Effect of uncertainty in land use, damage models and inundation depth on flood damage estimates

H. Moel () and J. Aerts

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, 2011, vol. 58, issue 1, 407-425

Abstract: With the recent transition to a more risk-based approach in flood management, flood risk models—being a key component in flood risk management—are becoming increasingly important. Such models combine information from four components: (1) the flood hazard (mostly inundation depth), (2) the exposure (e.g. land use), (3) the value of elements at risk and (4) the susceptibility of the elements at risk to hydrologic conditions (e.g. depth–damage curves). All these components contain, however, a certain degree of uncertainty which propagates through the calculation and accumulates in the final damage estimate. In this study, an effort has been made to assess the influence of uncertainty in these four components on the final damage estimate. Different land-use data sets and damage models have been used to represent the uncertainties in the exposure, value and susceptibility components. For the flood hazard component, inundation depth has been varied systematically to estimate the sensitivity of flood damage estimations to this component. The results indicate that, assuming the uncertainty in inundation depth is about 25 cm (about 15% of the mean inundation depth), the total uncertainty surrounding the final damage estimate in the case study area can amount to a factor 5–6. The value of elements at risk and depth–damage curves are the most important sources of uncertainty in flood damage estimates and can both introduce about a factor 2 of uncertainty in the final damage estimates. Very large uncertainties in inundation depth would be necessary to have a similar effect on the uncertainty of the final damage estimate, which seem highly unrealistic. Hence, in order to reduce the uncertainties surrounding potential flood damage estimates, these components deserve prioritisation in future flood damage research. While absolute estimates of flood damage exhibit considerable uncertainty (the above-mentioned factor 5–6), estimates for proportional changes in flood damages (defined as the change in flood damages as a percentage of a base situation) are much more robust. Copyright The Author(s) 2011

Keywords: Floods; Flood risk; Flood damage; Flood damage assessment; Uncertainty; Sensitivity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (51)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-010-9675-6 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:58:y:2011:i:1:p:407-425

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11069

DOI: 10.1007/s11069-010-9675-6

Access Statistics for this article

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards is currently edited by Thomas Glade, Tad S. Murty and Vladimír Schenk

More articles in Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards from Springer, International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().