@article{KienzlerFalterThieken2015, author = {Kienzler, Sarah and Falter, Daniela and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {Zusammenwirken von staatlicher und privater Vorsorge}, series = {Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013 : Bew{\"a}hrungsprobe f{\"u}r das Hochwasserrisikomanagement in Deutschland}, journal = {Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013 : Bew{\"a}hrungsprobe f{\"u}r das Hochwasserrisikomanagement in Deutschland}, publisher = {Deutsches Komitee Katastrophenvorsorge}, address = {Bonn}, isbn = {978-3-933181-62-6}, pages = {110 -- 120}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @article{PechKreibichThieken2015, author = {Pech, Ina and Kreibich, Heidi and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {Warnung und Reaktion aus Sicht von Betroffenen}, series = {Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013 : Bew{\"a}hrungsprobe f{\"u}r das Hochwasserrisikomanagement in Deutschland}, journal = {Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013 : Bew{\"a}hrungsprobe f{\"u}r das Hochwasserrisikomanagement in Deutschland}, publisher = {Deutsches Komitee Katastrophenvorsorge}, address = {Bonn}, isbn = {978-3-933181-62-6}, pages = {138 -- 142}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @article{ThiekenPisi2015, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Pisi, Sebastian}, title = {Vorhersagen und Warnungen im Mai / Juni 2013}, series = {Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013 : Bew{\"a}hrungsprobe f{\"u}r das Hochwasserrisikomanagement in Deutschland}, journal = {Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013 : Bew{\"a}hrungsprobe f{\"u}r das Hochwasserrisikomanagement in Deutschland}, publisher = {Deutsches Komitee Katastrophenvorsorge}, address = {Bonn}, isbn = {978-3-933181-62-6}, pages = {132 -- 137}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @techreport{ThiekenDierckDunstetal.2018, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Dierck, Julia and Dunst, Lea and G{\"o}pfert, Christian and Heidenreich, Anna and Hetz, Karen and Kern, Julia and Kern, Kristine and Lipp, Torsten and Lippert, Cordine and Meves, Monika and Niederhafner, Stefan and Otto, Antje and Rohrbacher, Christian and Schmidt, Katja and Strate, Leander and Stumpp, Inga and Walz, Ariane}, title = {Urbane Resilienz gegen{\"u}ber extremen Wetterereignissen - Typologien und Transfer von Anpassungsstrategien in kleinen Großst{\"a}dten und Mittelst{\"a}dten (ExTrass)}, organization = {Leibniz-Institut f{\"u}r Raumbezogene Sozialforschung, adelphi research gGmbH}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-416067}, pages = {102}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Weltweit verursachen St{\"a}dte etwa 70 \% der Treibhausgasemissionen und sind daher wichtige Akteure im Klimaschutz bzw. eine wichtige Zielgruppe von Klimapolitiken. Gleichzeitig sind St{\"a}dte besonders stark von m{\"o}glichen Auswirkungen des Klimawandels betroffen: Insbesondere extreme Wetterereignisse wie Hitzewellen oder Starkregenereignisse mit {\"U}berflutungen verursachen in St{\"a}dten hohe Sachsch{\"a}den und wirken sich negativ auf die Gesundheit der st{\"a}dtischen Bev{\"o}lkerung aus. Daher verfolgt das Projekt ExTrass das Ziel, die st{\"a}dtische Resilienz gegen{\"u}ber extremen Wetterereignissen in enger Zusammenarbeit mit Stadtverwaltungen, Strukturen des Bev{\"o}lkerungsschutzes und der Zivilgesellschaft zu st{\"a}rken. Im Fokus stehen dabei (kreisfreie) Groß- und Mittelst{\"a}dte mit 50.000 bis 500.000 Einwohnern, insbesondere die Fallstudienst{\"a}dte Potsdam, Remscheid und W{\"u}rzburg. Der vorliegende Bericht beinhaltet die Ergebnisse der 14-monatigen Definitionsphase von ExTrass, in der vor allem die Abstimmung eines Arbeitsprogramms im Mittelpunkt stand, das in einem nachfolgenden dreij{\"a}hrigen Forschungsprojekt (F+E-Phase) gemeinsam von Wissenschaft und Praxispartnern umgesetzt werden soll. Begleitend wurde eine Bestandsaufnahme von Klimaanpassungs- und Klimaschutzstrategien/-pl{\"a}nen in 99 deutschen Groß- und Mittelst{\"a}dten vorgenommen. Zudem wurden f{\"u}r Potsdam und W{\"u}rzburg Pfadanalysen f{\"u}r die Klimapolitik durchgef{\"u}hrt. Darin wird insbesondere die Bedeutung von Schl{\"u}sselakteuren deutlich. Weiterhin wurden im Rahmen von Stakeholder-Workshops Anpassungsherausforderungen und aktuelle Handlungsbedarfe in den Fallstudienst{\"a}dten identifiziert und L{\"o}sungsans{\"a}tze erarbeitet, die in der F+E-Phase entwickelt und getestet werden sollen. Neben Maßnahmen auf gesamtst{\"a}dtischer Ebene und auf Stadtteilebene wurden Maßnahmen angestrebt, die die Risikowahrnehmung, Vorsorge und Selbsthilfef{\"a}higkeit von Unternehmen und Bev{\"o}lkerung st{\"a}rken k{\"o}nnen. Daher wurde der Stand der Risikokommunikation in Deutschland f{\"u}r das Projekt aufgearbeitet und eine erste Evaluation von Risikokommunikationswerkzeugen durchgef{\"u}hrt. Der Bericht endet mit einer Kurzfassung des Arbeitsprogramms 2018-2021.}, language = {de} } @article{KoxThieken2017, author = {Kox, Thomas and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {To act or not to act? Factors influencing the general public's decision about Whether to Take Protective Action against Severe Weather}, series = {Weather, climate \& society}, volume = {9}, journal = {Weather, climate \& society}, publisher = {American Meteorological Soc.}, address = {Boston}, issn = {1948-8327}, doi = {10.1175/WCAS-D-15-0078.1}, pages = {299 -- 315}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Research suggests that providing weather forecast end users with additional information about the forecast uncertainty of a possible event can enhance the preparation of mitigation measures. But not all users have the same threshold for taking action. This paper focuses on the question of whether there are influencing factors that determine decision thresholds for numerical weather forecast information beginning at which the general public would start to take protective action. In spring 2014, 1342 residents of Berlin, Germany participated in a survey. Questions related to the following topics: perception of and prior experience with severe weather, trustworthiness of forecasters and confidence in weather forecasts, and sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Within the questionnaire a scenario was created in order to determine individual decision thresholds and see whether subgroups of the sample lead to different thresholds.