@article{PhilipsWalzBergneretal.2015, author = {Philips, Andrea and Walz, Ariane and Bergner, Andreas G. N. and Gr{\"a}ff, Thomas and Heistermann, Maik and Kienzler, Sarah and Korup, Oliver and Lipp, Torsten and Schwanghart, Wolfgang and Zeilinger, Gerold}, title = {Immersive 3D geovisualization in higher education}, series = {Journal of geography in higher education}, volume = {39}, journal = {Journal of geography in higher education}, number = {3}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {0309-8265}, doi = {10.1080/03098265.2015.1066314}, pages = {437 -- 449}, year = {2015}, abstract = {In this study, we investigate how immersive 3D geovisualization can be used in higher education. Based on MacEachren and Kraak's geovisualization cube, we examine the usage of immersive 3D geovisualization and its usefulness in a research-based learning module on flood risk, called GEOSimulator. Results of a survey among participating students reveal benefits, such as better orientation in the study area, higher interactivity with the data, improved discourse among students and enhanced motivation through immersive 3D geovisualization. This suggests that immersive 3D visualization can effectively be used in higher education and that 3D CAVE settings enhance interactive learning between students.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlickeMassonKienzleretal.2020, author = {Kuhlicke, Christian and Masson, Torsten and Kienzler, Sarah and Sieg, Tobias and Thieken, Annegret and Kreibich, Heidi}, title = {Multiple flood experiences and social resilience}, series = {Weather, Climate, and Society}, volume = {12}, journal = {Weather, Climate, and Society}, number = {1}, publisher = {American Meteorological Society}, address = {Boston}, issn = {1948-8327}, doi = {10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0069.1}, pages = {63 -- 88}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Previous studies have explored the consequences of flood events for exposed households and companies by focusing on single flood events. Less is known about the consequences of experiencing repeated flood events for the resilience of households and companies. In this paper, we therefore explore how multiple floods experience affects the resilience of exposed households and companies. Resilience was made operational through individual appraisals of households and companies' ability to withstand and recover from material as well as health and psychological impacts of the 2013 flood in Germany. The paper is based on three different datasets including more than 2000 households and 300 companies that were affected by the 2013 flood. The surveys revealed that the resilience of households seems to increase, but only with regard to their subjectively appraised ability to withstand impacts on mobile goods and equipment (e.g., cars, TV, and radios). In regard to the ability of households to withstand overall financial consequences of repetitive floods, evidence for nonlinear (quadratic) trends can be found. With regard to psychological and health-related consequences, the findings are mixed but provide tentative evidence for eroding resilience among households. Companies' resilience increased with respect to material assets but appears to decrease with respect to ability to recover. We conclude by arguing that clear and operational definitions of resilience are required so that evidence-based resilience baselines can be established to assess whether resilience is eroding or improving over time.}, 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} } @misc{ThiekenKienzlerKreibichetal.2016, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Kienzler, Sarah and Kreibich, Heidi and Kuhlicke, Christian and Kunz, Michael and M{\"u}hr, Bernhard and M{\"u}ller, Meike and Otto, Antje and Petrow, Theresia and Pisi, Sebastian and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai}, title = {Review of the flood risk management system in Germany after the major flood in 2013}, issn = {1866-8372}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-100600}, pages = {12}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Widespread flooding in June 2013 caused damage costs of €6 to 8 billion in Germany, and awoke many memories of the floods in August 2002, which resulted in total damage of €11.6 billion and hence was the most expensive natural hazard event in Germany up to now. The event of 2002 does, however, also mark a reorientation toward an integrated flood risk management system in Germany. Therefore, the flood of 2013 offered the opportunity to review how the measures that politics, administration, and civil society have implemented since 2002 helped to cope with the flood and what still needs to be done to achieve effective and more integrated flood risk management. The review highlights considerable improvements on many levels, in particular (1) an increased consideration of flood hazards in spatial planning and urban development, (2) comprehensive property-level mitigation and preparedness measures, (3) more effective flood warnings and improved coordination of disaster response, and (4) a more targeted maintenance of flood defense systems. In 2013, this led to more effective flood management and to a reduction of damage. Nevertheless, important aspects remain unclear and need to be clarified. This particularly holds for balanced and coordinated strategies for reducing and overcoming the impacts of flooding in large catchments, cross-border and interdisciplinary cooperation, the role of the general public in the different phases of flood risk management, as well as a transparent risk transfer system. Recurring flood events reveal that flood risk management is a continuous task. Hence, risk drivers, such as climate change, land-use changes, economic developments, or demographic change and the resultant risks must be investigated at regular intervals, and risk reduction strategies and processes must be reassessed as well as adapted and implemented in a dialogue with all stakeholders.