Comparative flood damage model assessment: towards a European approach

Abstract

Abstract. There is a wide variety of flood damage models in use internationally, differing substantially in their approaches and economic estimates. Since these models are being used more and more as a basis for investment and planning decisions on an increasingly large scale, there is a need to reduce the uncertainties involved and develop a harmonised European approach, in particular with respect to the EU Flood Risks Directive. In this paper we present a qualitative and quantitative assessment of seven flood damage models, using two case studies of past flood events in Germany and the United Kingdom. The qualitative analysis shows that modelling approaches vary strongly, and that current methodologies for estimating infrastructural damage are not as well developed as methodologies for the estimation of damage to buildings. The quantitative results show that the model outcomes are very sensitive to uncertainty in both vulnerability (i.e. depth-damage functions) and exposure (i.e. asset values), whereby the first has a larger effect than the latter. We conclude that care needs to be taken when using aggregated land use data for flood risk assessment, and that it is essential to adjust asset values to the regional economic situation and property characteristics. We call for the development of a flexible but consistent European framework that applies best practice from existing models while providing room for including necessary regional adjustments.

Understanding epistemic uncertainty in large-scale coastal flood risk assessment for present and future climates

“…3.1.3) that were initially derived for fluvial flood risk (referred to as DDF L ) estimation and as a result do not account for factors such as wave forces and salinity. The choice of the DDFs is justified by the fact that they have been calibrated and validated at a pan-European scale with satisfactory results (Jongman et al, 2012a). We formulate an alternative set of DDFs (DDF A ) based on a number of smaller-scale coastal studies (Table 3).…”

DamaGIS: a multisource geodatabase for collection of flood-related damage data

“…In the literature, damage is often assessed with the replacement cost or the value of the impaired element (Jongman et al, 2012;Merz et al, 2010;Olesen et al, 2017). One major disadvantage of this kind of approach is that it weakens the possible comparison between two flood events (Blong, 2003a).…”

Veinte años de protección de cauces en el litoral de la Región de Murcia (1994-2014). Evaluación de la eficiencia de las medidas de Ordenación del Territorio

“…Afortunadamente este tipo de trabajos centrados en el análisis del factor humano que anteriormente se venían realizando con el análisis de los usos de suelo (Moel, Alphen y Aerts, 2009), han sido mejorados sustancialmente gracias a los avances en modelización hidrológica y la digitalización del espacio construido por parte de los organismos oficiales (Jongman et al, 2012). Mediante estos dos tipos de fuentes de información espacial, hoy se puede llevar a cabo con cierta solvencia trabajos que nos permiten evidenciar el grado, la intensidad y el volumen de lo expuesto en áreas propensas a experimentar inundaciones con una precisión mejorada.…”