GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Publication Date: 2023-06-19
    Description: Residential assets, comprising buildings and household contents, are a major source of direct flood losses. Existing damage models are mostly deterministic and limited to particular countries or flood types. Here, we compile building-level losses from Germany, Italy and the Netherlands covering a wide range of fluvial and pluvial flood events. Utilizing a Bayesian network (BN) for continuous variables, we find that relative losses (i.e. loss relative to exposure) to building structure and its contents could be estimated with five variables: water depth, flow velocity, event return period, building usable floor space area and regional disposable income per capita. The model’s ability to predict flood losses is validated for the 11 flood events contained in the sample. Predictions for the German and Italian fluvial floods were better than for pluvial floods or the 1993 Meuse river flood. Further, a case study of a 2010 coastal flood in France is used to test the BN model’s performance for a type of flood not included in the survey dataset. Overall, the BN model achieved better results than any of 10 alternative damage models for reproducing average losses for the 2010 flood. An additional case study of a 2013 fluvial flood has also shown good performance of the model. The study shows that data from many flood events can be combined to derive most important factors driving flood losses across regions and time, and that resulting damage models could be applied in an open data framework.
    Description: EIT Climate-KIC http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100013283
    Description: Horizon 2020 Framework Programme http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010661
    Description: Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum - GFZ (4217)
    Keywords: ddc:551.48 ; Fluvial floods ; Coastal floods ; Pluvial floods ; Bayesian networks ; Flood damage surveys
    Language: English
    Type: doc-type:article
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2024-01-24
    Description: 〈title xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"〉Abstract〈/title〉〈p xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xml:lang="en"〉Flood risk assessments require different disciplines to understand and model the underlying components hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Many methods and data sets have been refined considerably to cover more details of spatial, temporal, or process information. We compile case studies indicating that refined methods and data have a considerable effect on the overall assessment of flood risk. But are these improvements worth the effort? The adequate level of detail is typically unknown and prioritization of improvements in a specific component is hampered by the lack of an overarching view on flood risk. Consequently, creating the dilemma of potentially being too greedy or too wasteful with the resources available for a risk assessment. A “sweet spot” between those two would use methods and data sets that cover all relevant known processes without using resources inefficiently. We provide three key questions as a qualitative guidance toward this “sweet spot.” For quantitative decision support, more overarching case studies in various contexts are needed to reveal the sensitivity of the overall flood risk to individual components. This could also support the anticipation of unforeseen events like the flood event in Germany and Belgium in 2021 and increase the reliability of flood risk assessments.〈/p〉
    Description: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001659
    Description: BMBF http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002347
    Description: Federal Environment Agency http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100010809
    Description: http://howas21.gfz-potsdam.de/howas21/
    Description: https://www.umwelt.niedersachsen.de/startseite/themen/wasser/hochwasser_amp_kustenschutz/hochwasserrisikomanagement_richtlinie/hochwassergefahren_und_hochwasserrisikokarten/hochwasserkarten-121920.html
    Description: https://download.geofabrik.de/europe/germany.html
    Description: https://emergency.copernicus.eu/mapping/list-of-components/EMSN024
    Description: https://data.jrc.ec.europa.eu/collection/id-0054
    Description: https://oasishub.co/dataset/surface-water-flooding-footprinthurricane-harvey-august-2017-jba
    Description: https://www.wasser.sachsen.de/hochwassergefahrenkarte-11915.html
    Keywords: ddc:551.48 ; decision support ; extreme events ; integrated flood risk management ; risk assessment
    Language: English
    Type: doc-type:article
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Publication Date: 2023-11-16
    Description: 〈title xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"〉Abstract〈/title〉〈p xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xml:lang="en"〉Floods cause average annual losses of more than US$30 billion in the US and are estimated to significantly increase due to global change. Flood resilience, which currently differs strongly between socio‐economic groups, needs to be substantially improved by proactive adaptive measures, such as timely purchase of flood insurance. Yet, knowledge about the state and uptake of private adaptation and its drivers is so far scarce and fragmented. Based on interpretable machine learning and large insurance and socio‐economic open data sets covering the whole continental US we reveal that flood insurance purchase is characterized by reactive behavior after severe flood events. However, we observe that the Community Rating System helps overcome this behavior by effectively fostering proactive insurance purchase, irrespective of socio‐economic backgrounds in the communities. Thus, we recommend developing additional targeted measures to help overcome existing inequalities, for example, by providing special incentives to the most vulnerable and exposed communities.〈/p〉
    Description: Plain Language Summary: Flood resilience of individuals and communities can be improved by bottom‐up strategies, such as insurance purchase, or top‐down measures like the US National Flood Insurance Program's Community Rating System (CRS). Our interpretable machine learning approach shows that flood insurances are mostly purchased reactively, after the occurrence of a flood event. Yet, reactive behaviors are ill‐suited as more extreme events are expected under future climate, also in areas that were not previously flooded. The CRS counteracts this behavior by fostering proactive adaptation across a widespread range of socio‐economic backgrounds. Future risk management including the CRS should support and motivate individuals' proactive adaptation with a particular focus on highly vulnerable social groups to overcome existing inequalities in flood risk.〈/p〉
    Description: Key Points: 〈list list-type="bullet"〉 〈list-item〉 〈p xml:lang="en"〉Flood insurance purchase in the US is dominated by reactive behavior after severe floods〈/p〉〈/list-item〉 〈list-item〉 〈p xml:lang="en"〉The Community Rating System (CRS) fosters proactive insurance adoption irrespective of socio‐economic background〈/p〉〈/list-item〉 〈list-item〉 〈p xml:lang="en"〉The CRS should further balance existing inequalities by targeting specific population segments〈/p〉〈/list-item〉 〈/list〉 〈/p〉
    Description: https://api.census.gov/data/2018/acs/
    Description: https://www.fema.gov/about/openfema/data-sets#nfip
