Usefulness and limitations of global flood risk models (original) (raw)

• Commentary
• Published: 24 July 2015
• Brenden Jongman1,2,
• Peter Salamon3,
• Alanna Simpson2,
• Paul Bates4,5,
• Tom De Groeve3,
• Sanne Muis1,
• Erin Coughlan de Perez1,6,7,
• Roberto Rudari8,
• Mark A. Trigg4 &
• …
• Hessel C. Winsemius9

Nature Climate Change volume 5, pages 712–715 (2015) Cite this article

• 7795 Accesses
• 271 Citations
• 32 Altmetric
• Metrics details

Subjects

Global flood risk models were developed to identify risk hotspots in a world with increasing flood occurrence. Here we assess the ability and limitations of the current models and suggest what is needed moving forward.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

$259.00 per year

only $21.58 per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

• Log in
• Learn about institutional subscriptions
• Read our FAQs
• Contact customer support

Figure 1: Example hazard data from a global flood model, overlaid on impervious surface area (ISA) data27 as an indicator of exposure.

The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

References

1. Dilley, M. et al. Natural Disaster Hotspots. A Global Risk Analysis (The World Bank, 2005).
   Book Google Scholar
2. Hallegatte, S., Green, C., Nicholls, R. J. & Corfee-Morlot, J. Nature Clim. Change 3, 802–806 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
3. Hirabayashi, Y. et al. Nature Clim. Change 3, 816–821 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
4. UNISDR Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Making Development Sustainable: The Future of Disaster Risk Management (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Secretariat, 2015).
5. Ward, P. J. et al. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 044019 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
6. Winsemius, H. C., Van Beek, R., Jongman, B., Ward, P. J. & Bouwman, A. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 17, 1871–1892 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
7. Ward, P. J. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 15659–15664 (2014).
   Article CAS Google Scholar
8. Understanding Risk: Producing Actionable Information (World Bank, 2015).
9. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 A/CONF.224/L.2 (United Nations, 2015).
10. Decision2/CP.19 Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage Associated with Climate Change Impacts (UNFCCC, 2013).
11. Jonkman, S. N. Nature Clim. Change 3, 1004 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
12. Bates, P. D., Horritt, M. S. & Fewtrell, T. J. J. Hydro. 387, 33–45 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
13. Yamazaki, D. et al. Water Resour. Res. 50, 3467–3480 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
14. Bates, P. D., Smith, A., Sampson, C., Alfielri, L. & Neal, J. C. in Am. Geophys. Union Fall Meet. Abstract H33M-03 (AGU, 2014)
    Google Scholar
15. Mechler, R. et al. Nature Clim. Change 4, 235–237 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
16. Alfieri, L. et al. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 17, 1161–1175 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
17. Wu, H. et al. Water Resour. Res. 50, 2693–2717 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
18. Simpson, A. Better understanding disaster risk: a new dataset is set to make a difference. World Bank Voices Blog (24 September 2014); http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/better-understanding-disaster-risk-new-dataset-set-make-difference
    Google Scholar
19. ASTER GDEM Version 2 (Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center, 2015); https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/dataset_discovery/aster/aster_products_table/astgtm
20. Schumann, G. J-P., Bates, P. D., Neal, J. C. & Andreadis, K. M. Nature 507, 169 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
21. Jongman, B. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E2271–E2280 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
22. Jongman, B. et al. Nat. Hazard Earth Sys. 12, 3733–3752 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
23. Haklay, M., Antoniou, V., Basiouka, S., Soden, R. & Mooney, P. Crowdsourced Geographic Information Use in Government (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery and World Bank, 2015); http://go.nature.com/CUxelq
    Google Scholar
24. Rummukainen, M. WIREs Clim. Change 1, 82–96 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
25. Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J. H., Walker, W. E. & Ter Maat, J. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 485–498 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
26. De Groeve, T. et al. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 96, ES97–ES100 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
27. Elvidge, C. D. et al. Sensors 7, 1962–1979 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by a VENI grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (grant no. 863.11.011). The findings are drawn from workshops and discussions between users and modellers at the Understanding Risk Forum in London, 2014, the European Geosciences Union General Assembly in Vienna, 2015, and the Global Flood Partnership annual meeting in Boulder, 2015. We thank the participants of these events for their valuable contributions. The Uganda Red Cross forecast-based financing pilot is funded by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development. The World Bank Caribbean Risk Information Programme (www.charim.net) is financed by the European Union-funded ACP-EU Natural Disaster Risk Reduction Program and managed by the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1081HV, The Netherlands
   Philip J. Ward, Brenden Jongman, Sanne Muis & Erin Coughlan de Perez
2. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery, World Bank Group, 20433, Washington DC, USA
   Brenden Jongman & Alanna Simpson
3. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, 21027, Italy
   Peter Salamon & Tom De Groeve
4. University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 1SS, UK
   Paul Bates & Mark A. Trigg
5. SSBN Flood Risk Solutions, Cardiff, CF10 4AZ, UK
   Paul Bates
6. Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre, The Hague, 2521 CV, The Netherlands
   Erin Coughlan de Perez
7. International Research Institute for Climate and Society, Columbia University, New York, 10964, New York, USA
   Erin Coughlan de Perez
8. CIMA Research Foundation, Savona, 17100, Italy
   Roberto Rudari
9. Deltares, Delft, 2629 HV, The Netherlands
   Hessel C. Winsemius

Authors

1. Philip J. Ward
2. Brenden Jongman
3. Peter Salamon
4. Alanna Simpson
5. Paul Bates
6. Tom De Groeve
7. Sanne Muis
8. Erin Coughlan de Perez
9. Roberto Rudari
10. Mark A. Trigg
11. Hessel C. Winsemius

Corresponding author

Correspondence toPhilip J. Ward.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ward, P., Jongman, B., Salamon, P. et al. Usefulness and limitations of global flood risk models.Nature Clim Change 5, 712–715 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2742

Download citation

• Published: 24 July 2015
• Issue date: August 2015
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2742

This article is cited by