}, language = {en} } @misc{KienzlerPechKreibichetal.2014, author = {Kienzler, Sarah and Pech, I. and Kreibich, Heidi and M{\"u}ller, M. and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {After the extreme flood in 2002}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {488}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-40805}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-408056}, pages = {505 -- 526}, year = {2014}, abstract = {In the aftermath of the severe flooding in Central Europe in August 2002, a number of changes in flood policies were launched in Germany and other European countries, aiming at improved risk management. The question arises as to whether these changes have already had an impact on the residents' ability to cope with floods, and whether flood-affected private households are now better prepared than they were in 2002. Therefore, computer-aided telephone interviews with private households in Germany that suffered from property damage due to flooding in 2005, 2006, 2010 or 2011 were performed and analysed with respect to flood awareness, precaution, preparedness and recovery. The data were compared to a similar investigation conducted after the flood in 2002. After the flood in 2002, the level of private precautions taken increased considerably. One contributing factor is the fact that, in general, a larger proportion of people knew that they were at risk of flooding. The best level of precaution was found before the flood events in 2006 and 2011. The main reason for this might be that residents had more experience with flooding than residents affected in 2005 or 2010. Yet, overall, flood experience and knowledge did not necessarily result in building retrofitting or flood-proofing measures, which are considered as mitigating damages most effectively. Hence, investments still need to be stimulated in order to reduce future damage more efficiently. Early warning and emergency responses were substantially influenced by flood characteristics. In contrast to flood-affected people in 2006 or 2011, people affected by flooding in 2005 or 2010 had to deal with shorter lead times and therefore had less time to take emergency measures. Yet, the lower level of emergency measures taken also resulted from the people's lack of flood experience and insufficient knowledge of how to protect themselves. Overall, it was noticeable that these residents suffered from higher losses. Therefore, it is important to further improve early warning systems and communication channels, particularly in hilly areas with rapid-onset flooding.}, language = {en} } @misc{RoezerMuellerBubecketal.2017, author = {R{\"o}zer, Viktor and M{\"u}ller, Meike and Bubeck, Philip and Kienzler, Sarah and Thieken, Annegret and Pech, Ina and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai and Buchholz, Oliver and Kreibich, Heidi}, title = {Coping with pluvial floods by private households}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-400465}, pages = {24}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Pluvial floods have caused severe damage to urban areas in recent years. With a projected increase in extreme precipitation as well as an ongoing urbanization, pluvial flood damage is expected to increase in the future. Therefore, further insights, especially on the adverse consequences of pluvial floods and their mitigation, are needed. To gain more knowledge, empirical damage data from three different pluvial flood events in Germany were collected through computer-aided telephone interviews. Pluvial flood awareness as well as flood experience were found to be low before the respective flood events. The level of private precaution increased considerably after all events, but is mainly focused on measures that are easy to implement. Lower inundation depths, smaller potential losses as compared with fluvial floods, as well as the fact that pluvial flooding may occur everywhere, are expected to cause a shift in damage mitigation from precaution to emergency response. However, an effective implementation of emergency measures was constrained by a low dissemination of early warnings in the study areas. Further improvements of early warning systems including dissemination as well as a rise in pluvial flood preparedness are important to reduce future pluvial flood damage.}, language = {en} } @misc{KuhlickeMassonKienzleretal.2020, author = {Kuhlicke, Christian and Masson, Torsten and Kienzler, Sarah and Sieg, Tobias and Thieken, Annegret and Kreibich, Heidi}, title = {Multiple flood experiences and social resilience}, series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {1}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-51650}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-516500}, pages = {28}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Previous studies have explored the consequences of flood events for exposed households and companies by focusing on single flood events. Less is known about the consequences of experiencing repeated flood events for the resilience of households and companies. In this paper, we therefore explore how multiple floods experience affects the resilience of exposed households and companies. Resilience was made operational through individual appraisals of households and companies' ability to withstand and