Articles | Volume 19, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-661-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-661-2019
Research article
 | 
29 Mar 2019
Research article |  | 29 Mar 2019

Testing empirical and synthetic flood damage models: the case of Italy

Mattia Amadio, Anna Rita Scorzini, Francesca Carisi, Arthur H. Essenfelder, Alessio Domeneghetti, Jaroslav Mysiak, and Attilio Castellarin

Viewed

Total article views: 5,710 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
4,337 1,285 88 5,710 80 69
  • HTML: 4,337
  • PDF: 1,285
  • XML: 88
  • Total: 5,710
  • BibTeX: 80
  • EndNote: 69
Views and downloads (calculated since 20 Nov 2018)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 20 Nov 2018)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 5,710 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 5,010 with geography defined and 700 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Discussed (final revised paper)

Latest update: 19 Apr 2024
Short summary
Flood risk management relies on assessments performed using flood loss models of different complexities. We compared the performances of expert-based and empirical damage models on three major flood events in northern Italy. Our findings suggest that multivariate models have better potential to provide reliable damage estimates if extensive ancillary characterisation data are available. Expert-based approaches are better suited for transferability compared to empirically based approaches.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint