Sea-levels are rising in many areas around the world, posing risks to coastal
communities and infrastructures. Strategies for managing these flood risks
present decision challenges that require a combination of geophysical,
economic, and infrastructure models. Previous studies have broken important new
ground on the considerable tensions between the costs of upgrading
infrastructure and the damages that could result from extreme flood events.
However, many risk-based adaptation strategies remain silent on certain
potentially important uncertainties, as well as the trade-offs between
competing objectives. Here, we implement and improve on a classic
decision-analytical model (van Dantzig 1956) to: (i) capture trade-offs across
conflicting stakeholder objectives, (ii) demonstrate the consequences of
structural uncertainties in the sea-level rise and storm surge models, and
(iii) identify the parametric uncertainties that most strongly influence each
objective using global sensitivity analysis. We find that the flood adaptation
model produces potentially myopic solutions when formulated using traditional
mean-centric decision theory. Moving from a single-objective problem
formulation to one with multi-objective trade-offs dramatically expands the
decision space, and highlights the need for compromise solutions to address
stakeholder preferences. We find deep structural uncertainties that have large
effects on the model outcome, with the storm surge parameters accounting for
the greatest impacts. Global sensitivity analysis effectively identifies
important parameter interactions that local methods overlook, and which could
have critical implications for flood adaptation strategies