Articles | Volume 23, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-891-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-891-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| Highlight paper
| 
07 Mar 2023
Research article | Highlight paper |
| 07 Mar 2023
| 07 Mar 2023
A climate-conditioned catastrophe risk model for UK flooding
School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8
1SS, UK
Fathom, Square Works, 17-18 Berkeley Square, Bristol BS8 1HB, UK
James Savage
Fathom, Square Works, 17-18 Berkeley Square, Bristol BS8 1HB, UK
Oliver Wing
School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8
1SS, UK
Fathom, Square Works, 17-18 Berkeley Square, Bristol BS8 1HB, UK
Niall Quinn
Fathom, Square Works, 17-18 Berkeley Square, Bristol BS8 1HB, UK
Christopher Sampson
Fathom, Square Works, 17-18 Berkeley Square, Bristol BS8 1HB, UK
Jeffrey Neal
School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8
1SS, UK
Fathom, Square Works, 17-18 Berkeley Square, Bristol BS8 1HB, UK
Andrew Smith
Fathom, Square Works, 17-18 Berkeley Square, Bristol BS8 1HB, UK
Related authors
Thomas P. Collings, Callum J. R. Murphy-Barltrop, Conor Murphy, Ivan D. Haigh, Paul D. Bates, and Niall D. Quinn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1138, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1138, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Determining the threshold above which events are considered extreme is an important consideration for many modelling procedures. We propose an extension of an existing data-driven method for automatic threshold selection. We test our approach on tide gauge records, and show that it outperforms existing techniques. This helps improve estimates of extreme sea levels, and we hope other researchers will use this method for other natural hazards.
Thomas P. Collings, Niall D. Quinn, Ivan D. Haigh, Joshua Green, Izzy Probyn, Hamish Wilkinson, Sanne Muis, William V. Sweet, and Paul D. Bates
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2403–2423, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2403-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2403-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Coastal areas are at risk of flooding from rising sea levels and extreme weather events. This study applies a new approach to estimating the likelihood of coastal flooding around the world. The method uses data from observations and computer models to create a detailed map of where these coastal floods might occur. The approach can predict flooding in areas for which there are few or no data available. The results can be used to help prepare for and prevent this type of flooding.
Leanne Archer, Jeffrey Neal, Paul Bates, Emily Vosper, Dereka Carroll, Jeison Sosa, and Daniel Mitchell
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 375–396, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-375-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-375-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We model hurricane-rainfall-driven flooding to assess how the number of people exposed to flooding changes in Puerto Rico under the 1.5 and 2 °C Paris Agreement goals. Our analysis suggests 8 %–10 % of the population is currently exposed to flooding on average every 5 years, increasing by 2 %–15 % and 1 %–20 % at 1.5 and 2 °C. This has implications for adaptation to more extreme flooding in Puerto Rico and demonstrates that 1.5 °C climate change carries a significant increase in risk.
Youtong Rong, Paul Bates, and Jeffrey Neal
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3291–3311, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3291-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3291-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
A novel subgrid channel (SGC) model is developed for river–floodplain modelling, allowing utilization of subgrid-scale bathymetric information while performing computations on relatively coarse grids. By including adaptive artificial diffusion, potential numerical instability, which the original SGC solver had, in low-friction regions such as urban areas is addressed. Evaluation of the new SGC model through structured tests confirmed that the accuracy and stability have improved.
Mohammad Kazem Sharifian, Georges Kesserwani, Alovya Ahmed Chowdhury, Jeffrey Neal, and Paul Bates
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2391–2413, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2391-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2391-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a new release of the LISFLOOD-FP model for fast and efficient flood simulations. It features a new non-uniform grid generator that uses multiwavelet analyses to sensibly coarsens the resolutions where the local topographic variations are smooth. Moreover, the model is parallelised on the graphical processing units (GPUs) to further boost computational efficiency. The performance of the model is assessed for five real-world case studies, noting its potential applications.
Yinxue Liu, Paul D. Bates, and Jeffery C. Neal
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 375–391, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-375-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-375-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we test two approaches for removing buildings and other above-ground objects from a state-of-the-art satellite photogrammetry topography product, ArcticDEM. Our best technique gives a 70 % reduction in vertical error, with an average difference of 1.02 m from a benchmark lidar for the city of Helsinki, Finland. When used in a simulation of rainfall-driven flooding, the bare-earth version of ArcticDEM yields a significant improvement in predicted inundation extent and water depth.
