2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.10.022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of flood risk models: Current practice and possible improvements

Abstract: Although often neglected, model validation is a key topic in flood risk analysis, as flood risk estimates are used to underpin large investments and important decisions. In this paper, we discuss the state of the art of flood risk model validation, using as input the discussion among more than 50 experts at two scientific workshop events. The events aimed at identifying policy and research recommendations towards promoting more common practice of validation, and an improvement of flood risk model reliability. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
85
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 107 publications
(85 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
0
85
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Still, as for other damage models, the variability of parameters required by AGRIDE-c together with the limited availability of data for its validation (see Section 2) suggest the use of the model not in absolute terms (i.e. to evaluate the effectiveness of a specific measure), but as a tool to compare among several alternatives (Molinari et al 2019). 25…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Still, as for other damage models, the variability of parameters required by AGRIDE-c together with the limited availability of data for its validation (see Section 2) suggest the use of the model not in absolute terms (i.e. to evaluate the effectiveness of a specific measure), but as a tool to compare among several alternatives (Molinari et al 2019). 25…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We argue that a sound flood risk assessment should be based on a high-resolution-individual building-based-building asset value map because of the high spatial heterogeneity of flood hazards.Röthlisberger and colleagues [13] compared five building value models for flood risk analysis, and proposed that estimating exposed-building values should be based on individual buildings rather than on areas of land-use types. Higher quality exposure data is needed to perform validations of flood risk models [14].However, for flood risk analysis, quite often a spatial mismatch exists between hazard intensity data (e.g., inundation depth), which are frequently modelled on a high-resolution raster level, and exposure data, which are usually only available at coarse census units (e.g., counties) or aggregated land-use/land cover classes [14][15][16][17]. Flood risk assessments often invest much more in hazard modelling of water depths or inundation areas at a spatially explicit raster level [18,19], while only a limited number of studies have explicitly focused on the estimations of assets and their disaggregation to overcome the spatial mismatch between the quality of hazard and exposure data [20][21][22][23].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Röthlisberger and colleagues [13] compared five building value models for flood risk analysis, and proposed that estimating exposed-building values should be based on individual buildings rather than on areas of land-use types. Higher quality exposure data is needed to perform validations of flood risk models [14].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The energy dissipation rate is enhanced by effective operation rules to stabilize the downstream flow regimes.Rapidly varied flow having large streamline curvatures exerts non-hydrostatic pressure distribution over the dam discharge structure surface. The enormous three-dimensional (3D) effect of dam discharge flow reveals that two-dimensional (2D) assumptions in solving such problems are inadequate [13][14][15]. 3D numerical simulation comes into sight gradually because it can yield a high-resolution outcome and vividly display the variation of physical parameters in the flow field [16].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%