}, language = {en} } @article{KocThieken2017, author = {Koc, Gamze and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {The relevance of flood hazards and impacts in Turkey}, series = {Natural hazards : journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards}, volume = {91}, journal = {Natural hazards : journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York}, issn = {0921-030X}, doi = {10.1007/s11069-017-3134-6}, pages = {375 -- 408}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Turkey has been severely affected by many natural hazards, in particular earthquakes and floods. Especially over the last two decades, these natural hazards have caused enormous human and economic damage. Although there is a large body of literature on earthquake hazards and risks in Turkey, comparatively little is known about flood hazards and risks. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the severity of flooding in comparison with other natural hazards in Turkey and to analyse the flood patterns by providing an overview of the temporal and spatial distribution of flood losses. These will act as a metric for the societal and economic impacts of flood hazards in Turkey. For this purpose, Turkey Disaster Database (TABB) was used for the years 1960-2014. As input for more detailed event analyses, the most severe flood events in Turkey for the same time interval will also be retrieved. Sufficiency of the TABB database to achieve the main aim of the study in terms of data quality and accuracy was also discussed. The TABB database was analysed and reviewed through comparison, mainly with the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT), the Global Active Archive of Large Flood Events-Dartmouth Flood Observatory database, news archives and the scientific literature, with a focus on listing the most severe flood event. The comparative review of these data sources reveals big mismatches in the flood data, i.e. the reported number of events, number of affected people and economic loss all differ dramatically. Owing to the fact that the TABB is the only disaster loss database for Turkey, it is important to explore the reasons for the mismatches between TABB and the other sources with regard to aspects of accuracy and data quality. Therefore, biases and fallacies in the TABB loss data are also discussed. The comparative TABB database analyses show that large mismatches between global and national databases can occur. Current global and national databases for monitoring losses from national hazards suffer from a number of limitations, which in turn could lead to misinterpretations of the loss data. Since loss data collection is gaining more and more attention, e.g. in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, this study offers a framework for developing guidelines for the Turkey Disaster Database (TABB), implications on how to standardize national loss databases and implement across the other hazard events in Turkey.}, language = {en} } @article{ThiekenBesselKienzleretal.2016, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Bessel, Tina and Kienzler, Sarah and Kreibich, Heidi and Mueller, Meike and Pisi, Sebastian and Schroeter, Kai}, title = {The flood of June 2013 in Germany: how much do we know about its impacts?}, series = {Natural hazards and earth system sciences}, volume = {16}, journal = {Natural hazards and earth system sciences}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1561-8633}, doi = {10.5194/nhess-16-1519-2016}, pages = {1519 -- 1540}, year = {2016}, abstract = {In June 2013, widespread flooding and consequent damage and losses occurred in Central Europe, especially in Germany. This paper explores what data are available to investigate the adverse impacts of the event, what kind of information can be retrieved from these data and how well data and information fulfil requirements that were recently proposed for disaster reporting on the European and international levels. In accordance with the European Floods Directive (2007/60/EC), impacts on human health, economic activities (and assets), cultural heritage and the environment are described on the national and sub-national scale. Information from governmental reports is complemented by communications on traffic disruptions and surveys of flood-affected residents and companies. Overall, the impacts of the flood event in 2013 were manifold. The study reveals that flood-affected residents suffered from a large range of impacts, among which mental health and supply problems were perceived more seriously than financial losses. The most frequent damage type among affected companies was business interruption. This demonstrates that the current scientific focus on direct (financial) damage is insufficient to describe the overall impacts and severity of flood events. The case further demonstrates that procedures and standards for impact data collection in Germany are widely missing. Present impact data in Germany are fragmentary, heterogeneous, incomplete and difficult to access. In order to fulfil, for example, the monitoring and reporting requirements of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 that was adopted in March 2015 in Sendai, Japan, more efforts on impact data collection are needed.