A semantic notation for comparing global high-resolution coastal flooding studies

Abstract

IntroductionGlobal coastal flooding maps are now achieving a level of detail suitable for local applications. The resolution of these maps, derived from widely available open data sources, is approaching that of local flooding maps (0.5–100 m), increasing the need for a standardized approach to evaluate underlying assumptions and indicators for local applications.MethodsThis study introduces the Waterlevel, Elevation, Protection, Flood, Impact, Future (WEPFIF) notation, a structured notation for documenting and comparing key methodological choices and data variations across global coastal flooding studies. This approach enhances the understanding and explanation of the fitness-for- purpose of flood maps. This notation builds on commonly used methodological choices, dataset variations, and model approaches in global flooding risk research. Analysis of these workflows identifies common elements and highlights the need for a more structured reporting approach to improve comparability.ResultsApplying the WEPFIF notation to a case study in the Netherlands reveals significant variations in flood risk assessments originating from differences in Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and water level selection, and inclusion of protective infrastructure.DiscussionWEPFIF, by annotating these methodological variations, enables more informed comparisons between local and global flood studies. This allows researchers and practitioners to select appropriate data and models, based on their specific research objectives. The study proposes tailored approaches for three common types of flood studies: raising concern, optimizing flood protection investments, and representing the state of coastal risk.