Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (53) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (53) (remove)
Language
- English (53) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (53)
Keywords
- Germany (8)
- floods (5)
- Turkey (4)
- preparedness (4)
- vulnerability (4)
- Adaptation (3)
- Flood (3)
- Floods (3)
- Natural hazards (3)
- damage (3)
- City ranking (2)
- Direct economic loss (2)
- ERA5 (2)
- Flood risk (2)
- Land use change (2)
- Mountain basins (2)
- Recovery (2)
- Risk reduction (2)
- adaptation (2)
- climate change adaptation (2)
- disaster risk reduction (2)
- emergency management (2)
- flood hazards (2)
- flooding (2)
- frequency analysis (2)
- governance (2)
- hierarchical clustering (2)
- insurance (2)
- mitigation (2)
- pathway (2)
- precaution (2)
- risk governance (2)
- risk management (2)
- Adaptation plans (1)
- Adaptation to climate change (1)
- Adaptation tracking (1)
- Alpine hazards (1)
- Asset estimation (1)
- August 2002 flood (1)
- Austria (1)
- Bavaria (1)
- Bayesian Network (1)
- Capital Approach Framework (CAF) (1)
- Central Europe (1)
- Climate adaptation (1)
- Climate change (1)
- Climate change adaptation Saxony (1)
- Climate mitigation (1)
- Climate policy integration (1)
- Cluster analysis (1)
- Coastal hazards (1)
- Communications/decision making (1)
- Company (1)
- Compound flood event (1)
- Coping appraisal (1)
- Costs (1)
- Deutschland (1)
- Disaster loss databases (1)
- Droughts (1)
- EU Floods Directive (1)
- Emergency (1)
- Emergency response (1)
- Europe (1)
- Event documentation (1)
- Extreme events (1)
- Federal Water Act (1)
- Field experiments (1)
- Flood damage potential (1)
- Flood defence measures (1)
- Flood impacts (1)
- Flood losses (1)
- Flooding (1)
- Floods Directive (1)
- Groundwater (1)
- Hail (1)
- Hazard (1)
- Hess-Brezowsky Grosswetterlagen classification (1)
- Hess-Brezowsky Großwetterlagen classification (1)
- Historic natural hazards (1)
- Hochwasser (1)
- Hochwasserrisikomanagementrichtlinie (1)
- Insurance (1)
- June 2013 flood (1)
- Klimaanpassung (1)
- Klimapolitische Integration (1)
- Klimaschutz (1)
- LCGA (1)
- Lech catchment (1)
- Levee (1)
- Loss (1)
- Loss modeling (1)
- Loss modelling (1)
- Markov Blanket (1)
- Mitigation (1)
- Moral hazard (1)
- OpenStreetMap (1)
- Private businesses (1)
- Resilience (1)
- Risk governance (1)
- Risk reduction partnerships (1)
- Riverine floods (1)
- Scenarios (1)
- Societal impacts (1)
- Socioeconomic scenarios (1)
- Spatial policy (1)
- Stadtplanung (1)
- Stadtranking (1)
- Starkregen (1)
- Storm (1)
- Surface floods (1)
- Temporal variability (1)
- Transport sector (1)
- UNISDR (1)
- Urban climate policy (1)
- Urban planning (1)
- Vulnerability (1)
- Wasserhaushaltsgesetz (1)
- adaptation behavior (1)
- breaches (1)
- capacities (1)
- climate change (1)
- critical meteorological condition (1)
- damage estimation (1)
- disaster risk (1)
- discharge pattern (1)
- early warning (1)
- effectiveness (1)
- emergency response (1)
- exposure (1)
- extreme rainfall (1)
- flood loss (1)
- flood recovery (1)
- flood risk analysis (1)
- flood risk management (1)
- global environmental change (1)
- health (1)
- heavy rainfall (1)
- individual recovery (1)
- integrated flood risk management (1)
- land-use (1)
- modelling (1)
- motivation (1)
- natural hazard management (1)
- natural hazards (1)
- panel data (1)
- people (1)
- pluvial floods (1)
- population density (1)
- private households (1)
- protection motivation theory (PMT) (1)
- public communication (1)
- public engagement (1)
- railway transportation (1)
- rapid impact assessment (1)
- recovery (1)
- reduction (1)
- residents (1)
- resilience (1)
- resources (1)
- risk communication (1)
- risk management cycle (1)
- risk perception (1)
- risk perceptions (1)
- risk reduction (1)
- social science (1)
- social vulnerability (1)
- societal equity (1)
- surface water flooding (1)
- transferability (1)
Institute
The number of people exposed to natural hazards has grown steadily over recent decades, mainly due to increasing exposure in hazard-prone areas. In the future, climate change could further enhance this trend. Still, empirical and comprehensive insights into individual recovery from natural hazards are largely lacking, hampering efforts to increase societal resilience. Drawing from a sample of 710 residents affected by flooding across Germany in June 2013, we empirically explore a wide range of variables possibly influencing self-reported recovery, including flood-event characteristics, the circumstances of the recovery process, socio-economic characteristics, and psychological factors, using multivariate statistics. We found that the amount of damage and other flood-event characteristics such as inundation depth are less important than socio-economic characteristics (e.g., sex or health status) and psychological factors (e.g., risk aversion and emotions). Our results indicate that uniform recovery efforts focusing on areas that were the most affected in terms of physical damage are insufficient to account for the heterogeneity in individual recovery results. To increase societal resilience, aid and recovery efforts should better address the long-term psychological effects of floods.
