Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (71) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (71) (remove)
Keywords
- Germany (8)
- floods (5)
- Turkey (4)
- preparedness (4)
- vulnerability (4)
- Adaptation (3)
- Flood (3)
- Floods (3)
- Natural hazards (3)
- damage (3)
Flood loss data collection and modeling are not standardized, and previous work has indicated that losses from different flood types (e.g., riverine and groundwater) may follow different driving forces. However, different flood types may occur within a single flood event, which is known as a compound flood event. Therefore, we aimed to identify statistical similarities between loss-driving factors across flood types and test whether the corresponding losses should be modeled separately. In this study, we used empirical data from 4,418 respondents from four survey campaigns studying households in Germany that experienced flooding. These surveys sought to investigate several features of the impact process (hazard, socioeconomic, preparedness, and building characteristics, as well as flood type). While the level of most of these features differed across flood type subsamples (e.g., degree of preparedness), they did so in a nonregular pattern. A variable selection process indicates that besides hazard and building characteristics, information on property-level preparedness was also selected as a relevant predictor of the loss ratio. These variables represent information, which is rarely adopted in loss modeling. Models shall be refined with further data collection and other statistical methods. To save costs, data collection efforts should be steered toward the most relevant predictors to enhance data availability and increase the statistical power of results. Understanding that losses from different flood types are driven by different factors is a crucial step toward targeted data collection and model development and will finally clarify conditions that allow us to transfer loss models in space and time. <br /> Key Points <br /> Survey data of flood-affected households show different concurrent flood types, undermining the use of a single-flood-type loss model Thirteen variables addressing flood hazard, the building, and property level preparedness are significant predictors of the building loss ratio Flood type-specific models show varying significance across the predictor variables, indicating a hindrance to model transferability
Flood loss modeling is an important component within flood risk assessments. Traditionally, stage-damage functions are used for the estimation of direct monetary damage to buildings. Although it is known that such functions are governed by large uncertainties, they are commonly applied - even in different geographical regions - without further validation, mainly due to the lack of real damage data. Until now, little research has been done to investigate the applicability and transferability of such damage models to other regions. In this study, the last severe flood event in the Austrian Lech Valley in 2005 was simulated to test the performance of various damage functions from different geographical regions in Central Europe for the residential sector. In addition to common stage-damage curves, new functions were derived from empirical flood loss data collected in the aftermath of recent flood events in neighboring Germany. Furthermore, a multi-parameter flood loss model for the residential sector was adapted to the study area and also evaluated with official damage data. The analysis reveals that flood loss functions derived from related and more similar regions perform considerably better than those from more heterogeneous data sets of different regions and flood events. While former loss functions estimate the observed damage well, the latter overestimate the reported loss clearly. To illustrate the effect of model choice on the resulting uncertainty of damage estimates, the current flood risk for residential areas was calculated. In the case of extreme events like the 300 yr flood, for example, the range of losses to residential buildings between the highest and the lowest estimates amounts to a factor of 18, in contrast to properly validated models with a factor of 2.3. Even if the risk analysis is only performed for residential areas, our results reveal evidently that a carefree model transfer in other geographical regions might be critical. Therefore, we conclude that loss models should at least be selected or derived from related regions with similar flood and building characteristics, as far as no model validation is possible. To further increase the general reliability of flood loss assessment in the future, more loss data and more comprehensive loss data for model development and validation are needed.
Flood risk management in Germany follows an integrative approach in which both private households and businesses can make an important contribution to reducing flood damage by implementing property-level adaptation measures. While the flood adaptation behavior of private households has already been widely researched, comparatively less attention has been paid to the adaptation strategies of businesses. However, their ability to cope with flood risk plays an important role in the social and economic development of a flood-prone region. Therefore, using quantitative survey data, this study aims to identify different strategies and adaptation drivers of 557 businesses damaged by a riverine flood in 2013 and 104 businesses damaged by pluvial or flash floods between 2014 and 2017. Our results indicate that a low perceived self-efficacy may be an important factor that can reduce the motivation of businesses to adapt to flood risk. Furthermore, property-owners tended to act more proactively than tenants. In addition, high experience with previous flood events and low perceived response costs could strengthen proactive adaptation behavior. These findings should be considered in business-tailored risk communication.
Flood risk management in Germany follows an integrative approach in which both private households and businesses can make an important contribution to reducing flood damage by implementing property-level adaptation measures. While the flood adaptation behavior of private households has already been widely researched, comparatively less attention has been paid to the adaptation strategies of businesses. However, their ability to cope with flood risk plays an important role in the social and economic development of a flood-prone region. Therefore, using quantitative survey data, this study aims to identify different strategies and adaptation drivers of 557 businesses damaged by a riverine flood in 2013 and 104 businesses damaged by pluvial or flash floods between 2014 and 2017. Our results indicate that a low perceived self-efficacy may be an important factor that can reduce the motivation of businesses to adapt to flood risk. Furthermore, property-owners tended to act more proactively than tenants. In addition, high experience with previous flood events and low perceived response costs could strengthen proactive adaptation behavior. These findings should be considered in business-tailored risk communication.
