2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.11.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Parametric and physically based modelling techniques for flood risk and vulnerability assessment: A comparison

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
156
0
5

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 216 publications
(162 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
156
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Two distinct method types can be distinguished (Balica et al, 2013): (I) Deterministic modeling approaches, which use physically-based modeling approaches coupled with damage assessment models to provide an assessment of flood risk in an area; and (II) Parametric approaches, which aim to use readily available data of information to build a picture of the vulnerability of an area. Once relies on a significant amount of detailed topographic, hydrographic and economic information in the area studied.…”
Section: Necessity For a New Model Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Two distinct method types can be distinguished (Balica et al, 2013): (I) Deterministic modeling approaches, which use physically-based modeling approaches coupled with damage assessment models to provide an assessment of flood risk in an area; and (II) Parametric approaches, which aim to use readily available data of information to build a picture of the vulnerability of an area. Once relies on a significant amount of detailed topographic, hydrographic and economic information in the area studied.…”
Section: Necessity For a New Model Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this context it becomes important to evaluate the hazard, risk and vulnerability to flooding also from a different perspective: the parametric approach. The parametric approach aims to estimate the complete vulnerability value of a system by using only a few readily available parameters relating to that system (Balica et al, 2013) and tries to design a methodology that would allow the experts to assess the vulnerability results depend on the system characteristics (Serrat et Gómez, 2001).…”
Section: Necessity For a New Model Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Outcome vulnerability is characterized by the IPCC [1] definition of the degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. In contrast, contextual vulnerability assesses the susceptibility of a system to disturbances determined by exposure to perturbations, sensitivity to perturbations, and the capacity to adapt [2] Vulnerability can also be defined as the inverse of the resilience, where resilience describes the capacity of ecosystems to react against the stress. Thus, vulnerability represents the territorial system tendency to suffer damage during an extreme event.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first one encompasses occurrence of hazard or damage incurred by the system due to action of hazard upon the system while the second one is independent of hazard and it is the inherent current state of the system or communities. In the context of flood, vulnerability is the extent to which a system is susceptible to flood due to exposure, a perturbation, in conjunction with its ability (or inability) to cope [2]. This indicates that one has to deal with a paradox while measuring vulnerability as it is difficult to define it precisely [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, this topic has received an increased attention in literature and is being investigated by different approaches. For example, Krueger et al (2012) stress the role of expert opinion in the application of environmental models, Demir and Krajewski (2013) focus on the role of integrated information systems to communicate model outputs to decisionmakers and Balica et al (2013) and Zagonari and Rossi (2013) …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%