure and rural development plan for the Vietnamese Mekong Delta
during the period 1996–2000, 1996 (in Vietnamese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
The Government of Viet Nam: Decision No. 315/TTg on pilot programme for
agriculture insurance in Vietnam, 2011 (in Vietnamese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Tinh, D. N.: 2011 flood lesson leraned in Vietnam, Presentation at 2012
South-East-Asia Flood Risk Reduction Forum, Vietnam, 19, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Toan, T. Q.: Climate Change and Sea Level Rise in the Mekong Delta: Flood,
Tidal Inundation, Salinity Intrusion, and Irrigation Adaptation Methods, in:
Coastal Disasters and Climate Change in Vietnam, edited by: Esteban, N. D.
T., Hiroshi Takagi Miguel, Elsevier, Oxford, 199–218, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Tran, D. D., van Halsema, G., Hellegers, P. J. G. J., Ludwig, F., and Wyatt,
A.: Questioning triple rice intensification on the Vietnamese mekong delta
floodplains: An environmental and economic analysis of current land-use
trends and alternatives, J. Environ. Manage., 217, 429–441,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.116" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.116</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Tri, V.: Hydrology and Hydraulic Infrastructure Systems in the Mekong Delta,
Vietnam, in: The Mekong Delta System, edited by: Renaud, F. G. and Kuenzer,
C., Springer Environmental Science and Engineering, Springer Netherlands,
49–81, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Triet, N. V. K., Dung, N. V., Fujii, H., Kummu, M., Merz, B., and Apel, H.:
Has dyke development in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta shifted flood hazard
downstream?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3991–4010, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3991-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-21-3991-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>Van, P. D. T., Popescu, I., van Griensven, A., Solomatine, D. P., Trung, N. H., and Green, A.:
A study of the climate change impacts on fluvial flood propagation in the
Vietnamese Mekong Delta, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 4637–4649, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-4637-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-16-4637-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Van, T. C.: Identification of sea level rise impacts on the Mekong Delta and
orientation of adaptation activities, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Ward, P. J., de Moel, H., and Aerts, J. C. J. H.: How are flood risk estimates
affected by the choice of return-periods?, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 3181–3195, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-11-3181-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-11-3181-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Xo, L. Q., Hien, N. X., Thanh, N. D., Ngoc, B., Khoi, N. H., Lam, D. T.,
Khoi, T. M., Tien, H. T., and Uyen, N. T.: Mekong Delta flood management
plan to 2020 and 2030, Southern Institute of Water Resources
Planning, Hochiminh City, Vietnam, 2015 (in Vietnamese).</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Towards risk-based flood management in highly productive paddy rice cultivation – concept development and application to the Mekong Delta</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Flooding is an imminent natural hazard threatening most river deltas, e.g. the Mekong Delta. An appropriate flood management is thus required for a
sustainable development of the often densely populated regions. Recently, the
traditional event-based hazard control shifted towards a risk management
approach in many regions, driven by intensive research leading to new legal
regulation on flood management. However, a large-scale flood risk assessment
does not exist for the Mekong Delta. Particularly, flood risk to paddy rice
cultivation, the most important economic activity in the delta, has not been
performed yet. Therefore, the present study was developed to provide the very
first insight into delta-scale flood damages and risks to rice cultivation.