Adaptation to flood risk
(2017)
As flood impacts are increasing in large parts of the world, understanding the primary drivers of changes in risk is essential for effective adaptation. To gain more knowledge on the basis of empirical case studies, we analyze eight paired floods, that is, consecutive flood events that occurred in the same region, with the second flood causing significantly lower damage. These success stories of risk reduction were selected across different socioeconomic and hydro-climatic contexts. The potential of societies to adapt is uncovered by describing triggered societal changes, as well as formal measures and spontaneous processes that reduced flood risk. This novel approach has the potential to build the basis for an international data collection and analysis effort to better understand and attribute changes in risk due to hydrological extremes in the framework of the IAHSs Panta Rhei initiative. Across all case studies, we find that lower damage caused by the second event was mainly due to significant reductions in vulnerability, for example, via raised risk awareness, preparedness, and improvements of organizational emergency management. Thus, vulnerability reduction plays an essential role for successful adaptation. Our work shows that there is a high potential to adapt, but there remains the challenge to stimulate measures that reduce vulnerability and risk in periods in which extreme events do not occur.
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.
Die Hochwasserkatastrophe im Juli 2021 in Westdeutschland erfordert eine kritische Diskussion über die Abschätzung der Hochwassergefährdung, Aktualisierung von Hochwassergefahrenkarten und Kommunikation von extremen Hochwasserszenarien. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wurde die Extremwertstatistik für die jährlichen maximalen Spitzenabflüsse am Pegel Altenahr im Ahrtal mit und ohne Berücksichtigung historischer Hochwasser berechnet und verglichen. Die Schätzung der Wiederkehrperiode für das aktuelle Hochwasser mittels Generalisierter Extremwertverteilung (GEV) unter Berücksichtigung historischer Hochwasser schwankt zwischen etwa 2.600 und über 58.700 Jahren (90%-Konfidenzintervall) mit einem Median bei etwa 8.600 Jahren, wogegen die Schätzung, die nur auf der systematisch gemessenen Abflusszeitreihe von 74 Jahren basiert, theoretisch eine Wiederkehrperiode von über 100 Millionen Jahren ergeben würde. Die Berücksichtigung der historischen Hochwasser führt zu einer dramatischen Änderung der Hochwasserquan-
tile, die für eine Gefahrenkartierung zugrunde gelegt werden. Die Anpassung der GEV an die Zeitreihe mit historischen Hochwassern zeigt dennoch, dass das GEV-Modell möglicherweise die Grundgesamtheit der Hochwasser im Ahrtal nicht adäquat abbilden kann. Es könnte sich im vorliegenden Fall um eine gemischte Stichprobe handeln, in der die extremen Hochwasser im Vergleich zu kleineren Ereignissen durch besondere Prozesse hervorgerufen werden. Somit könnten die Wahrscheinlichkeiten von extremen Hochwassern deutlich größer sein, als aus dem GEV-Modell hervorgeht. Hier sollte in Zukunft die Anwendung einer prozessbasierten Mischverteilung
untersucht werden. Der Vergleich von amtlichen Gefahrenkarten zu Extremhochwassern (HQextrem) im Ahrtal mit den Überflutungsflächen vom Juli 2021
zeigt eine deutliche Diskrepanz in den betroffenen Gebieten und die Notwendigkeit, die Grundlagen zur Erstellung der Extremszenarien zu überdenken. Die hydrodynamisch-numerischen Simulationen von 1.000-jährlichen Hochwassern (HQ1000) unter Berücksichtigung historischer Ereignisse und des größten historischen Hochwassers 1804 können die Gefährdung des Juli-Hochwassers 2021 deutlich besser widerspiegeln, wenngleich auch diese beiden Szenarien die Überflutungsflächen unterschätzen. Besondere Effekte wie die Verklausung von Brücken und die geomorphologischen Änderungen im Flussschlauch führten zu noch größeren Überflutungs- flächen im Juli 2021, als die Simulationsergebnisse zeigten. Basierend auf dieser Analyse wird eine einheitliche Festlegung von HQextrem bei Hochwassergefahrenkartierungen in Deutschland vorgeschlagen, die sich an höheren Hochwasserquantilen im Bereich von HQ1000 orientiert. Zusätzlich sollen simulationsbasierte Rekonstruktionen von den größten verlässlich dokumentierten historischen Hochwassern und/oder synthetische Worst-Case-Szenarien in den Hochwassergefahrenkarten gesondert dargestellt werden. Damit wird ein wichtiger Beitrag geleistet, um die potenziell betroffene Bevölkerung und das Katastrophenmanagement vor Überraschungen durch sehr seltene und extreme Hochwasser in Zukunft besser zu schützen.
The most severe flood events in Turkey were determined for the period 1960-2014 by considering the number of fatalities, the number of affected people, and the total economic losses as indicators. The potential triggering mechanisms (i.e., atmospheric circulations and precipitation amounts) and aggravating pathways (i.e., topographic features, catchment size, land use types, and soil properties) of these 25 events were analyzed. On this basis, a new approach was developed to identify the main influencing factor per event and to provide additional information for determining the dominant flood occurrence pathways for severe floods. The events were then classified through hierarchical cluster analysis. As a result, six different clusters were found and characterized. Cluster 1 comprised flood events that were mainly influenced by drainage characteristics (e.g., catchment size and shape); Cluster 2 comprised events aggravated predominantly by urbanization; steep topography was identified to be the dominant factor for Cluster 3; extreme rainfall was determined as the main triggering factor for Cluster 4; saturated soil conditions were found to be the dominant factor for Cluster 5; and orographic effects of mountain ranges characterized Cluster 6. This study determined pathway patterns of the severe floods in Turkey with regard to their main causal or aggravating mechanisms. Accordingly, geomorphological properties are of major importance in large catchments in eastern and northeastern Anatolia. In addition, in small catchments, the share of urbanized area seems to be an important factor for the extent of flood impacts. This paper presents an outcome that could be used for future urban planning and flood risk prevention studies to understand the flood mechanisms in different regions of Turkey.