recover from material as well as health and psychological impacts of the 2013 flood in Germany. The paper is based on three different datasets including more than 2000 households and 300 companies that were affected by the 2013 flood. The surveys revealed that the resilience of households seems to increase, but only with regard to their subjectively appraised ability to withstand impacts on mobile goods and equipment (e.g., cars, TV, and radios). In regard to the ability of households to withstand overall financial consequences of repetitive floods, evidence for nonlinear (quadratic) trends can be found. With regard to psychological and health-related consequences, the findings are mixed but provide tentative evidence for eroding resilience among households. Companies' resilience increased with respect to material assets but appears to decrease with respect to ability to recover. We conclude by arguing that clear and operational definitions of resilience are required so that evidence-based resilience baselines can be established to assess whether resilience is eroding or improving over time.}, 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} } @book{ThiekenBesselCallsenetal.2015, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Bessel, Tina and Callsen, Ines and Falter, Daniela and Hasan, Issa and Kienzler, Sarah and Kox, Thomas and Kreibich, Heidi and Kuhlicke, Christian and Kunz, Michael and Matthias, Max and Meyer, Volker and M{\"u}hr, Bernhard and M{\"u}ller, Meike and Otto, Antje and Pech, Ina and Petrow, Theresia and Pisi, Sebastian and Rother, Karl-Heinz and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai}, title = {Das Hochwasser im Juni 2013}, series = {Schriftenreihe des DKKV ; 53}, journal = {Schriftenreihe des DKKV ; 53}, publisher = {Deutsches Komitee Katastrophenvorsorge}, address = {Bonn}, isbn = {978-3-933181-62-6}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {207}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @article{KienzlerPechThieken2015, author = {Kienzler, Sarah and Pech, Ina and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {Risikowahrnehmung, Risikokommunikation und Entwicklung der Eigenversorg 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 = {99 -- 110}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @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{ThiekenKienzlerKreibichetal.2016, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Kienzler, Sarah and Kreibich, Heidi and Kuhlicke, Christian and Kunz, Michael and M{\"u}hr, Bernhard and M{\"u}ller, Meike and Otto, Antje and Petrow, Theresia and Pisi, Sebastian and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai}, title = {Review of the flood risk management system in Germany after the major flood in 2013}, series = {Ecology and society : E\&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability}, volume = {21}, journal = {Ecology and society : E\&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability}, number = {2}, publisher = {Resilience Alliance}, address = {Wolfville, NS}, issn = {1708-3087}, doi = {10.5751/ES-08547-210251}, pages = {12}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Widespread flooding in June 2013 caused damage costs of €6 to 8 billion in Germany, and awoke many memories of the floods in August 2002, which resulted in total damage of €11.6 billion and hence was the most expensive natural hazard event in Germany up to now. The event of 2002 does, however, also mark a reorientation toward an integrated flood risk management system in Germany. Therefore, the flood of 2013 offered the opportunity to review how the measures that politics, administration, and civil society have implemented since 2002 helped to cope with the flood and what still needs to be done to achieve effective and more integrated flood risk management. The review highlights considerable improvements on many levels, in particular (1) an increased consideration of flood hazards in spatial planning and urban development, (2) comprehensive property-level mitigation and preparedness measures, (3) more effective flood warnings and improved coordination of disaster response, and (4) a more targeted maintenance of flood defense systems. In 2013, this led to more effective flood management and to a reduction of damage. Nevertheless, important aspects remain unclear and need to be clarified. This particularly holds for balanced and coordinated strategies for reducing and overcoming the impacts of flooding in large catchments, cross-border and interdisciplinary cooperation, the role of the general public in the different phases of flood risk management, as well as a transparent risk transfer system. Recurring flood events reveal that flood risk management is a continuous task. Hence, risk drivers, such as climate change, land-use changes, economic developments, or demographic change and the resultant risks must be investigated at regular intervals, and risk reduction strategies and processes must be reassessed as well as adapted and implemented in a dialogue with all stakeholders.