Open AccessHow the choice of flood damage metrics influences urban flood risk assessment
Author(s) -
Veldhuis J.A.E.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
journal of flood risk management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.049
H-Index - 36
ISSN - 1753-318X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1753-318x.2011.01112.x
Subject(s) - damages , flood myth , flooding (psychology) , environmental science , flood risk management , return period , water damage , geography , environmental resource management , environmental planning , water resource management , cartography , archaeology , psychology , asphalt , political science , law , psychotherapist
This study presents a first attempt to quantify tangible and intangible flood damage according to two different damage metrics: monetary values and number of people affected by flooding. Tangible damage includes material damage to buildings and infrastructure; intangible damage includes damages that are difficult to quantify exactly, such as stress and inconvenience. The data used are representative of lowland flooding incidents with return periods up to 10 years. The results show that monetarisation of damage prioritises damage to buildings in comparison with roads, cycle paths and footpaths. When, on the other hand, damage is expressed in terms of numbers of people affected by a flood, road flooding is the main contributor to total flood damage. The results also show that the cumulative damage of 10 years of successive flood events is almost equal to the damage of a singular event with a T = 125 years return period. Differentiation between urban functions and the use of different kinds of damage metrics to quantify flood risk provide the opportunity to weigh tangible and intangible damages from an economic and societal perspective.