Unknown risk: assessing refugee camp flood risk in Ethiopia

The number of global refugees has been rising annually for the last decade. Many of these refugees are housed within camps, in temporary structures, vulnerable to the impacts of flooding. The flood risk of refugees is not well understood. Flood risk guidance available for camp planners and managers is vague, and existing flood risk data is often lacking in the remote areas where camps are typically located. We show how global data should, and should not, be used to assess refugee flood risk in Ethiopia; a country hosting 725 000 refugees, primarily from four neighboring countries, in 24 camps. We find that global population (GP) datasets, typically used in national flood risk assessments, do not accurately capture camp populations (CPs). Even the most accurate GP datasets are missing three fifths of camp flood exposure. We propose, and test, alternative approaches for representing exposure that combine reported estimates of CP with data on camp area, building footprints, and population density. Applying these approaches in our national flood risk assessment, we find that 95.8% of camps in Ethiopia are exposed to flooding of some degree and between 143 208 (19.8%) and 182 125 refugees (25.2%) are exposed to a 1% annual exceedance probability flood (100 year return period). South Sudanese refugees are the nationality most exposed to flooding, but Eritrean refugees are the nationality most exposed to flooding with a high risk to life. Promisingly, we find that many camps may be set up in such a way that reduces the exposure of refugees to flooding. Our study demonstrates that global data, augmented with local data, can be useful for understanding the flood risk of refugee camps. The consistent scalable approach can be used as a first-order analysis of risk, identifying risk hotspots, and help to prioritize further detailed analyses to inform within-camp adaptation

Using global datasets to estimate flood exposure at the city scale: an evaluation in Addis Ababa

Copyright \ua9 2024 Carr, Trigg, Haile, Bernhofen, Alemu, Bekele and Walsh.Introduction: Cities located in lower income countries are global flood risk hotspots. Assessment and management of these risks forms a key part of global climate adaptation efforts. City scale flood risk assessments necessitate flood hazard information, which is challenging to obtain in these localities because of data quality/scarcity issues, and the complex multi-source nature of urban flood dynamics. A growing array of global datasets provide an attractive means of closing these data gaps, but their suitability for this context remains relatively unknown. Methods: Here, we test the use of relevant global terrain, rainfall, and flood hazard data products in a flood hazard and exposure assessment framework covering Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. To conduct the tests, we first developed a city scale rain-on-grid hydrodynamic flood model based on local data and used the model results to identify buildings exposed to flooding. We then observed how the results of this flood exposure assessment changed when each of the global datasets are used in turn to drive the hydrodynamic model in place of its local counterpart. Results and discussion: Results are evaluated in terms of both the total number of exposed buildings, and the spatial distribution of exposure across Addis Ababa. Our results show that of the datasets tested, the FABDEM global terrain and the PXR global rainfall data products provide the most promise for use at the city scale in lower income countries

Global Flood Exposure from Different Sized Rivers

There is now a wealth of data to calculate global flood exposure. Available datasets differ in detail and representation of both global population distribution and global flood hazard. Previous studies of global flood risk have used datasets interchangeably without addressing the impacts using different datasets could have on exposure estimates. By calculating flood exposure to different sized rivers using a model-independent geomorphological river flood susceptibility map (RFSM), we show that limits placed on the size of river represented in global flood models result in global flood exposure estimates that differ by more than a factor of 2. The choice of population dataset is found to be equally important and can have enormous impacts on national flood exposure estimates. Up-to-date, high-resolution population data are vital for accurately representing exposure to smaller rivers and will be key in improving the global flood risk picture. Our results inform the appropriate application of these datasets and where further development and research are needed

The Role of Global Data Sets for Riverine Flood Risk Management at National Scales

Over the last two decades, several data sets have been developed to assess flood risk at the global scale. In recent years, some of these data sets have become detailed enough to be informative at national scales. The use of these data sets nationally could have enormous benefits in areas lacking existing flood risk information and allow better flood management decisions and disaster response. In this study, we evaluate the usefulness of global data for assessing flood risk in five countries: Colombia, England, Ethiopia, India, and Malaysia. National flood risk assessments are carried out for each of the five countries using six data sets of global flood hazard, seven data sets of global population, and three different methods for calculating vulnerability. We also conduct interviews with key water experts in each country to explore what capacity there is to use these global data sets nationally. We find that the data sets differ substantially at the national level, and this is reflected in the national flood risk estimates. While some global data sets could be of significant value for national flood risk management, others are either not detailed enough, or too outdated to be relevant at this scale. For the relevant global data sets to be used most effectively for national flood risk management, a country needs a functioning, institutional framework with capability to support their use and implementation

A first collective validation of global fluvial flood models for major floods in Nigeria and Mozambique

Global flood models (GFMs) are becoming increasingly important for disaster risk management internationally. However, these models have had little validation against observed flood events, making it difficult to compare model performance. In this paper, we introduce the first collective validation of multiple GFMs against the same events and we analyse how different model structures influence performance. We identify three hydraulically diverse regions in Africa with recent large scale flood events: Lokoja, Nigeria; Idah, Nigeria; and Chemba, Mozambique. We then evaluate the flood extent output provided by six GFMs against satellite observations of historical flood extents in these regions. The critical success index of individual models across the three regions ranges from 0.45 to 0.7 and the percentage of flood captured ranges from 52% to 97%. Site specific conditions influence performance as the models score better in the confined floodplain of Lokoja but score poorly in Idah's flat extensive floodplain. 2D hydrodynamic models are shown to perform favourably. The models forced by gauged flow data show a greater level of return period accuracy compared to those forced by climate reanalysis data. Using the results of our analysis, we create and validate a three-model ensemble to investigate the usefulness of ensemble modelling in a flood hazard context. We find the ensemble model performs similarly to the best individual and aggregated models. In the three study regions, we found no correlation between performance and the spatial resolution of the models. The best individual models show an acceptable level of performance for these large rivers

Evaluating scenarios toward zero plastic pollution

Plastic pollution is a pervasive and growing problem. To estimate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce plastic pollution, we modeled stocks and flows of municipal solid waste and four sources of microplastics through the global plastic system for five scenarios between 2016 and 2040. Implementing all feasible interventions reduced plastic pollution by 40% from 2016 rates and 78% relative to “business as usual” in 2040. Even with immediate and concerted action, 710 million metric tons of plastic waste cumulatively entered aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. To avoid a massive build-up of plastic in the environment, coordinated global action is urgently needed to reduce plastic consumption; increase rates of reuse, waste collection, and recycling; expand safe disposal systems; and accelerate innovation in the plastic value chain

Evaluating scenarios toward zero plastic pollution

Plastic pollution is a pervasive and growing problem. To estimate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce plastic pollution, we modeled stocks and flows of municipal solid waste and four sources of microplastics through the global plastic system for five scenarios between 2016 and 2040. Implementing all feasible interventions reduced plastic pollution by 40% from 2016 rates and 78% relative to “business as usual” in 2040. Even with immediate and concerted action, 710 million metric tons of plastic waste cumulatively entered aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. To avoid a massive build-up of plastic in the environment, coordinated global action is urgently needed to reduce plastic consumption; increase rates of reuse, waste collection, and recycling; expand safe disposal systems; and accelerate innovation in the plastic value chain