The flood hazard was quantified by probabilistic flood hazard maps of the
whole delta using a bivariate extreme value statistics, synthetic flood
hydrographs, and a large-scale hydraulic model. The flood risk to paddy rice
was then quantified considering cropping calendars, rice phenology, and
harvest times based on a time series of enhanced vegetation index (EVI)
derived from MODIS satellite data, and a published rice flood damage
function. The proposed concept provided flood risk maps to paddy rice for the
Mekong Delta in terms of expected annual damage. The presented concept can be
used as a blueprint for regions facing similar problems due to its generic
approach. Furthermore, the changes in flood risk to paddy rice caused by
changes in land use currently under discussion in the Mekong Delta were
estimated. Two land-use scenarios either intensifying or reducing rice
cropping were considered, and the changes in risk were presented in spatially
explicit flood risk maps. The basic risk maps could serve as guidance for the
authorities to develop spatially explicit flood management and mitigation
plans for the delta. The land-use change risk maps could further be used for
adaptive risk management plans and as a basis for a cost–benefit of the
discussed land-use change scenarios. Additionally, the damage and risks maps
may support the recently initiated agricultural insurance programme in
Vietnam.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Abbott, M. B. and Ionescu, F.: On the numerical computation of nearly
horizontal flows, J. Hydraul. Res., 5, 97–117, 1967.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Apel, H., Martínez Trepat, O., Hung, N. N., Chinh, D. T., Merz, B.,
and Dung, N. V.: Combined fluvial and pluvial urban flood hazard analysis:
concept development and application to Can Tho city, Mekong Delta,
Vietnam, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 941–961, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-941-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-941-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Aronica, G., Bates, P., and Horritt, M.: Assessing the uncertainty in
distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information
within GLUE, Hydrol. Process., 16, 2001–2016, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bouvet, A. and Le Toan, T.: Use of ENVISAT/ASAR wide-swath data for timely
rice fields mapping in the Mekong River Delta, Remote Sens.
Environ., 115, 1090–1101, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.12.014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.12.014</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bouvet, A., Le Toan, T., and Nguyen, L. D.: Monitoring of the Rice Cropping
System in the Mekong Delta Using ENVISAT/ASAR Dual Polarization Data, IEEE
T. Geosci. Remote, 47, 10,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2008.2007963" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2008.2007963</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Brandt, S. A.: Modeling and visualizing uncertainties of flood boundary
delineation: algorithm for slope and DEM resolution dependencies of 1D
hydraulic models, Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A., 30,
1677–1690, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-016-1212-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-016-1212-z</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Chinh, D., Dung, N., Gain, A., and Kreibich, H.: Flood Loss Models and Risk
Analysis for Private Households in Can Tho City, Vietnam, Water, 9, 313,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Chinh, D. T., Bubeck, P., Dung, N. V., and Kreibich, H.: The 2011 flood event
in the Mekong Delta: preparedness, response, damage and recovery of private
households and small businesses, Disasters, 40, 753–778, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12171" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12171</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Dang, T. D., Cochrane, T. A., Arias, M. E., and Tri, V. P. D.: Future
hydrological alterations in the Mekong Delta under the impact of water
resources development, land subsidence and sea level rise, J.
Hydrol.-Regional Studies, 15, 119–133, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2017.12.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2017.12.002</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Delgado, J. M., Apel, H., and Merz, B.: Flood trends and variability in
the Mekong river, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 407–418, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-407-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-407-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Deltares: Mekong Delta Plan, Long-term vision and strategy for a safe,
prosperous and sustainable delta, available at:
<a href="https://www.deltares.nl/app/uploads/2014/01/Mekong-delta-plan-Long-term-vision-and-strategy.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.deltares.nl/app/uploads/2014/01/Mekong-delta-plan-Long-term-vision-and-strategy.pdf</a> (last access: 20 July 2018), 126, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Dinh, Q., Balica, S., Popescu, I., and Jonoski, A.: 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, 103–120,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Dung, N. V., Merz, B., Bárdossy, A., Thang, T. D., and Apel, H.: Multi-objective
automatic calibration of hydrodynamic models utilizing inundation maps and gauge
data, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 1339–1354, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1339-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1339-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Dung, N. V., Merz, B., Bárdossy, A., and Apel, H.: Handling uncertainty
in bivariate quantile estimation – An application to flood hazard analysis in
the Mekong Delta, J. Hydrol., 527, 704–717, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Dutta, D., Herath, S., and Musiake, K.: A mathematical model for flood loss
estimation, J. Hydrol., 277, 24–49, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Förster, S., Kuhlmann, B., Lindenschmidt, K.-E., and Bronstert, A.:
Assessing flood risk for a rural detention area, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 8, 311–322, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-8-311-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-8-311-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
GSO: Statistical handbook of Vietnam 2015, General statistics office of Viet
Nam, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Hak, D., Nadaoka, K., Patrick Bernado, L., Le Phu, V., Hong Quan, N., Quang
Toan, T., Hieu Trung, N., Van Ni, D., and Pham Dang Tri, V.: Spatio-temporal
variations of sea level around the Mekong Delta: their causes and
consequences on the coastal environment, Hydrological Research Letters, 10,
60–66, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Hirabayashi, Y., Mahendran, R., Koirala, S., Konoshima, L., Yamazaki, D.,
Watanabe, S., Kim, H., and Kanae, S.: Global flood risk under climate
change, Nat. Clim. Change, 3, 816, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1911" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1911</a>,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Howie, C.: High dykes in the Mekong Delta in Vietnam bring social gains and
environmental pains, Aquaculture News, 32, 15–17, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Huete, A., Didan, K., Miura, T., Rodriguez, E. P., Gao, X., and Ferreira, L.
