@article{MerzVorogushynLalletal.2015, author = {Merz, Bruno and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Lall, Upmanu and Viglione, Alberto and Bl{\"o}schl, G{\"u}nter}, title = {Charting unknown waters-On the role of surprise in flood risk assessment and management}, series = {Water resources research}, volume = {51}, journal = {Water resources research}, number = {8}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0043-1397}, doi = {10.1002/2015WR017464}, pages = {6399 -- 6416}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Unexpected incidents, failures, and disasters are abundant in the history of flooding events. In this paper, we introduce the metaphors of terra incognita and terra maligna to illustrate unknown and wicked flood situations, respectively. We argue that surprise is a neglected element in flood risk assessment and management. Two sources of surprise are identified: (1) the complexity of flood risk systems, represented by nonlinearities, interdependencies, and nonstationarities and (2) cognitive biases in human perception and decision making. Flood risk assessment and management are particularly prone to cognitive biases due to the rarity and uniqueness of extremes, and the nature of human risk perception. We reflect on possible approaches to better understanding and reducing the potential for surprise and its adverse consequences which may be supported by conceptually charting maps that separate terra incognita from terra cognita, and terra maligna from terra benigna. We conclude that flood risk assessment and management should account for the potential for surprise and devastating consequences which will require a shift in thinking.}, language = {en} } @article{DiBaldassarreKreibichVorogushynetal.2018, author = {Di Baldassarre, Giuliano and Kreibich, Heidi and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Aerts, Jeroen and Arnbjerg-Nielsen, Karsten and Barendrecht, Marlies and Bates, Paul and Borga, Marco and Botzen, Wouter and Bubeck, Philip and De Marchi, Bruna and Llasat, Carmen Maria and Mazzoleni, Maurizio and Molinari, Daniela and Mondino, Elena and Mard, Johanna and Petrucci, Olga and Scolobig, Anna and Viglione, Alberto and Ward, Philip J.}, title = {Hess Opinions: An interdisciplinary research agenda to explore the unintended consequences of structural flood protection}, series = {Hydrology and earth system sciences : HESS}, volume = {22}, journal = {Hydrology and earth system sciences : HESS}, number = {11}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1027-5606}, doi = {10.5194/hess-22-5629-2018}, pages = {5629 -- 5637}, year = {2018}, abstract = {One common approach to cope with floods is the implementation of structural flood protection measures, such as levees or flood-control reservoirs, which substantially reduce the probability of flooding at the time of implementation. Numerous scholars have problematized this approach. They have shown that increasing the levels of flood protection can attract more settlements and high-value assets in the areas protected by the new measures. Other studies have explored how structural measures can generate a sense of complacency, which can act to reduce preparedness. These paradoxical risk changes have been described as "levee effect", "safe development paradox" or "safety dilemma". In this commentary, we briefly review this phenomenon by critically analysing the intended benefits and unintended effects of structural flood protection, and then we propose an interdisciplinary research agenda to uncover these paradoxical dynamics of risk.}, language = {en} } @misc{TarasovaMerzKissetal.2019, author = {Tarasova, Larisa and Merz, Ralf and Kiss, Andrea and Basso, Stefano and Bl{\"o}chl, G{\"u}nter and Merz, Bruno and Viglione, Alberto and Pl{\"o}tner, Stefan and Guse, Bj{\"o}rn and Schumann, Andreas and Fischer, Svenja and Ahrens, Bodo and Anwar, Faizan and B{\´a}rdossy, Andr{\´a}s and B{\"u}hler, Philipp and Haberlandt, Uwe and Kreibich, Heidi and Krug, Amelie and Lun, David and M{\"u}ller-Thomy, Hannes and Pidoto, Ross and Primo, Cristina and Seidel, Jochen and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Wietzke, Luzie}, title = {Causative classification of river flood events}, series = {Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews : Water}, volume = {6}, journal = {Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews : Water}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {2049-1948}, doi = {10.1002/wat2.1353}, pages = {23}, year = {2019}, abstract = {A wide variety of processes controls the time of occurrence, duration, extent, and severity of river floods. Classifying flood events by their causative processes may assist in enhancing the accuracy of local and regional flood frequency estimates and support the detection and interpretation of any changes in flood occurrence and magnitudes. This paper provides a critical review of existing causative classifications of instrumental and preinstrumental series of flood events, discusses their validity and applications, and identifies opportunities for moving toward more comprehensive approaches. So far no unified definition of causative mechanisms of flood events exists. Existing frameworks for classification of instrumental and preinstrumental series of flood events adopt different perspectives: hydroclimatic (large-scale circulation patterns and atmospheric state at the time of the event), hydrological (catchment scale precipitation patterns and antecedent catchment state), and hydrograph-based (indirectly considering generating mechanisms through their effects on hydrograph characteristics). All of these approaches intend to capture the flood generating mechanisms and are useful for characterizing the flood processes at various spatial and temporal scales. However, uncertainty analyses with respect to indicators, classification methods, and data to assess the robustness of the classification are rarely performed which limits the transferability across different geographic regions. It is argued that more rigorous testing is needed. There are opportunities for extending classification methods to include indicators of space-time dynamics of rainfall, antecedent wetness, and routing effects, which will make the classification schemes even more useful for understanding and estimating floods. This article is categorized under: Science of Water > Water Extremes Science of Water > Hydrological Processes Science of Water > Methods}, language = {en} } @article{BarendrechtViglioneKreibichetal.2019, author = {Barendrecht, Marlies H. and Viglione, Alberto and Kreibich, Heidi and Merz, Bruno and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Bl{\"o}schl, G.}, title = {The Value of Empirical Data for Estimating the Parameters of a Sociohydrological Flood Risk Model}, series = {Water resources research}, volume = {55}, journal = {Water resources research}, number = {2}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0043-1397}, doi = {10.1029/2018WR024128}, pages = {1312 -- 1336}, year = {2019}, abstract = {In this paper, empirical data are used to estimate the parameters of a sociohydrological flood risk model. The proposed model, which describes the interactions between floods, settlement density, awareness, preparedness, and flood loss, is based on the literature. Data for the case study of Dresden, Germany, over a period of 200years, are used to estimate the model parameters through Bayesian inference. The credibility bounds of their estimates are small, even though the data are rather uncertain. A sensitivity analysis is performed to examine the value of the different data sources in estimating the model parameters. In general, the estimated parameters are less biased when using data at the end of the modeled period. Data about flood awareness are the most important to correctly estimate the parameters of this model and to correctly model the system dynamics. Using more data for other variables cannot compensate for the absence of awareness data. More generally, the absence of data mostly affects the estimation of the parameters that are directly related to the variable for which data are missing. This paper demonstrates that combining sociohydrological modeling and empirical data gives additional insights into the sociohydrological system, such as quantifying the forgetfulness of the society, which would otherwise not be easily achieved by sociohydrological models without data or by standard statistical analysis of empirical data.}, language = {en} }