Insights into the dynamics of human behavior in response to flooding are urgently needed for the development of effective integrated flood risk management strategies, and for integrating human behavior in flood risk modeling. However, our understanding of the dynamics of risk perceptions, attitudes, individual recovery processes, as well as adaptive (i.e., risk reducing) intention and behavior are currently limited because of the predominant use of cross-sectional surveys in the flood risk domain. Here, we present the results from one of the first panel surveys in the flood risk domain covering a relatively long period of time (i.e., four years after a damaging event), three survey waves, and a wide range of topics relevant to the role of citizens in integrated flood risk management. The panel data, consisting of 227 individuals affected by the 2013 flood in Germany, were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA and latent class growth analysis (LCGA) to utilize the unique temporal dimension of the data set. Results show that attitudes, such as the respondents' perceived responsibility within flood risk management, remain fairly stable over time. Changes are observed partly for risk perceptions and mainly for individual recovery and intentions to undertake risk-reducing measures. LCGA reveal heterogeneous recovery and adaptation trajectories that need to be taken into account in policies supporting individual recovery and stimulating societal preparedness. More panel studies in the flood risk domain are needed to gain better insights into the dynamics of individual recovery, risk-reducing behavior, and associated risk and protective factors.
Research suggests that providing weather forecast end users with additional information about the forecast uncertainty of a possible event can enhance the preparation of mitigation measures. But not all users have the same threshold for taking action. This paper focuses on the question of whether there are influencing factors that determine decision thresholds for numerical weather forecast information beginning at which the general public would start to take protective action. In spring 2014, 1342 residents of Berlin, Germany participated in a survey. Questions related to the following topics: perception of and prior experience with severe weather, trustworthiness of forecasters and confidence in weather forecasts, and sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Within the questionnaire a scenario was created in order to determine individual decision thresholds and see whether subgroups of the sample lead to different thresholds.
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.
Due to limited public budgets and the need to economize, the analysis of costs of hazard mitigation and emergency management of natural hazards becomes increasingly important for public natural hazard and risk management. In recent years there has been a growing body of literature on the estimation of losses which supported to help to determine benefits of measures in terms of prevented losses. On the contrary, the costs of mitigation are hardly addressed. This paper thus aims to shed some light on expenses for mitigation and emergency services. For this, we analysed the annual costs of mitigation efforts in four regions/countries of the Alpine Arc: Bavaria (Germany), Tyrol (Austria), South Tyrol (Italy) and Switzerland. On the basis of PPP values (purchasing power parities), annual expenses on public safety ranged from EUR 44 per capita in the Free State of Bavaria to EUR 216 in the Autonomous Province of South Tyrol. To analyse the (variable) costs for emergency services in case of an event, we used detailed data from the 2005 floods in the Federal State of Tyrol (Austria) as well as aggregated data from the 2002 floods in Germany. The analysis revealed that multi-hazards, the occurrence and intermixture of different natural hazard processes, contribute to increasing emergency costs. Based on these findings, research gaps and recommendations for costing Alpine natural hazards are discussed.
There is a movement towards the concepts of integrated flood risk management and governance. In these concepts, each stakeholder prone to flooding is tasked with actively limiting flood impacts. Currently, relatively more research has focused upon the adaptation of private households and not on private businesses operating in flood-prone areas. This paper offers an extension of this literature on business-level flood adaptation by exploring the potential presence of moral hazard. The analyses are based on survey data collected in the aftermath of six floods across Germany between 2002 and 2013 to provide a first indication of the presence of moral hazard in private businesses. Moral hazard is where increased insurance coverage results in policyholders preparing less, increasing the risk they face, a counterproductive outcome. We present an initial study of moral hazard occurring through three channels: the performance of emergency measures during a flood, changes in precautionary behavior employed before a given flood occurred, and changes in the intention to employ additional precautionary measures after a flood. We find, much like for private households, no strong indication that moral hazard is present regarding past adaptation. However, there is a potential avenue after 2005 for insurance coverage to lower businesses' intentions to employ more adaptation measures after a flood. This has significant policy relevance such as opportunities for strengthening the link between insurance and risk reduction measures and boosting insurance coverage against flooding in general.
The Flood Damage Database HOWAS 21 contains object-specific flood damage data resulting from fluvial, pluvial and groundwater flooding. The datasets incorporate various variables of flood hazard, exposure, vulnerability and direct tangible damage at properties from several economic sectors. The main purpose of development of HOWAS 21 was to support forensic flood analysis and the derivation of flood damage models. HOWAS 21 was first developed for Germany and currently almost exclusively contains datasets from Germany. However, its scope has recently been enlarged with the aim to serve as an international flood damage database; e.g. its web application is now available in German and English. This paper presents the recent advancements of HOWAS 21 and highlights exemplary analyses to demonstrate the use of HOWAS 21 flood damage data. The data applications indicate a large potential of the database for fostering a better understanding and estimation of the consequences of flooding.
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.
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.
The literature on the costing of mitigation measures for reducing impacts of natural hazards is rather fragmented. This paper provides a concise overview of the current state of knowledge in Europe on the costing of mitigation measures for the reduction of natural hazard risks (droughts, floods, storms and induced coastal hazards as well as alpine hazards) and identifies knowledge gaps and related research recommendations. Furthermore, it provides a taxonomy of related mitigation options, classifying them into nine categories: (1) management plans, land-use planning, and climate adaptation; (2) hazard modification; (3) infrastructure; (4) mitigation measures (stricto sensu); (5) communication in advance of events; (6) monitoring and early warning systems; (7) emergency response and evacuation; (8) financial incentives; and (9) risk transfer (including insurance). It is found that the costing of mitigation measures in European and in other countries has almost exclusively focused on estimating direct costs. A cost assessment framework that addresses a range of costs, possibly informed by multiple stakeholders, would provide more accurate estimates and could provide better guidance to decision makers. (C) 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.