Global flood depth-damage functions: Methodology and the database with guidelines

Assessing potential damage of flood events is an important component in flood risk management. Determining direct flood damage is commonly done using depth-damage curves, which denote the flood damage that would occur at specific water depths per asset or per land-use class. Many countries have developed flood damage models using depth-damage curves based on analysis of past flood events and on expert judgement. However, the fact that such damage curves are not available for all regions hampers damage assessments in some areas. Moreover, due to different methodologies employed for various damage models in different countries, damage assessments cannot be directly compared with each other, obstructing also supra-national flood damage assessments. To address these problems a globally consistent database of depth-damage curves has been developed. This dataset contains damage curves depicting fractional damage function of water depth as well as maximum damage values for a variety of assets and land use classes. Based on an extensive literature survey concave damage curves have been developed for each continent, while differentiation in flood damage between countries is established by determining maximum damage values at the country scale. These maximum damage values are based on construction cost surveys from multinational construction companies, which provide a coherent set of detailed building cost data across dozens of countries. A consistent set of maximum flood damage values for all countries was computed using statistical regressions with socio-economic World Development Indicators. Further, based on insights from the literature survey, guidance is also given on how the damage curves and maximum damage values can be adjusted for specific local circumstances, such as urban vs. rural locations or use of specific building material. This dataset can be used for consistent supra-national scale flood damage assessments, and guide assessment in countries where no damage model is currently available.JRC.C.6-Economics of Climate Change, Energy and Transpor

The Asynergies of Structural Disaster Risk Reduction Measures: Comparing Floods and Earthquakes

Traditionally, building‐level disaster risk reduction (DRR) measures are aimed at a single natural hazard. However, in many countries the society faces the threat of multiple hazards. Building‐level DRR measures that aim to decrease earthquake vulnerability can have opposing or conflicting effects on flood vulnerability, and vice versa. In a case study of Afghanistan, we calculate the risk of floods and earthquakes, in terms of average annual losses (AAL), in the current situation. Next, we develop two DRR scenarios, where building‐level measures to reduce flood and earthquake risk are implemented. We use this to identify districts for which DRR measures of one hazard increase the risk of another hazard. We then also calculate the optimal situation between the two scenarios by, for each district, selecting the DRR scenario for which the AAL as a ratio of the total exposure is lowest. Finally, we assess the sensitivity of the total risk to each scenario. The optimal measure differs spatially throughout Afghanistan, but in most districts it is more beneficial to take flood DRR measures. However, in the districts where it is more beneficial to take earthquake measures, the reduction in risk is considerable (up to 40%, while flood DRR measures lead to a reduction in risk by 16% in individual districts). The introduction of asynergies between DRR measures in risk analyses allows policy‐makers to spatially differentiate building codes and other building‐level DRR measures to address the most prevalent risk while not compromising the risk resulting from other hazards

Enhancing resilience: Understanding the impact of flood hazard and vulnerability on business interruption and losses

Without taking additional measures, flooding is becoming more likely and intense in a changing climate, which causes large economic damage. Households and firms are directly impacted by physical flood damage, but further ripple effects on society occur through business disruptions. By using post-disaster survey data from the 2021 flood event in the Netherlands, this study adds to the literature on business interruption duration and losses after flooding. The current empirical literature on flood impacts on firms is often unable to distinguish separate effects for flooded and non-flooded firms and does not incorporate flood severity and the influence of risk reduction measures. Here, we use multivariate regression models to determine depth-duration functions that describe the relationship between flood hazard characteristics and business interruption duration. This relationship can be used to calibrate flood damage models that capture indirect firm impacts. The prediction of business interruption after flooding allows for differentiation in business interruption between firms within a flooded area, reducing the reliance of these macroeconomic models on restrictive assumptions. Our results indicate that a day of business interruption duration costs a firm on average 0.5 % of their annual revenue; an effect that is stronger for firms with a weaker connection to their region. Flood damage mitigation (FDM) measures taken at the building level do not significantly affect business interruption duration, although further research on this is required. Finally, quick damage compensation is found to reduce business interruption duration and thus revenue losses, calling for higher insurance uptake and rapid and streamlined post-disaster insurance and government compensation

