Improvements on Flood Alleviation in Germany: Lessons Learned from the Elbe Flood in August 2002

The increase in damage due to natural disasters is directly related to the number of people who live and work in hazardous areas and continuously accumulate assets. Therefore, land use planning authorities have to manage effectively the establishment and development of settlements in flood-prone areas in order to avoid the further increase of vulnerable assets. Germany faced major destruction during the flood in August 2002 in the Elbe and Danube catchments, and many changes have been suggested in the existing German water and planning regulations. This article presents some findings of a “Lessons Learned” study that was carried out in the aftermath of the flood and discusses the following topics: 1) the establishment of comprehensive hazard maps and flood protection concepts, 2) the harmonization of regulations of flood protection at the federal level, 3) the communication of the flood hazard and awareness strategies, and 4) how damage potential can be minimized through measures of area precaution such as resettlement and risk-adapted land use. Although attempts towards a coordinated and harmonized creation of flood hazard maps and concepts have been made, there is still no uniform strategy at all planning levels and for all states (Lae nder) of the Federal Republic of Germany. The development and communication of possible mitigation strategies for “unthinkable extreme events” beyond the common safety level of a 100-year flood are needed. In order to establish a sustainable and integrated flood risk management, interdisciplinary and catchment-based approaches are needed.     

The Role of Disaggregation of Asset Values in Flood Loss Estimation: A Comparison of Different Modeling Approaches at the Mulde River,Germany

In loss estimation there is a spatial mismatch of hazard data that are commonly modeled on an explicit raster level and exposure data that are often available only for aggregated administrative units. Usually disaggregation methods that use ancillary information to distribute lumped exposure data in a finer spatial resolution help to bridge this gap. However, the actual influence of different mapping techniques and ancillary data on the final loss estimation has not been analyzed yet. In this paper three methods are applied to disaggregate residential building assets using two kinds of land use/land cover (LULC) data. The resulting disaggregated assets are validated and compared using census data of the residential building number on the community and constituency level. In addition, the disaggregated assets are taken to estimate residential building losses due to the flood in August 2002 in 21 municipalities on the River Mulde in Saxony, Germany. Losses are calculated with the help of four loss models. In general, disaggregation helps to decrease the error variance within the loss estimation. It must, however, be stated that the application of sophisticated disaggregation methods does not lead to significant improvements compared to the straightforward binary method. Therefore more effort should instead be put into the provision of high-resolution LULC data. Finally, the remaining uncertainties in loss estimation are high and demand further improvements in all modeling aspects.     

Recent changes in flood preparedness of private households and businesses in Germany

Using the focusing event framework, a comprehensive analysis of private households’ and businesses’ preparedness was undertaken in the aftermath of the 2002 and 2006 flood events on the Elbe River in Germany. In August 2002, preparedness of households (n = 235) and businesses (n = 103) was low: 30% of the households and 54% of the businesses took no precautionary measures before the flood event. Many undertaken emergency measures were ineffective, since only 26% of all households knew how to react when the flood warning came, and only 9% of businesses had an emergency plan in place. Due to this extreme flood, double-loop learning occurred in many households and businesses, so that many did implement precautionary measures. The distribution of adopted precautionary measures for households fits well to Preisendörfer’s low-cost hypothesis, but does not apply for businesses. Only 10% of the households (n = 112), but still 29% of the businesses (n = 41) were unprepared before the flood in 2006. Significant improvement in flood preparedness activities is still necessary. Particularly for businesses, regulatory programs and programs encouraging proactive behaviour should be implemented. The focusing event framework proofed to be a useful tool for a differentiated analysis of the responses to and learning due to a disaster also in the commercial and private sector.     

Estimating changes in flood risks and benefits of non-structural adaptation strategies - a case study from Tyrol,Austria

Flood damage has increased significantly and is expected to rise further in many parts of the world. For assessing potential changes in flood risk, this paper presents an integrated model chain quantifying flood hazards and losses while considering climate and land use changes. In the case study region, risk estimates for the present and the near future illustrate that changes in flood risk by 2030 are relatively low compared to historic periods. While the impact of climate change on the flood hazard and risk by 2030 is slight or negligible, strong urbanisation associated with economic growth contributes to a remarkable increase in flood risk. Therefore, it is recommended to frequently consider land use scenarios and economic developments when assessing future flood risks. Further, an adapted and sustainable risk management is necessary to encounter rising flood losses, in which non-structural measures are becoming more and more important. The case study demonstrates that adaptation by non-structural measures such as stricter land use regulations or enhancement of private precaution is capable of reducing flood risk by around 30 %. Ignoring flood risks, in contrast, always leads to further increasing losses—with our assumptions by 17 %. These findings underline that private precaution and land use regulation could be taken into account as low cost adaptation strategies to global climate change in many flood prone areas. Since such measures reduce flood risk regardless of climate or land use changes, they can also be recommended as no-regret measures.     

What helps people recover from floods? Insights from a survey among flood-affected residents in Germany

Regional Environmental Change - The number of people exposed to natural hazards has grown steadily over recent decades, mainly due to increasing exposure in hazard-prone areas. In the future,...     

Historical development and future outlook of the flood damage potential of residential areas in the Alpine Lech Valley (Austria) between 1971 and 2030

In the recent past, the Alpine Lech valley (Austria) experienced three damaging flood events within 6 years despite the various structural flood protection measures in place. For an improved flood risk management, the analysis of flood damage potentials is a crucial component. Since the expansion of built-up areas and their associated values is seen as one of the main drivers of rising flood losses, the goal of this study is to analyze the spatial development of the assets at risk, particularly of residential areas, due to land use changes over a historic period (since 1971) and up to possible shifts in future (until 2030). The analysis revealed that the alpine study area was faced to remarkable land use changes like urbanization and the decline of agriculturally used grassland areas. Although the major agglomeration of residential areas inside the flood plains took place before 1971, a steady growth of values at risk can still be observed until now. Even for the future, the trend is ongoing, but depends very much on the assumed land use scenario and the underlying land use policy. Between 1971 and 2006, the annual growth rate of the damage potential of residential areas amounted to 1.1 % (‘constant values,’ i.e., asset values at constant prices of reference year 2006) or 3.0 % (‘adjusted values,’ i.e., asset values adjusted by GDP increase at constant prices of reference year 2006) for three flood scenarios. For the projected time span between 2006 and 2030, a further annual increase by 1.0 % (‘constant values’) or even 4.2 % (‘adjusted values’) may be possible when the most extreme urbanization scenario ‘Overall Growth’ is considered. Although socio-economic development is regarded as the main driver for increasing flood losses, our analysis shows that settlement development does not preferably take place within flood prone areas.