Maria Pregnolato, Andrew O. Winter, Dakota Mascarenas, Andrew D. Sen, Paul Bates, and Michael R. Motley
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1559–1576, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-1559-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-1559-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The interaction of flow, structure and network is complex, and yet to be fully understood. This study aims to establish rigorous practices of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for modelling hydrodynamic forces on inundated bridges, and understanding the consequences of such impacts on the surrounding network. The objectives of this study are to model hydrodynamic forces as the demand on the bridge structure, to advance a structural reliability and network-level analysis.
Gang Zhao, Paul Bates, Jeffrey Neal, and Bo Pang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5981–5999, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5981-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5981-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Design flood estimation is a fundamental task in hydrology. We propose a machine- learning-based approach to estimate design floods anywhere on the global river network. This approach shows considerable improvement over the index-flood-based method, and the average bias in estimation is less than 18 % for 10-, 20-, 50- and 100-year design floods. This approach is a valid method to estimate design floods globally, improving our prediction of flood hazard, especially in ungauged areas.
Peter Uhe, Daniel Mitchell, Paul D. Bates, Nans Addor, Jeff Neal, and Hylke E. Beck
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4865–4890, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4865-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4865-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present a cascade of models to compute high-resolution river flooding. This takes meteorological inputs, e.g., rainfall and temperature from observations or climate models, and takes them through a series of modeling steps. This is relevant to evaluating current day and future flood risk and impacts. The model framework uses global data sets, allowing it to be applied anywhere in the world.
James Shaw, Georges Kesserwani, Jeffrey Neal, Paul Bates, and Mohammad Kazem Sharifian
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3577–3602, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3577-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3577-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
LISFLOOD-FP has been extended with new shallow-water solvers – DG2 and FV1 – for modelling all types of slow- or fast-moving waves over any smooth or rough surface. Using GPU parallelisation, FV1 is faster than the simpler ACC solver on grids with millions of elements. The DG2 solver is notably effective on coarse grids where river channels are hard to capture, improving predicted river levels and flood water depths. This marks a new step towards real-world DG2 flood inundation modelling.
Oliver E. J. Wing, Andrew M. Smith, Michael L. Marston, Jeremy R. Porter, Mike F. Amodeo, Christopher C. Sampson, and Paul D. Bates
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 559–575, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-559-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-559-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Global flood models are difficult to validate. They generally output theoretical flood events of a given probability rather than an observed event that they can be tested against. Here, we adapt a US-wide flood model to enable the rapid simulation of historical flood events in order to more robustly understand model biases. For 35 flood events, we highlight the challenges of model validation amidst observational data errors yet evidence the increasing skill of large-scale models.
Songtang He, Zhenhong Shen, Jeffrey Neal, Zongji Yang, Jiangang Chen, Daojie Wang, Yujing Yang, Peng Zhao, Xudong Hu, Yongming Lin, Youtong Rong, Yanchen Zheng, Xiaoli Su, and Yong Kong
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3004, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3004, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).
Short summary
Short summary
We explored why landslides still happen in areas with dense vegetation. Using data from a mountainous region in China, we combined large-scale mapping with detailed field analysis. We found that while plants can help prevent landslides, their weight and interaction with rainfall and wind can sometimes make slopes more unstable. This research highlights the complex role of vegetation and helps improve landslide prediction and prevention in green mountain areas.
Thomas P. Collings, Callum J. R. Murphy-Barltrop, Conor Murphy, Ivan D. Haigh, Paul D. Bates, and Niall D. Quinn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1138, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1138, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Determining the threshold above which events are considered extreme is an important consideration for many modelling procedures. We propose an extension of an existing data-driven method for automatic threshold selection. We test our approach on tide gauge records, and show that it outperforms existing techniques. This helps improve estimates of extreme sea levels, and we hope other researchers will use this method for other natural hazards.
Joshua Green, Ivan D. Haigh, Niall Quinn, Jeff Neal, Thomas Wahl, Melissa Wood, Dirk Eilander, Marleen de Ruiter, Philip Ward, and Paula Camus
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 747–816, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-747-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-747-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Compound flooding, involving the combination or successive occurrence of two or more flood drivers, can amplify flood impacts in coastal/estuarine regions. This paper reviews the practices, trends, methodologies, applications, and findings of coastal compound flooding literature at regional to global scales. We explore the types of compound flood events, their mechanistic processes, and the range of terminology. Lastly, this review highlights knowledge gaps and implications for future practices.
