@article{MacdonaldMerzGuseetal.2022, author = {Macdonald, Elena and Merz, Bruno and Guse, Bj{\"o}rn and Wietzke, Luzie and Ullrich, Sophie and Kemter, Matthias and Ahrens, Bodo and Vorogushyn, Sergiy}, title = {Event and catchment controls of heavy tail behavior of floods}, series = {Water resources research}, volume = {58}, journal = {Water resources research}, number = {6}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0043-1397}, doi = {10.1029/2021WR031260}, pages = {25}, year = {2022}, abstract = {In some catchments, the distribution of annual maximum streamflow shows heavy tail behavior, meaning the occurrence probability of extreme events is higher than if the upper tail decayed exponentially. Neglecting heavy tail behavior can lead to an underestimation of the likelihood of extreme floods and the associated risk. Partly contradictory results regarding the controls of heavy tail behavior exist in the literature and the knowledge is still very dispersed and limited. To better understand the drivers, we analyze the upper tail behavior and its controls for 480 catchments in Germany and Austria over a period of more than 50 years. The catchments span from quickly reacting mountain catchments to large lowland catchments, allowing for general conclusions. We compile a wide range of event and catchment characteristics and investigate their association with an indicator of the tail heaviness of flood distributions, namely the shape parameter of the GEV distribution. Following univariate analyses of these characteristics, along with an evaluation of different aggregations of event characteristics, multiple linear regression models, as well as random forests, are constructed. A novel slope indicator, which represents the relation between the return period of flood peaks and event characteristics, captures the controls of heavy tails best. Variables describing the catchment response are found to dominate the heavy tail behavior, followed by event precipitation, flood seasonality, and catchment size. The pre-event moisture state in a catchment has no relevant impact on the tail heaviness even though it does influence flood magnitudes.}, language = {en} } @article{UllrichHegnauerNguyenetal.2021, author = {Ullrich, Sophie Louise and Hegnauer, Mark and Nguyen, Dung Viet and Merz, Bruno and Kwadijk, Jaap and Vorogushyn, Sergiy}, title = {Comparative evaluation of two types of stochastic weather generators for synthetic precipitation in the Rhine basin}, series = {Journal of hydrology}, volume = {601}, journal = {Journal of hydrology}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]}, issn = {0022-1694}, doi = {10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126544}, pages = {16}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Stochastic modeling of precipitation for estimation of hydrological extremes is an important element of flood risk assessment and management. The spatially consistent estimation of rainfall fields and their temporal variability remains challenging and is addressed by various stochastic weather generators. In this study, two types of weather generators are evaluated against observed data and benchmarked regarding their ability to simulate spatio-temporal precipitation fields in the Rhine catchment. A multi-site station-based weather generator uses an auto-regressive model and estimates the spatial correlation structure between stations. Another weather generator is raster-based and uses the nearest-neighbor resampling technique for reshuffling daily patterns while preserving the correlation structure between the observations. Both weather generators perform well and are comparable at the point (station) scale with regards to daily mean and 99.9th percentile precipitation as well as concerning wet/dry frequencies and transition probabilities. The areal extreme precipitation at the sub-basin scale is however overestimated in the station-based weather generator due to an overestimation of the correlation structure between individual stations. The auto-regressive model tends to generate larger rainfall fields in space for extreme precipitation than observed, particularly in summer. The weather generator based on nearest-neighbor resampling reproduces the observed daily and multiday (5, 10 and 20) extreme events in a similar magnitude. Improvements in performance regarding wet frequencies and transition probabilities are recommended for both models.