Flood Vulnerability Models and Household Flood Damage Mitigation Measures: An Econometric Analysis of Survey Data

Flood events are expected to increase in their frequency and severity, which results in higher flood risk without additional adaptation measures. The information gained from flood risk models is essential in effective disaster risk management. However, vulnerability estimations are often a large driver of uncertainty, and flood damage is rarely estimated due to a lack of empirical damage data from flood events. This study uses a unique data set with experienced damages and the implementation of flood damage mitigation (FDM) measures on the household level, collected after the flood event in the Netherlands in 2021. Flood damage models that control for several hazard, exposure, and vulnerability indicators are estimated and allow for additional input in flood risk models. Previous estimates of the effectiveness of FDM measures are prone to a selection bias, as households that do, and do not implement FDM measures systematically differ in their risk profiles. By using an instrumental variable-estimation, this study overcomes this selection bias and finds significant reductions in flood damage due to FDM measures. These reductions can be incorporated in multivariate flood vulnerability estimations, which indicate that FDM measures significantly reduce flood damage. Providing information on flood hazard, as well as implementing early warning systems, is crucial for ensuring effective flood risk management

A look into our future under climate change?: Adaptation and migration intentions following extreme flooding in the Netherlands

Worldwide, increased flood risk from climate change prompts adaptive behavior of households in situ or through migration. Both can be sensible adaptation responses involving tradeoffs, and understanding their drivers is important for effective climate policy. However, in-situ adaptation and migration are rarely studied in combination and research on how extreme events trigger adaptive behavior in originally low-risk areas is lacking. We analyze survey data from residents affected by the extreme summer floods of 2021 in the Netherlands to contribute to fill this research gap. Our results indicate that current low levels of flood-related migration are likely to increase under higher flood risk. Undertaken in-situ adaptation may act as a barrier for further insitu adaptation or migration behavior. Where in-situ adaptation is mostly related to cognitive factors including risk perceptions, response efficacy and self-efficacy, migration seems to be driven by flood-related emotions. Personal flood experience, mediated by worry, is strongly associated with both types of adaptive behavior. We discuss how policymakers can use these insights to guide and anticipate household adaptation behavior

Urban transformation with TURAS open innovations; opportunities for transitioning through transdisciplinarity

Transitioning is a unidirectional process of mainstreaming sustainability within normative societal behaviour, which communities hope will build resilience, reduce our dependence on distant resources and lead to the transformation towards more sustainable living as an end product. Throughout Europe there are numerous examples and pilot or demonstration projects that illustrate tools, practices, mechanisms, pathways and policies for how transitioning can be guided and a transformation can be achieved. This paper draws on the experience of the TURAS project by illustrating some of the diverse open innovation opportunities that have been derived using novel transdisciplinary approaches. The paper concludes with identifying possible ways forward by utilising the TURAS innovations to enable the transformation of urban communities

How Close Do We Live to Water? A Global Analysis of Population Distance to Freshwater Bodies

Traditionally, people have inhabited places with ready access to fresh water. Today, over 50% of the global population lives in urban areas, and water can be directed via tens of kilometres of pipelines. Still, however, a large part of the world's population is directly dependent on access to natural freshwater sources. So how are inhabited places related to the location of freshwater bodies today? We present a high-resolution global analysis of how close present-day populations live to surface freshwater. We aim to increase the understanding of the relationship between inhabited places, distance to surface freshwater bodies, and climatic characteristics in different climate zones and administrative regions. Our results show that over 50% of the world's population lives closer than 3 km to a surface freshwater body, and only 10% of the population lives further than 10 km away. There are, however, remarkable differences between administrative regions and climatic zones. Populations in Australia, Asia, and Europe live closest to water. Although populations in arid zones live furthest away from freshwater bodies in absolute terms, relatively speaking they live closest to water considering the limited number of freshwater bodies in those areas. Population distributions in arid zones show statistically significant relationships with a combination of climatic factors and distance to water, whilst in other zones there is no statistically significant relationship with distance to water. Global studies on development and climate adaptation can benefit from an improved understanding of these relationships between human populations and the distance to fresh water