}, language = {en} } @misc{ThiekenBesselKienzleretal.2016, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Bessel, Tina and Kienzler, Sarah and Kreibich, Heidi and M{\"u}ller, Meike and Pisi, Sebastian and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai}, title = {The flood of June 2013 in Germany}, series = {National Hazards Earth System Science}, journal = {National Hazards Earth System Science}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-97207}, pages = {21}, year = {2016}, abstract = {In June 2013, widespread flooding and consequent damage and losses occurred in Central Europe, especially in Germany. This paper explores what data are available to investigate the adverse impacts of the event, what kind of information can be retrieved from these data and how well data and information fulfil requirements that were recently proposed for disaster reporting on the European and international levels. In accordance with the European Floods Directive (2007/60/EC), impacts on human health, economic activities (and assets), cultural heritage and the environment are described on the national and sub-national scale. Information from governmental reports is complemented by communications on traffic disruptions and surveys of flood-affected residents and companies. Overall, the impacts of the flood event in 2013 were manifold. The study reveals that flood-affected residents suffered from a large range of impacts, among which mental health and supply problems were perceived more seriously than financial losses. The most frequent damage type among affected companies was business interruption. This demonstrates that the current scientific focus on direct (financial) damage is insufficient to describe the overall impacts and severity of flood events. The case further demonstrates that procedures and standards for impact data collection in Germany are widely missing. Present impact data in Germany are fragmentary, heterogeneous, incomplete and difficult to access. In order to fulfil, for example, the monitoring and reporting requirements of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 that was adopted in March 2015 in Sendai, Japan, more efforts on impact data collection are needed.}, language = {en} } @article{ThiekenBesselKienzleretal.2016, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Bessel, Tina and Kienzler, Sarah and Kreibich, Heidi and M{\"u}ller, Meike and Pisi, Sebastian and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai}, title = {The flood of June 2013 in Germany}, series = {National Hazards Earth System Science}, journal = {National Hazards Earth System Science}, number = {16}, publisher = {Copernicus Publications}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, doi = {10.5194/nhess-16-1519-2016}, pages = {1519 -- 1540}, year = {2016}, abstract = {In June 2013, widespread flooding and consequent damage and losses occurred in Central Europe, especially in Germany. This paper explores what data are available to investigate the adverse impacts of the event, what kind of information can be retrieved from these data and how well data and information fulfil requirements that were recently proposed for disaster reporting on the European and international levels. In accordance with the European Floods Directive (2007/60/EC), impacts on human health, economic activities (and assets), cultural heritage and the environment are described on the national and sub-national scale. Information from governmental reports is complemented by communications on traffic disruptions and surveys of flood-affected residents and companies. Overall, the impacts of the flood event in 2013 were manifold. The study reveals that flood-affected residents suffered from a large range of impacts, among which mental health and supply problems were perceived more seriously than financial losses. The most frequent damage type among affected companies was business interruption. This demonstrates that the current scientific focus on direct (financial) damage is insufficient to describe the overall impacts and severity of flood events. The case further demonstrates that procedures and standards for impact data collection in Germany are widely missing. Present impact data in Germany are fragmentary, heterogeneous, incomplete and difficult to access. In order to fulfil, for example, the monitoring and reporting requirements of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 that was adopted in March 2015 in Sendai, Japan, more efforts on impact data collection are needed.}, language = {en} } @article{BouwerPapyrakisPoussinetal.2014, author = {Bouwer, Laurens M. and Papyrakis, Elissaios and Poussin, Jennifer and Pfurtscheller, Clemens and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {The costing of measures for natural hazard mitigation in Europe}, series = {Natural hazards review}, volume = {15}, journal = {Natural hazards review}, number = {4}, publisher = {American Society of Civil Engineers}, address = {Reston}, issn = {1527-6988}, doi = {10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000133}, pages = {10}, year = {2014}, abstract = {The literature on the costing of mitigation measures for reducing impacts of natural hazards is rather fragmented. This paper provides a concise overview of the current state of knowledge in Europe on the costing of mitigation measures for the reduction of natural hazard risks (droughts, floods, storms and induced coastal hazards as well as alpine hazards) and identifies knowledge gaps and related research recommendations. Furthermore, it provides a taxonomy of related mitigation options, classifying them into nine categories: (1) management plans, land-use planning, and climate adaptation; (2) hazard modification; (3) infrastructure; (4) mitigation measures (stricto sensu); (5) communication in advance of events; (6) monitoring and early warning systems; (7) emergency response and evacuation; (8) financial incentives; and (9) risk transfer (including insurance). It is found that the costing of mitigation measures in European and in other countries has almost exclusively focused on estimating direct costs. A cost assessment framework that addresses a range of costs, possibly informed by multiple stakeholders, would provide more accurate estimates and could provide better guidance to decision makers. (C) 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.}, language = {en} }