}, language = {en} } @article{FarragBrillNguyenetal.2022, author = {Farrag, Mostafa and Brill, Fabio Alexander and Nguyen, Viet Dung and Sairam, Nivedita and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai and Kreibich, Heidi and Merz, Bruno and de Bruijn, Karin M. and Vorogushyn, Sergiy}, title = {On the role of floodplain storage and hydrodynamic interactions in flood risk estimation}, series = {Hydrological sciences journal = Journal des sciences hydrologiques}, volume = {67}, journal = {Hydrological sciences journal = Journal des sciences hydrologiques}, number = {4}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {0262-6667}, doi = {10.1080/02626667.2022.2030058}, pages = {508 -- 534}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Hydrodynamic interactions, i.e. the floodplain storage effects caused by inundations upstream on flood wave propagation, inundation areas, and flood damage downstream, are important but often ignored in large-scale flood risk assessments. Although new methods considering these effects sometimes emerge, they are often limited to a small or meso scale. In this study, we investigate the role of hydrodynamic interactions and floodplain storage on flood hazard and risk in the German part of the Rhine basin. To do so, we compare a new continuous 1D routing scheme within a flood risk model chain to the piece-wise routing scheme, which largely neglects floodplain storage. The results show that floodplain storage is significant, lowers water levels and discharges, and reduces risks by over 50\%. Therefore, for accurate risk assessments, a system approach must be adopted, and floodplain storage and hydrodynamic interactions must carefully be considered.}, language = {en} } @article{KreibichHudsonMerz2021, author = {Kreibich, Heidi and Hudson, Paul and Merz, Bruno}, title = {Knowing what to do substantially improves the effectiveness of flood early warning}, series = {Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society}, volume = {102}, journal = {Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society}, number = {7}, publisher = {American Meteorological Soc.}, address = {Boston}, issn = {0003-0007}, doi = {10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0262.1}, pages = {E1450 -- E1463}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Flood warning systems are longstanding success stories with respect to protecting human life, but monetary losses continue to grow. Knowledge on the effectiveness of flood early warning in reducing monetary losses is scarce, especially at the individual level. To gain more knowledge in this area, we analyze a dataset that is unique with respect to detailed information on warning reception and monetary losses at the property level and with respect to amount of data available. The dataset contains 4,468 loss cases from six flood events in Germany. These floods occurred between 2002 and 2013. The data from each event were collected by computer-aided telephone interviews in four surveys following a repeated cross-sectional design. We quantitatively reveal that flood early warning is only effective in reducing monetary losses when people know what to do when they receive the warning. We also show that particularly long-term preparedness is associated with people knowing what to do when they receive a warning. Thus, risk communication, training, and (financial) support for private preparedness are effective in mitigating flood losses in two ways: precautionary measures and more effective emergency responses.}, language = {en} } @article{WietzkeMerzGerlitzetal.2020, author = {Wietzke, Luzie M. and Merz, Bruno and Gerlitz, Lars and Kreibich, Heidi and Guse, Bj{\"o}rn and Castellarin, Attilio and Vorogushyn, Sergiy}, title = {Comparative analysis of scalar upper tail indicators}, series = {Hydrological sciences journal = Journal des sciences hydrologiques}, volume = {65}, journal = {Hydrological sciences journal = Journal des sciences hydrologiques}, number = {10}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {0262-6667}, doi = {10.1080/02626667.2020.1769104}, pages = {1625 -- 1639}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Different upper tail indicators exist to characterize heavy tail phenomena, but no comparative study has been carried out so far. We evaluate the shape parameter (GEV), obesity index, Gini index and upper tail ratio (UTR) against a novel benchmark of tail heaviness - the surprise factor. Sensitivity analyses to sample size and changes in scale-to-location ratio are carried out in bootstrap experiments. The UTR replicates the surprise factor best but is most uncertain and only comparable between records of similar length. For samples with symmetric Lorenz curves, shape parameter, obesity and Gini indices provide consistent indications. For asymmetric Lorenz curves, however, the first two tend to overestimate, whereas Gini index tends to underestimate tail heaviness. We suggest the use of a combination of shape parameter, obesity and Gini index to characterize tail heaviness. These indicators should be supported with calculation of the Lorenz asymmetry coefficients and interpreted with caution.