Solomon H. Gebrechorkos, Julian Leyland, Simon J. Dadson, Sagy Cohen, Louise Slater, Michel Wortmann, Philip J. Ashworth, Georgina L. Bennett, Richard Boothroyd, Hannah Cloke, Pauline Delorme, Helen Griffith, Richard Hardy, Laurence Hawker, Stuart McLelland, Jeffrey Neal, Andrew Nicholas, Andrew J. Tatem, Ellie Vahidi, Yinxue Liu, Justin Sheffield, Daniel R. Parsons, and Stephen E. Darby
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 3099–3118, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3099-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3099-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluated six high-resolution global precipitation datasets for hydrological modelling. MSWEP and ERA5 showed better performance, but spatial variability was high. The findings highlight the importance of careful dataset selection for river discharge modelling due to the lack of a universally superior dataset. Further improvements in global precipitation data products are needed.
Thomas P. Collings, Niall D. Quinn, Ivan D. Haigh, Joshua Green, Izzy Probyn, Hamish Wilkinson, Sanne Muis, William V. Sweet, and Paul D. Bates
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2403–2423, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2403-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2403-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Coastal areas are at risk of flooding from rising sea levels and extreme weather events. This study applies a new approach to estimating the likelihood of coastal flooding around the world. The method uses data from observations and computer models to create a detailed map of where these coastal floods might occur. The approach can predict flooding in areas for which there are few or no data available. The results can be used to help prepare for and prevent this type of flooding.
Laurence Hawker, Jeffrey Neal, James Savage, Thomas Kirkpatrick, Rachel Lord, Yanos Zylberberg, Andre Groeger, Truong Dang Thuy, Sean Fox, Felix Agyemang, and Pham Khanh Nam
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 539–566, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-539-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-539-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a global flood model built using a new terrain data set and evaluated in the Central Highlands of Vietnam.
Leanne Archer, Jeffrey Neal, Paul Bates, Emily Vosper, Dereka Carroll, Jeison Sosa, and Daniel Mitchell
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 375–396, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-375-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-375-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We model hurricane-rainfall-driven flooding to assess how the number of people exposed to flooding changes in Puerto Rico under the 1.5 and 2 °C Paris Agreement goals. Our analysis suggests 8 %–10 % of the population is currently exposed to flooding on average every 5 years, increasing by 2 %–15 % and 1 %–20 % at 1.5 and 2 °C. This has implications for adaptation to more extreme flooding in Puerto Rico and demonstrates that 1.5 °C climate change carries a significant increase in risk.
Youtong Rong, Paul Bates, and Jeffrey Neal
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3291–3311, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3291-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3291-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
A novel subgrid channel (SGC) model is developed for river–floodplain modelling, allowing utilization of subgrid-scale bathymetric information while performing computations on relatively coarse grids. By including adaptive artificial diffusion, potential numerical instability, which the original SGC solver had, in low-friction regions such as urban areas is addressed. Evaluation of the new SGC model through structured tests confirmed that the accuracy and stability have improved.
Mohammad Kazem Sharifian, Georges Kesserwani, Alovya Ahmed Chowdhury, Jeffrey Neal, and Paul Bates
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2391–2413, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2391-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2391-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a new release of the LISFLOOD-FP model for fast and efficient flood simulations. It features a new non-uniform grid generator that uses multiwavelet analyses to sensibly coarsens the resolutions where the local topographic variations are smooth. Moreover, the model is parallelised on the graphical processing units (GPUs) to further boost computational efficiency. The performance of the model is assessed for five real-world case studies, noting its potential applications.
Yinxue Liu, Paul D. Bates, and Jeffery C. Neal
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 375–391, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-375-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-375-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we test two approaches for removing buildings and other above-ground objects from a state-of-the-art satellite photogrammetry topography product, ArcticDEM. Our best technique gives a 70 % reduction in vertical error, with an average difference of 1.02 m from a benchmark lidar for the city of Helsinki, Finland. When used in a simulation of rainfall-driven flooding, the bare-earth version of ArcticDEM yields a significant improvement in predicted inundation extent and water depth.
