@article{SairamSchroeterRoezeretal.2019, author = {Sairam, Nivedita and Schroeter, Kai and R{\"o}zer, Viktor and Merz, Bruno and Kreibich, Heidi}, title = {Hierarchical Bayesian Approach for Modeling Spatiotemporal Variability in Flood Damage Processes}, series = {Water resources research}, volume = {55}, journal = {Water resources research}, number = {10}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0043-1397}, doi = {10.1029/2019WR025068}, pages = {8223 -- 8237}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Flood damage processes are complex and vary between events and regions. State-of-the-art flood loss models are often developed on the basis of empirical damage data from specific case studies and do not perform well when spatially and temporally transferred. This is due to the fact that such localized models often cover only a small set of possible damage processes from one event and a region. On the other hand, a single generalized model covering multiple events and different regions ignores the variability in damage processes across regions and events due to variables that are not explicitly accounted for individual households. We implement a hierarchical Bayesian approach to parameterize widely used depth-damage functions resulting in a hierarchical (multilevel) Bayesian model (HBM) for flood loss estimation that accounts for spatiotemporal heterogeneity in damage processes. We test and prove the hypothesis that, in transfer scenarios, HBMs are superior compared to generalized and localized regression models. In order to improve loss predictions for regions and events for which no empirical damage data are available, we use variables pertaining to specific region- and event-characteristics representing commonly available expert knowledge as group-level predictors within the HBM.}, language = {en} } @misc{HudsonThiekenBubeck2019, author = {Hudson, Paul and Thieken, Annegret and Bubeck, Philip}, title = {The challenges of longitudinal surveys in the flood risk domain}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {759}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43409}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-434092}, pages = {23}, year = {2019}, abstract = {There has been much research regarding the perceptions, preferences, behaviour, and responses of people exposed to flooding and other nat- ural hazards. Cross-sectional surveys have been the predominant method applied in such research. While cross-sectional data can provide a snapshot of a respondent's behaviour and perceptions, it cannot be assumed that the respondent's perceptions are constant over time. As a result, many important research questions relating to dynamic processes, such as changes in risk perceptions, adaptation behaviour, and resilience cannot be fully addressed by cross-sectional surveys. To overcome these shortcomings, there has been a call for developing longitudinal (or panel) datasets in research on natural hazards, vulnerabilities, and risks. However, experiences with implementing longitudinal surveys in the flood risk domain (FRD), which pose distinct methodological challenges, are largely lacking. The key problems are sample recruitment, attrition rate, and attrition bias. We present a review of the few existing longitudinal surveys in the FRD. In addition, we investigate the potential attrition bias and attrition rates in a panel dataset of flood-affected households in Germany. We find little potential for attrition bias to occur. High attrition rates across longitudinal survey waves are the larger concern. A high attrition rate rapidly depletes the longitudinal sample. To overcome high attrition, longitudinal data should be collected as part of a multisector partnership to allow for sufficient resources to implement sample retention strategies. If flood-specific panels are developed, different sample retention strategies should be applied and evaluated in future research to understand how much-needed longitudinal surveying techniques can be successfully applied to the study of individuals threatened by flooding.}, language = {en} } @article{HudsonPhamBubeck2019, author = {Hudson, Paul and Pham, My and Bubeck, Philip}, title = {An evaluation and monetary assessment of the impact of flooding on subjective well-being across genders in Vietnam}, series = {Climate \& development}, volume = {11}, journal = {Climate \& development}, number = {7}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {1756-5529}, doi = {10.1080/17565529.2019.1579698}, pages = {623 -- 637}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The intangible impacts of floods on welfare are not well investigated, even though they are important aspects of welfare. Moreover, flooding has gender based impacts on welfare. These differing impacts create a gender based flood risk resilience gap. We study the intangible impacts of flood risk on the subjective well-being of residents in central Vietnam. The measurement of intangible impacts through subjective well-being is a growing field within flood risk research. We find an initial drop in welfare through subjective well-being across genders when a flood is experienced. Male respondents tended to recover their welfare losses by around 80\% within 5 years while female respondents were associated with a welfare recovery of around 70\%. A monetization of the impacts floods have on an individual's subjective well-being shows that for the average female respondent, between 41\% to 86\% of annual income would be required to compensate subjective well-being losses after 5 years of experiencing a flood. The corresponding value for males is 30\% to 57\% of annual income. This shows that the intangible impacts of flood risk are important (across genders) and need to be integrated into flood (or climate) risk assessments to develop more socially appropriate risk management strategies.}, language = {en} } @misc{HudsonPhamBubeck2019, author = {Hudson, Paul and Pham, My and Bubeck, Philip}, title = {An evaluation and monetary assessment of the impact of flooding on subjective well-being across genders in Vietnam}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {736}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43341}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-433414}, pages = {623 -- 637}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The intangible impacts of floods on welfare are not well investigated, even though they are important aspects of welfare. Moreover, flooding has gender based impacts on welfare. These differing impacts create a gender based flood risk resilience gap. We study the intangible impacts of flood risk on the subjective well-being of residents in central Vietnam. The measurement of intangible impacts through subjective well-being is a growing field within flood risk research. We find an initial drop in welfare through subjective well-being across genders when a flood is experienced. Male respondents tended to recover their welfare losses by around 80\% within 5 years while female respondents were associated with a welfare recovery of around 70\%. A monetization of the impacts floods have on an individual's subjective well-being shows that for the average female respondent, between 41\% to 86\% of annual income would be required to compensate subjective well-being losses after 5 years of experiencing a flood. The corresponding value for males is 30\% to 57\% of annual income. This shows that the intangible impacts of flood risk are important (across genders) and need to be integrated into flood (or climate) risk assessments to develop more socially appropriate risk management strategies.}, language = {en} }