}, language = {en} } @article{SpeckhannKreibichMerz2021, author = {Speckhann, Gustavo Andrei and Kreibich, Heidi and Merz, Bruno}, title = {Inventory of dams in Germany}, series = {Earth system science data : the data publishing journal}, volume = {13}, journal = {Earth system science data : the data publishing journal}, number = {2}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1866-3508}, doi = {10.5194/essd-13-731-2021}, pages = {731 -- 740}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Dams are an important element of water resources management. Data about dams are crucial for practitioners, scientists, and policymakers for various purposes, such as seasonal forecasting of water availability or flood mitigation. However, detailed information on dams on the national level for Germany is so far not freely available. We present the most comprehensive open-access dam inventory for Germany (DIG) to date. We have collected and combined information on dams using books, state agency reports, engineering reports, and internet pages. We have applied a priority rule that ensures the highest level of reliability for the dam information. Our dam inventory comprises 530 dams in Germany with information on name, location, river, start year of construction and operation, crest length, dam height, lake area, lake volume, purpose, dam structure, and building characteristics. We have used a global, satellite-based water surface raster to evaluate the location of the dams. A significant proportion (63 \%) of dams were built between 1950-2013. Our inventory shows that dams in Germany are mostly single-purpose (52 \%), 53\% can be used for flood control, and 25\% are involved in energy production. The inventory is freely available through GFZ (GeoForschungsZentrum) Data Services (https://doi.org/10.5880/GFZ.4.4.2020.005)}, language = {en} } @article{SairamBrillSiegetal.2021, author = {Sairam, Nivedita and Brill, Fabio Alexander and Sieg, Tobias and Farrag, Mostafa and Kellermann, Patric and Viet Dung Nguyen, and L{\"u}dtke, Stefan and Merz, Bruno and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Kreibich, Heidi}, title = {Process-based flood risk assessment for Germany}, series = {Earth's future / American Geophysical Union}, volume = {9}, journal = {Earth's future / American Geophysical Union}, number = {10}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Hoboken, NJ}, issn = {2328-4277}, doi = {10.1029/2021EF002259}, pages = {12}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Large-scale flood risk assessments are crucial for decision making, especially with respect to new flood defense schemes, adaptation planning and estimating insurance premiums. We apply the process-based Regional Flood Model (RFM) to simulate a 5000-year flood event catalog for all major catchments in Germany and derive risk curves based on the losses per economic sector. The RFM uses a continuous process simulation including a multisite, multivariate weather generator, a hydrological model considering heterogeneous catchment processes, a coupled 1D-2D hydrodynamic model considering dike overtopping and hinterland storage, spatially explicit sector-wise exposure data and empirical multi-variable loss models calibrated for Germany. For all components, uncertainties in the data and models are estimated. We estimate the median Expected Annual Damage (EAD) and Value at Risk at 99.5\% confidence for Germany to be euro0.529 bn and euro8.865 bn, respectively. The commercial sector dominates by making about 60\% of the total risk, followed by the residential sector. The agriculture sector gets affected by small return period floods and only contributes to less than 3\% to the total risk. The overall EAD is comparable to other large-scale estimates. However, the estimation of losses for specific return periods is substantially improved. The spatial consistency of the risk estimates avoids the large overestimation of losses for rare events that is common in other large-scale assessments with homogeneous return periods. Thus, the process-based, spatially consistent flood risk assessment by RFM is an important step forward and will serve as a benchmark for future German-wide flood risk assessments.