Joseph L. Gutenson, Ahmad A. Tavakoly, Mohammad S. Islam, Oliver E. J. Wing, William P. Lehman, Chase O. Hamilton, Mark D. Wahl, and T. Christopher Massey
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 261–277, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-261-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-261-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Emergency managers use event-based flood inundation maps (FIMs) to plan and coordinate flood emergency response. We perform a case study test of three different FIM frameworks to see if FIM differences lead to substantial differences in the location and magnitude of flood exposure and consequences. We find that the FIMs are very different spatially and that the spatial differences do produce differences in the location and magnitude of exposure and consequences.
Maria Pregnolato, Andrew O. Winter, Dakota Mascarenas, Andrew D. Sen, Paul Bates, and Michael R. Motley
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1559–1576, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-1559-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-1559-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The interaction of flow, structure and network is complex, and yet to be fully understood. This study aims to establish rigorous practices of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for modelling hydrodynamic forces on inundated bridges, and understanding the consequences of such impacts on the surrounding network. The objectives of this study are to model hydrodynamic forces as the demand on the bridge structure, to advance a structural reliability and network-level analysis.
Gang Zhao, Paul Bates, Jeffrey Neal, and Bo Pang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5981–5999, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5981-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5981-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Design flood estimation is a fundamental task in hydrology. We propose a machine- learning-based approach to estimate design floods anywhere on the global river network. This approach shows considerable improvement over the index-flood-based method, and the average bias in estimation is less than 18 % for 10-, 20-, 50- and 100-year design floods. This approach is a valid method to estimate design floods globally, improving our prediction of flood hazard, especially in ungauged areas.
Mark V. Bernhofen, Mark A. Trigg, P. Andrew Sleigh, Christopher C. Sampson, and Andrew M. Smith
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2829–2847, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2829-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2829-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The use of different global datasets to calculate flood exposure can lead to differences in global flood exposure estimates. In this study, we use three global population datasets and a simple measure of a river’s flood susceptibility (based on the terrain alone) to explore how the choice of population data and the size of river represented in global flood models affect global and national flood exposure estimates.
Peter Uhe, Daniel Mitchell, Paul D. Bates, Nans Addor, Jeff Neal, and Hylke E. Beck
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4865–4890, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4865-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4865-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present a cascade of models to compute high-resolution river flooding. This takes meteorological inputs, e.g., rainfall and temperature from observations or climate models, and takes them through a series of modeling steps. This is relevant to evaluating current day and future flood risk and impacts. The model framework uses global data sets, allowing it to be applied anywhere in the world.
James Shaw, Georges Kesserwani, Jeffrey Neal, Paul Bates, and Mohammad Kazem Sharifian
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3577–3602, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3577-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3577-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
LISFLOOD-FP has been extended with new shallow-water solvers – DG2 and FV1 – for modelling all types of slow- or fast-moving waves over any smooth or rough surface. Using GPU parallelisation, FV1 is faster than the simpler ACC solver on grids with millions of elements. The DG2 solver is notably effective on coarse grids where river channels are hard to capture, improving predicted river levels and flood water depths. This marks a new step towards real-world DG2 flood inundation modelling.
Oliver E. J. Wing, Andrew M. Smith, Michael L. Marston, Jeremy R. Porter, Mike F. Amodeo, Christopher C. Sampson, and Paul D. Bates
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 559–575, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-559-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-559-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Global flood models are difficult to validate. They generally output theoretical flood events of a given probability rather than an observed event that they can be tested against. Here, we adapt a US-wide flood model to enable the rapid simulation of historical flood events in order to more robustly understand model biases. For 35 flood events, we highlight the challenges of model validation amidst observational data errors yet evidence the increasing skill of large-scale models.
Cited articles
Addor, N., Do, H. X., Alvarez-Garreton, C., Coxon, G., Fowler, K., and
Mendoza, P. A.: Large-sample hydrology: recent progress, guidelines for new
datasets and grand challenges, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 65, 712–725,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2019.1683182, 2020.
Alfieri, L., Bisselink, B., Dottori, F., Naumann, G., De Roo, A., Salamon,
P., Wyser, K., and Feyen, L.: Global projections of river flood risk in
a warmer world, Earths Future, 5, 171–182,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000485, 2016.
Allen, G. H. and Pavelsky, T. M.: Global extent of rivers and streams,
Science, 6402, 585–588, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat0636, 2018.
Almeida, G. A. M. and Bates, P.: Applicability of the local inertial
approximation of the shallow water equations to flood modeling, Water
Resour. Res., 49, 4833–4844, https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20366, 2013.
Almeida, G. A. M., Bates, P., Freer, J. E., and Souvignet, M.: Improving the
stability of a simple formulation of the shallow water equations for 2-D
flood modeling, Water Resour. Res., 48, W05528, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011570, 2012.
