TY - JOUR A1 - Sairam, Nivedita A1 - Brill, Fabio Alexander A1 - Sieg, Tobias A1 - Farrag, Mostafa A1 - Kellermann, Patric A1 - Viet Dung Nguyen, A1 - Lüdtke, Stefan A1 - Merz, Bruno A1 - Schröter, Kai A1 - Vorogushyn, Sergiy A1 - Kreibich, Heidi T1 - Process-based flood risk assessment for Germany JF - Earth's future / American Geophysical Union N2 - 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. KW - risk model chain KW - continuous simulation KW - expected annual damage KW - risk KW - curves KW - multi-sector risk Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EF002259 SN - 2328-4277 VL - 9 IS - 10 PB - Wiley-Blackwell CY - Hoboken, NJ ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Sairam, Nivedita A1 - Schröter, Kai A1 - Lüdtke, Stefan A1 - Merz, Bruno A1 - Kreibich, Heidi T1 - Quantifying Flood Vulnerability Reduction via Private Precaution JF - Earth future N2 - Private precaution is an important component in contemporary flood risk management and climate adaptation. However, quantitative knowledge about vulnerability reduction via private precautionary measures is scarce and their effects are hardly considered in loss modeling and risk assessments. However, this is a prerequisite to enable temporally dynamic flood damage and risk modeling, and thus the evaluation of risk management and adaptation strategies. To quantify the average reduction in vulnerability of residential buildings via private precaution empirical vulnerability data (n = 948) is used. Households with and without precautionary measures undertaken before the flood event are classified into treatment and nontreatment groups and matched. Postmatching regression is used to quantify the treatment effect. Additionally, we test state-of-the-art flood loss models regarding their capability to capture this difference in vulnerability. The estimated average treatment effect of implementing private precaution is between 11 and 15 thousand EUR per household, confirming the significant effectiveness of private precautionary measures in reducing flood vulnerability. From all tested flood loss models, the expert Bayesian network-based model BN-FLEMOps and the rule-based loss model FLEMOps perform best in capturing the difference in vulnerability due to private precaution. Thus, the use of such loss models is suggested for flood risk assessments to effectively support evaluations and decision making for adaptable flood risk management. KW - flood loss KW - average treatment effect KW - matching methods KW - loss models KW - risk analysis KW - adaptation Y1 - 2019 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000994 SN - 2328-4277 VL - 7 IS - 3 SP - 235 EP - 249 PB - American Geophysical Union CY - Washington ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kayatz, Benjamin A1 - Baroni, Gabriele A1 - Hillier, Jon A1 - Lüdtke, Stefan A1 - Heathcote, Richard A1 - Malin, Daniella A1 - van Tonder, Carl A1 - Kuster, Benjamin A1 - Freese, Dirk A1 - Hüttl, Reinhard A1 - Wattenbach, Martin T1 - Cool farm tool water BT - A global on-line tool to assess water use in crop production JF - Journal of cleaner production N2 - The agricultural sector accounts for 70% of all water consumption and poses great pressure on ground water resources. Therefore, evaluating agricultural water consumption is highly important as it allows supply chain actors to identify practices which are associated with unsustainable water use, which risk depleting current water resources and impacting future production. However, these assessments are often not feasible for crop producers as data, models and experiments are required in order to conduct them. This work introduces a new on-line agricultural water use assessment tool that provides the water footprint and irrigation requirements at field scale based on an enhanced FAO56 approach combined with a global climate, crop and soil databases. This has been included in the Cool Farm Tool - an online tool which already provides metrics for greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity impacts and therefore allows for a more holistic assessment of environmental sustainability in farming and agricultural supply chains. The model is tested against field scale and state level water footprint data providing good results. The tool provides a practical, reliable way to assess agricultural water use, and offers a means to engage growers and stakeholders in identifying efficient water management practices. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. KW - Water footprint KW - FAO56 KW - Crop water use KW - Stakeholder involvement KW - Water resource management KW - Irrigation requirements Y1 - 2018 SN - 0959-6526 SN - 1879-1786 VL - 207 SP - 1163 EP - 1179 PB - Elsevier CY - Oxford ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Nied, Manuela A1 - Schröter, Kai A1 - Lüdtke, Stefan A1 - Nguyen, Viet Dung A1 - Merz, Bruno T1 - What are the hydro-meteorological controls on flood characteristics? JF - Journal of hydrology N2 - Flood events can be expressed by a variety of characteristics such as flood magnitude and extent, event duration or incurred loss. Flood estimation and management may benefit from understanding how the different flood characteristics relate to the hydrological catchment conditions preceding the event and to the meteorological conditions throughout the event. In this study, we therefore propose a methodology to investigate the hydro-meteorological controls on different flood characteristics, based on the simulation of the complete flood risk chain from the flood triggering precipitation event, through runoff generation in the catchment, flood routing and possible inundation in the river system and floodplains to flood loss. Conditional cumulative distribution functions and regression tree analysis delineate the seasonal varying flood processes and indicate that the effect of the hydrological pre-conditions, i.e. soil moisture patterns, and of the meteorological conditions, i.e. weather patterns, depends on the considered flood characteristic. The methodology is exemplified for the Elbe catchment. In this catchment, the length of the build-up period, the event duration and the number of gauges undergoing at least a 10-year flood are governed by weather patterns. The affected length and the number of gauges undergoing at least a 2-year flood are however governed by soil moisture patterns. In case of flood severity and loss, the controlling factor is less pronounced. Severity is slightly governed by soil moisture patterns whereas loss is slightly governed by weather patterns. The study highlights that flood magnitude and extent arise from different flood generation processes and concludes that soil moisture patterns as well as weather patterns are not only beneficial to inform on possible flood occurrence but also on the involved flood processes and resulting flood characteristics. KW - Flood KW - Flood duration KW - Flood magnitude KW - Flood loss KW - Soil moisture patterns KW - Antecedent conditions KW - Weather patterns KW - Large basins Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.12.003 SN - 0022-1694 SN - 1879-2707 VL - 545 SP - 310 EP - 326 PB - Elsevier CY - Amsterdam ER -