}, language = {en} } @article{GanguliPaprotnyHasanetal.2020, author = {Ganguli, Poulomi and Paprotny, Dominik and Hasan, Mehedi and G{\"u}ntner, Andreas and Merz, Bruno}, title = {Projected changes in compound flood hazard from riverine and coastal floods in northwestern Europe}, series = {Earth's future}, volume = {8}, journal = {Earth's future}, number = {11}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Hoboken, NJ}, issn = {2328-4277}, doi = {10.1029/2020EF001752}, pages = {19}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Compound flooding in coastal regions, that is, the simultaneous or successive occurrence of high sea levels and high river flows, is expected to increase in a warmer world. To date, however, there is no robust evidence on projected changes in compound flooding for northwestern Europe. We combine projected storm surges and river floods with probabilistic, localized relative sea-level rise (SLR) scenarios to assess the future compound flood hazard over northwestern coastal Europe in the high (RCP8.5) emission scenario. We use high-resolution, dynamically downscaled regional climate models (RCM) to drive a storm surge model and a hydrological model, and analyze the joint occurrence of high coastal water levels and associated river peaks in a multivariate copula-based approach. The RCM-forced multimodel mean reasonably represents the observed spatial pattern of the dependence strength between annual maxima surge and peak river discharge, although substantial discrepancies exist between observed and simulated dependence strength. All models overestimate the dependence strength, possibly due to limitations in model parameterizations. This bias affects compound flood hazard estimates and requires further investigation. While our results suggest decreasing compound flood hazard over the majority of sites by 2050s (2040-2069) compared to the reference period (1985-2005), an increase in projected compound flood hazard is limited to around 34\% of the sites. Further, we show the substantial role of SLR, a driver of compound floods, which has frequently been neglected. Our findings highlight the need to be aware of the limitations of the current generation of Earth system models in simulating coastal compound floods.}, language = {en} } @article{MetinDungSchroeteretal.2020, author = {Metin, Ayse Duha and Dung, Nguyen Viet and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Guse, Bj{\"o}rn and Kreibich, Heidi and Merz, Bruno}, title = {The role of spatial dependence for large-scale flood risk estimation}, series = {Natural hazards and earth system sciences}, volume = {20}, journal = {Natural hazards and earth system sciences}, number = {4}, publisher = {European Geosciences Union (EGU) ; Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1561-8633}, doi = {10.5194/nhess-20-967-2020}, pages = {967 -- 979}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Flood risk assessments are typically based on scenarios which assume homogeneous return periods of flood peaks throughout the catchment. This assumption is unrealistic for real flood events and may bias risk estimates for specific return periods. We investigate how three assumptions about the spatial dependence affect risk estimates: (i) spatially homogeneous scenarios (complete dependence), (ii) spatially heterogeneous scenarios (modelled dependence) and (iii) spatially heterogeneous but uncorrelated scenarios (complete independence). To this end, the model chain RFM (regional flood model) is applied to the Elbe catchment in Germany, accounting for the spatio-temporal dynamics of all flood generation processes, from the rainfall through catchment and river system processes to damage mechanisms. Different assumptions about the spatial dependence do not influence the expected annual damage (EAD); however, they bias the risk curve, i.e. the cumulative distribution function of damage. The widespread assumption of complete dependence strongly overestimates flood damage of the order of 100\% for return periods larger than approximately 200 years. On the other hand, for small and medium floods with return periods smaller than approximately 50 years, damage is underestimated. The overestimation aggravates when risk is estimated for larger areas. This study demonstrates the importance of representing the spatial dependence of flood peaks and damage for risk assessments.}, language = {en} } @article{PaprotnyKreibichMoralesNapolesetal.2020, author = {Paprotny, Dominik and Kreibich, Heidi and Morales-Napoles, Oswaldo and Wagenaar, Dennis and Castellarin, Attilio and Carisi, Francesca and Bertin, Xavier and Merz, Bruno and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai}, title = {A probabilistic approach to estimating residential losses from different flood types}, series = {Natural hazards : journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards}, volume = {105}, journal = {Natural hazards : journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York}, issn = {0921-030X}, doi = {10.1007/s11069-020-04413-x}, pages = {2569 -- 2601}, year = {2020}, abstract = {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.}, language = {en} }