Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...
This resource contains some files/folders that have non-preferred characters in their name. Show non-conforming files/folders.
This resource contains content types with files that need to be updated to match with metadata changes. Show content type files that need updating.
| Authors: |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Owners: |
|
This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource. |
| Type: | Resource | |
| Storage: | The size of this resource is 2.6 MB | |
| Created: | Jun 25, 2026 at 5:41 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Last updated: | Jun 25, 2026 at 6:15 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Citation: | See how to cite this resource |
| Sharing Status: | Public |
|---|---|
| Views: | 99 |
| Downloads: | 32 |
| +1 Votes: | Be the first one to this. |
| Comments: | No comments (yet) |
Abstract
This workshop introduces the economic methods used to evaluate streamflow forecasts and quantify their impacts, framed within the broader practice of benefit-cost analysis (BCA) for federal water resource decisions. The first part reviews how agencies including USACE, FEMA, EPA, and NOAA apply BCA to flood control, and draws a contrast between structural investments such as dams and levees, for which tools like HAZUS and HEC-FDA already exist, and nonstructural investments such as forecast and early warning systems, where the benefits depend on human decisions and behaviors that those tools do not directly capture. The conceptual core of the workshop is the value-of-information (VOI) framework and its 2x2 cost-loss model, in which a decision maker chooses between a protective action and inaction under uncertainty, and the forecast's value is the expected reduction in cost plus loss relative to a without-forecast counterfactual. The relative economic value (REV) metric is introduced as a way to fold economic costs into forecast skill evaluation. Five worked examples build out the framework: a stylized 2x2 flood forecast (supported by the accompanying cost-loss spreadsheet), a multi-action flood forecast application for the City of St. Paul on the Upper Mississippi, a low-flow forecast for barge operations on the Lower Mississippi, a forecast-informed reservoir operations (FIRO) case study at Lake Mendocino, and a revealed-preference analysis of seasonal water supply forecasts used by Colorado farmers.
Acknowledgements:
This research was supported by the Cooperative Institute for Research to Operations in Hydrology (CIROH) with funding under award NA22NWS4320003 from the NOAA Cooperative Institute Program. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of NOAA.
Subject Keywords
Content
Additional Metadata
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| thumbnail_url | https://www.hydroshare.org/resource/e9485eb6f5b84aa89e35d82dc7991425/data/contents/thumbnail.png |
How to Cite
This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Comments
There are currently no comments
New Comment