@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}
}
@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}
}