    Description: https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/community-rating-system-overview-and-participation
    Description: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
    Description: https://www.fema.gov/case-study/information-about-community-rating-system
    Description: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8067448
    Keywords: ddc:363.34 ; FEMA ; machine learning ; flood insurance ; human behavior ; flood resilience
    Language: English
    Type: doc-type:article
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Publication Date: 2023-12-12
    Description: 〈title xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"〉Abstract〈/title〉〈p xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xml:lang="en"〉Reducing flood risk through disaster planning and risk management requires accurate estimates of exposure, damage, casualties, and environmental impacts. Models can provide such information; however, computational or data constraints often lead to the construction of such models by aggregating high‐resolution flood hazard grids to a coarser resolution, the effect of which is poorly understood. Through the application of a novel spatial classification framework, we derive closed‐form solutions for the location (e.g., flood margins) and direction of bias from flood grid aggregation independent of any study region. These solutions show bias of some key metric will always be present in regions with marginal inundation; for example, inundation area will be positively biased when water depth grids are aggregated and volume will be negatively biased when water surface elevation grids are aggregated through averaging. In a separate computational analysis, we employ the same framework to a 2018 flood and successfully reproduce the findings of our study‐region‐independent derivation. Extending the investigation to the exposure of buildings, we find regions with marginal inundation are an order of magnitude more sensitive to aggregation errors, highlighting the importance of understanding such artifacts for flood risk modelers. Of the two aggregation routines considered, averaging water surface elevation grids better preserved flood depths at buildings than averaging of water depth grids. This work provides insight into, and recommendations for, aggregating grids used by flood risk models.〈/p〉
    Description: Key Points: 〈list list-type="bullet"〉 〈list-item〉 〈p xml:lang="en"〉Through a novel framework, we show analytically that hazard grid aggregation leads to bias of key metrics independent of any study region〈/p〉〈/list-item〉 〈list-item〉 〈p xml:lang="en"〉This aggregation is shown to always positively bias inundation area when water depth grids are aggregated〈/p〉〈/list-item〉 〈list-item〉 〈p xml:lang="en"〉For example, aggregating from 1 to 512 m resolution resulted in a doubling of the inundated area for a 2018 flood in Canada〈/p〉〈/list-item〉 〈/list〉 〈/p〉
    Description: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
    Description: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8271996
    Description: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8271965
    Description: http://geonb.snb.ca/li/index.html
    Description: http://www.snb.ca/geonb1/e/DC/floodraahf.asp
    Keywords: ddc:551.48 ; flood risk ; model scaling ; data aggregation ; flood hazard ; error ; resampling
    Language: English
    Type: doc-type:article
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Publication Date: 2023-02-08
    Description: Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties and livelihood. While early warning systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location and timing of potentially damaging events, these systems rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected amount and distribution of physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services or financial loss. Complementing early warning systems with impact forecasts has a two‐fold advantage: it would provide decision makers with richer information to take informed decisions about emergency measures, and focus the attention of different disciplines on a common target. This would allow capitalizing on synergies between different disciplines and boosting the development of multi‐hazard early warning systems. This review discusses the state‐of‐the‐art in impact forecasting for a wide range of natural hazards. We outline the added value of impact‐based warnings compared to hazard forecasting for the emergency phase, indicate challenges and pitfalls, and synthesize the review results across hazard types most relevant for Europe. Plain language summary Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties and livelihood. While such systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location and timing of potentially damaging events, they rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services or financial loss. Extending hazard forecast systems to include impact estimates promises many benefits for the emergency phase, for instance, for organising evacuations. We review and compare the state‐of‐the‐art of impact forcasting across a wide range of natural hazards, and outline opportunities and key challenges for research and development of impact forecasting.
    Type: Article , PeerReviewed , info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: text
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Publication Date: 2024-04-22
    Description: As the adverse impacts of hydrological extremes increase in many regions of the world, a better understanding of the drivers of changes in risk and impacts is essential for effective flood and drought risk management and climate adaptation. However, there is currently a lack of comprehensive, empirical data about the processes, interactions, and feedbacks in complex human-water systems leading to flood and drought impacts. Here we present a benchmark dataset containing socio-hydrological data of paired events, i.e. two floods or two droughts that occurred in the same area. The 45 paired events occurred in 42 different study areas and cover a wide range of socio-economic and hydro-climatic conditions. The dataset is unique in covering both floods and droughts, in the number of cases assessed and in the quantity of socio-hydrological data. The benchmark dataset comprises (1) detailed review-style reports about the events and key processes between the two events of a pair; (2) the key data table containing variables that assess the indicators which characterize management shortcomings, hazard, exposure, vulnerability, and impacts of all events; and (3) a table of the indicators of change that indicate the differences between the first and second event of a pair. The advantages of the dataset are that it enables comparative analyses across all the paired events based on the indicators of change and allows for detailed context- and location-specific assessments based on the extensive data and reports of the individual study areas. The dataset can be used by the scientific community for exploratory data analyses, e.g. focused on causal links between risk management; changes in hazard, exposure and vulnerability; and flood or drought impacts. The data can also be used for the development, calibration, and validation of socio-hydrological models. The dataset is available to the public through the GFZ Data Services (Kreibich et al., 2023, 10.5880/GFZ.4.4.2023.001).
    Repository Name: EPIC Alfred Wegener Institut
    Type: Article , isiRev
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...