G.: Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the MODIS
vegetation indices, Remote Sens. Environ., 83, 195–213, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00096-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00096-2</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Hung, N. N., Delgado, J. M., Tri, V. K., Hung, L. M., Merz, B.,
Bárdossy, A., and Apel, H.: Floodplain hydrology of the Mekong Delta,
Vietnam, Hydrol. Process., 26, 674–686, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8183" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8183</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Käkönen, M.: Mekong Delta at the crossroads: more control or
adaptation?, AMBIO, 37, 205–212, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Klaus, S., Kreibich, H., Merz, B., Kuhlmann, B., and Schröter, K.:
Large-scale, seasonal flood risk analysis for agricultural crops in Germany,
Environ. Earth Sci., 75, 1289, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6096-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6096-1</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Kotera, A., Nagano, T., Hanittinan, P., and Koontanakulvong, S.: Assessing
the degree of flood damage to rice crops in the Chao Phraya delta, Thailand,
using MODIS satellite imaging, Paddy Water Environ., 14, 271–280, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Laura, E. E., Steven, M. G., and Howard, A. Z.: Groundwater extraction, land subsidence,
and sea-level rise in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam, Environmental Research Letters, 9, 084010, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Le, T. N., Bregt, A. K., van Halsema, G. E., Hellegers, P. J. G. J., and
Nguyen, L.-D.: Interplay between land-use dynamics and changes in
hydrological regime in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta, Land Use Policy, 73,
269–280, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.030" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.030</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Le, T. V. H., Nguyen, H. N., Wolanski, E., Tran, T. C., and Haruyama, S.:
The combined impact on the flooding in Vietnam's Mekong River delta of local
man-made structures, sea level rise, and dams upstream in the river
catchment, Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci., 71, 110–116, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2006.08.021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2006.08.021</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Leinenkugel, P., Kuenzer, C., Oppelt, N., and Dech, S.: Characterisation of
land surface phenology and land cover based on moderate resolution satellite
data in cloud prone areas – A novel product for the Mekong Basin, Remote
Sens. Environ., 136, 180–198, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.05.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.05.004</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Manh, N. V., Merz, B., and Apel, H.: Sedimentation monitoring including uncertainty
analysis in complex floodplains: a case study in the Mekong
Delta, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3039–3057, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3039-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3039-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Manh, N. V., Dung, N. V., Hung, N. N., Merz, B., and Apel, H.: Large-scale suspended
sediment transport and sediment deposition in the Mekong
Delta, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3033–3053, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3033-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3033-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Merz, B., Elmer, F., and Thieken, A. H.: Significance of “high probability/low damage” versus “low probability/high damage”
flood events, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 1033–1046, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-9-1033-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-9-1033-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Merz, B., Kreibich, H., Schwarze, R., and Thieken, A.: Review article “Assessment of economic
flood damage”, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 10, 1697–1724, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-10-1697-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-10-1697-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Minderhoud, P. S. J., Erkens, G., Pham, V. H., Bui, V. T., Erban, L., Kooi, H.,
and Stouthamer, E.: Impacts of 25 years of groundwater extraction on subsidence
in the Mekong delta, Vietnam, Environ. Res. Lett., 12, 064006, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7146" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7146</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
MRC: Flood Damages, Benefits and Flood Risk in Focal Areas, Mekong River
Commission, 184 pp., 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
MRC: Flood situation report 2011, MRC Technical Paper No. 36, Mekong River
Commission, Phnom Phenh, 57 pp., 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
MRC: The Impact and Management of Floods and Droughts in the Lower Mekong
Basin and The Implications of Possible Climate Change, Mekong River
Commission, 129 pp., 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Nguyen, D. B., Clauss, K., Cao, S. M., Naeimi, V., Kuenzer, C., and Wagner, W.:
Mapping Rice Seasonality in the Mekong Delta with Multi-Year Envisat ASAR WSM Data, Remote Sensing, 7, 15868–15893, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71215808" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71215808</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Penning-Rowsell, E. C., Wilson, T., and Centre, F. H. R.: The benefits of
flood and coastal defence: techniques and data for 2003, Middlesex
University, London, UK, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Sampson, C. C., Smith, A. M., Bates, P. B., Neal, J. C., Alfieri, L., and
Freer, J. E.: A high-resolution global flood hazard model, Water Resour.
