Flood damage estimation is a core task in flood risk assessments and requires reliable flood loss models. Identifying the driving factors of flood loss at residential buildings and gaining insight into their relations is important to improve our understanding of flood damage processes. For that purpose, we learn probabilistic graphical models, which capture and illustrate (in-)dependencies between the considered variables. The models are learned based on postevent surveys with flood-affected residents after six flood events, which occurred in Germany between 2002 and 2013. Besides the sustained building damage, the survey data contain information about flooding parameters, early warning and emergency measures, property-level mitigation measures and preparedness, socioeconomic characteristics of the household, and building characteristics. The analysis considers the entire data set with a total of 4,468 cases as well as subsets of the data set partitioned into single flood events and flood types: river floods, levee breaches, surface water flooding, and groundwater floods, to reveal differences in the damaging processes. The learned networks suggest that the flood loss ratio of residential buildings is directly influenced by hydrological and hydraulic aspects as well as by building characteristics and property-level mitigation measures. The study demonstrates also that for different flood events and process types the building damage is influenced by varying factors. This suggests that flood damage models need to be capable of reproducing these differences for spatial and temporal model transfers.

Integrated flood management strategies consider property-level precautionary measures as a vital part. Whereas this is a well-researched topic for residents, little is known about the adaptive behaviour of flood-prone companies although they often settle on the ground floor of buildings and are thus among the first affected by flooding. This pilot study analyses flood responses of 64 businesses in a district of the city of Dresden, Germany that experienced major flooding in 2002 and 2013. Using standardised survey data and accompanying qualitative interviews, the analyses revealed that the largest driver of adaptive behaviour is experiencing flood events. Intangible factors such as tradition and a sense of community play a role for the decision to stay in the area, while lacking ownership might hamper property-level adaptation. Further research is also needed to understand the role of insurance and governmental aid for recovery and adaptation of businesses.

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.

Models for the predictions of monetary losses from floods mainly blend data deemed to represent a single flood type and region. Moreover, these approaches largely ignore indicators of preparedness and how predictors may vary between regions and events, challenging the transferability of flood loss models. We use a flood loss database of 1812 German flood-affected households to explore how Bayesian multilevel models can estimate normalised flood damage stratified by event, region, or flood process type. Multilevel models acknowledge natural groups in the data and allow each group to learn from others. We obtain posterior estimates that differ between flood types, with credibly varying influences of water depth, contamination, duration, implementation of property-level precautionary measures, insurance, and previous flood experience; these influences overlap across most events or regions, however. We infer that the underlying damaging processes of distinct flood types deserve further attention. Each reported flood loss and affected region involved mixed flood types, likely explaining the uncertainty in the coefficients. Our results emphasise the need to consider flood types as an important step towards applying flood loss models elsewhere. We argue that failing to do so may unduly generalise the model and systematically bias loss estimations from empirical data.