}, language = {en} } @article{ThiekenOttoPisietal.2015, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Otto, Antje and Pisi, Sebastian and Petrow, Theresia and Kreibich, Heidi and Kuhlicke, Christian and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai and Kienzler, Sarah and M{\"u}ller, Meike}, title = {Schlussfolgerungen und Empfehlungen}, 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 = {184 -- 196}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @article{KienzlerPechKreibichetal.2015, author = {Kienzler, Sarah and Pech, Ina and Kreibich, Heidi and Mueller, M. and Thieken, Annegret}, title = {After the extreme flood in 2002: changes in preparedness, response and recovery of flood-affected residents in Germany between 2005 and 2011}, series = {Natural hazards and earth system sciences}, volume = {15}, journal = {Natural hazards and earth system sciences}, number = {3}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1561-8633}, doi = {10.5194/nhess-15-505-2015}, pages = {505 -- 526}, year = {2015}, abstract = {After the flood in 2002, the level of private precautions taken increased considerably. One contributing factor is the fact that, in general, a larger proportion of people knew that they were at risk of flooding. The best level of precaution was found before the flood events in 2006 and 2011. The main reason for this might be that residents had more experience with flooding than residents affected in 2005 or 2010. Yet, overall, flood experience and knowledge did not necessarily result in building retrofitting or flood-proofing measures, which are considered as mitigating damages most effectively. Hence, investments still need to be stimulated in order to reduce future damage more efficiently.}, language = {en} } @misc{ThiekenKienzlerKreibichetal.2016, author = {Thieken, Annegret and Kienzler, Sarah and Kreibich, Heidi and Kuhlicke, Christian and Kunz, Michael and Muehr, Bernhard and Mueller, Meike and Otto, Antje and Petrow, Theresia and Pisi, Sebastian and Schroeter, Kai}, title = {Review of the flood risk management system in Germany after the major flood in 2013}, series = {Ecology and society : a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability}, volume = {21}, journal = {Ecology and society : a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability}, publisher = {Resilience Alliance}, address = {Wolfville}, issn = {1708-3087}, doi = {10.5751/ES-08547-210251}, pages = {8612 -- 8614}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Widespread flooding in June 2013 caused damage costs of (sic)6 to 8 billion in Germany, and awoke many memories of the floods in August 2002, which resulted in total damage of (sic)11.6 billion and hence was the most expensive natural hazard event in Germany up to now. The event of 2002 does, however, also mark a reorientation toward an integrated flood risk management system in Germany. Therefore, the flood of 2013 offered the opportunity to review how the measures that politics, administration, and civil society have implemented since 2002 helped to cope with the flood and what still needs to be done to achieve effective and more integrated flood risk management. The review highlights considerable improvements on many levels, in particular (1) an increased consideration of flood hazards in spatial planning and urban development, (2) comprehensive property-level mitigation and preparedness measures, (3) more effective flood warnings and improved coordination of disaster response, and (4) a more targeted maintenance of flood defense systems. In 2013, this led to more effective flood management and to a reduction of damage. Nevertheless, important aspects remain unclear and need to be clarified. This particularly holds for balanced and coordinated strategies for reducing and overcoming the impacts of flooding in large catchments, cross-border and interdisciplinary cooperation, the role of the general public in the different phases of flood risk management, as well as a transparent risk transfer system. Recurring flood events reveal that flood risk management is a continuous task. Hence, risk drivers, such as climate change, land-use changes, economic developments, or demographic change and the resultant risks must be investigated at regular intervals, and risk reduction strategies and processes must be reassessed as well as adapted and implemented in a dialogue with all stakeholders.}, 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} } @article{RoezerMuellerBubecketal.2016, author = {R{\"o}zer, Viktor and M{\"u}ller, Meike and Bubeck, Philip and Kienzler, Sarah and Thieken, Annegret and Pech, Ina and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai and Buchholz, Oliver and Kreibich, Heidi}, title = {Coping with Pluvial Floods by Private Households}, series = {Water}, volume = {8}, journal = {Water}, publisher = {MDPI}, address = {Basel}, issn = {2073-4441}, doi = {10.3390/w8070304}, pages = {24}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Pluvial floods have caused severe damage to urban areas in recent years. With a projected increase in extreme precipitation as well as an ongoing urbanization, pluvial flood damage is expected to increase in the future. Therefore, further insights, especially on the adverse consequences of pluvial floods and their mitigation, are needed. To gain more knowledge, empirical damage data from three different pluvial flood events in Germany were collected through computer-aided telephone interviews. Pluvial flood awareness as well as flood experience were found to be low before the respective flood events. The level of private precaution increased considerably after all events, but is mainly focused on measures that are easy to implement. Lower inundation depths, smaller potential losses as compared with fluvial floods, as well as the fact that pluvial flooding may occur everywhere, are expected to cause a shift in damage mitigation from precaution to emergency response. However, an effective implementation of emergency measures was constrained by a low dissemination of early warnings in the study areas. Further improvements of early warning systems including dissemination as well as a rise in pluvial flood preparedness are important to reduce future pluvial flood damage.}, language = {en} }