Res., 51, 7358–7381, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016954" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016954</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Schröter, K., Kreibich, H., Vogel, K., Riggelsen, C., Scherbaum, F., and
Merz, B.: How useful are complex flood damage models?, Water Resour.
Res., 50, 3378–3395, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Smajgl, A., Toan, T. Q., Nhan, D. K., Ward, J., Trung, N. H., Tri, L. Q.,
Tri, V. P. D., and Vu, P. T.: Responding to rising sea levels in the Mekong
Delta, Nat. Clim. Change, 5, 167–174, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2469" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2469</a>, 2015.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
The Government of Viet Nam: Decision No. 99/TTg on water resources,
infrastructure and rural development plan for the Vietnamese Mekong Delta
during the period 1996–2000, 1996 (in Vietnamese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
The Government of Viet Nam: Decision No. 315/TTg on pilot programme for
agriculture insurance in Vietnam, 2011 (in Vietnamese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Tinh, D. N.: 2011 flood lesson leraned in Vietnam, Presentation at 2012
South-East-Asia Flood Risk Reduction Forum, Vietnam, 19, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Toan, T. Q.: Climate Change and Sea Level Rise in the Mekong Delta: Flood,
Tidal Inundation, Salinity Intrusion, and Irrigation Adaptation Methods, in:
Coastal Disasters and Climate Change in Vietnam, edited by: Esteban, N. D.
T., Hiroshi Takagi Miguel, Elsevier, Oxford, 199–218, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Tran, D. D., van Halsema, G., Hellegers, P. J. G. J., Ludwig, F., and Wyatt,
A.: Questioning triple rice intensification on the Vietnamese mekong delta
floodplains: An environmental and economic analysis of current land-use
trends and alternatives, J. Environ. Manage., 217, 429–441,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.116" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.116</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Tri, V.: Hydrology and Hydraulic Infrastructure Systems in the Mekong Delta,
Vietnam, in: The Mekong Delta System, edited by: Renaud, F. G. and Kuenzer,
C., Springer Environmental Science and Engineering, Springer Netherlands,
49–81, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Triet, N. V. K., Dung, N. V., Fujii, H., Kummu, M., Merz, B., and Apel, H.:
Has dyke development in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta shifted flood hazard
downstream?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3991–4010, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3991-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3991-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Van, P. D. T., Popescu, I., van Griensven, A., Solomatine, D. P., Trung, N. H., and Green, A.:
A study of the climate change impacts on fluvial flood propagation in the
Vietnamese Mekong Delta, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 4637–4649, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-4637-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-4637-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Van, T. C.: Identification of sea level rise impacts on the Mekong Delta and
orientation of adaptation activities, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Ward, P. J., de Moel, H., and Aerts, J. C. J. H.: How are flood risk estimates
affected by the choice of return-periods?, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 3181–3195, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-11-3181-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-11-3181-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Xo, L. Q., Hien, N. X., Thanh, N. D., Ngoc, B., Khoi, N. H., Lam, D. T.,
Khoi, T. M., Tien, H. T., and Uyen, N. T.: Mekong Delta flood management
plan to 2020 and 2030, Southern Institute of Water Resources
Planning, Hochiminh City, Vietnam, 2015 (in Vietnamese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