Archer, D. and Fowler, H.: A historical flash flood chronology for Britain,
J. Flood Risk Manag., 14, e12721, https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12721, 2021.
Aronica G., Bates P. D., and Horritt M. S.: Assessing the uncertainty in
distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information
within GLUE, Hydrol. Process., 16, 2001–2016,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.398, 2002.
Bates, P. D.: Flood Inundation Prediction, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.,
54, 287–315, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-030121-113138, 2022.
Bates, P. D., Dawson, R. J., Hall, J. W., Horritt, M. S., Nicholls, R. J.,
Wicks, J., and Mohamed Ahmed Ali Mohamed Hassan: Simplified two-dimensional
numerical modelling of coastal flooding and example applications,
Coast. Eng., 52, 793–810, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2005.06.001,
2005.
Bates, P. D., Wilson, M. D., Horritt, M. S., Mason, D. C., Holden, N., and
Currie, A.: Reach scale floodplain inundation dynamics observed using
airborne synthetic aperture radar imagery: Data analysis and modelling,
J. Hydrol. 328, 306–318, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.12.028, 2006.
Bates, P. D., Horritt, M. S., and Fewtrell, T. J.: A simple inertial
formulation of the shallow water equations for efficient two-dimensional
flood inundation modelling, J. Hydrol., 387, 33–45,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.03.027, 2010.
Bates, P. D., Quinn, N., Sampson, C., Smith, A., Wing, O., Sosa, J., Savage,
J., Olcese, G., Neal, J., Schumann, G., Giustarini, L., Coxon, G., Porter,
J. R., Amodeo, M. F., Chu, Z., Lewis-Gruss, S., Freeman, N. B., Houser, T.,
Delgado, M., Hamidi, A., Bolliger, I., McCusker, K., Emanuel, K., Ferreira,
C. M., Khalid, A., Haigh, I. D., Couasnon, A., Kopp, R., Hsiang, S., and
Krajewski, W. F.: Combined modelling of US fluvial, pluvial and coastal
flood hazard under current and future climates, Water Resour. Res.,
57, e2020WR028673, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028673, 2021.
Bertola, M., Viglione, A., Lun, D., Hall, J., and Blöschl, G.: Flood trends in Europe: are changes in small and big floods different?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1805–1822, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-1805-2020, 2020.
Beven, K.: A manifesto for the equifinality thesis, J. Hydrol.,
320, 18–36, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.07.007, 2006.
Biggin, D. S. and Blyth, K.: A Comparison of ERS-1 Satellite Radar and
Aerial Photography for River Flood Mapping, Water Environ. J.,
10, 59–64, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.1996.tb00009.x, 1996.
Black, A. R. and Law, F. M.: Development and utilization of a national
web-based chronology of hydrological events/Développement et utilisation
sur internet d'une chronologie nationale d'événements hydrologiques,
Hydrolog. Sci. J., 49, 237–246, https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.49.2.237.34835, 2004.
Blöschl, G., Hall, J., Viglione, A., Perdigão, R. A. P., Parajka,
J., Merz, B., Lun, D., Arheimer, B., Aronica, G. T., Bilibashi, A.,
Boháč, M., Bonacci, O., Borga, M., Čanjevac, I., Castellarin,
A., Chirico, G. B., Claps, P., Frolova, N., Ganora, D., Gorbachova, L.,
Gül, A., Hannaford, J., Harrigan, S., Kireeva, M., Kiss, A., Kjeldsen,
T. R., Kohnová, S., Koskela, J. J., Ledvinka, O., Macdonald, N.,
Mavrova-Guirguinova, M., Mediero, L., Merz, R., Molnar, P., Montanari, A.,
Murphy, C., Osuch, M., Ovcharuk, V., Radevski, I., Salinas, J. L., Sauquet,
E., Šraj, M., Szolgay, J., Volpi, E., Wilson, D., Zaimi, K., and
Živković, N.: Changing climate both increases and decreases European
river floods, Nature, 573, 108–111, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1495-6, 2019.
Bradbrook, K., Waller, S., and Morris, D.: National Floodplain Mapping:
Datasets and Methods – 160 000 km in 12 months, Nat. Hazards, 36, 103–123, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-004-4544-9, 2005.
Cabinet Office: UK National Risk Register 2020, London, UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-risk-register-2020 (last access: 20 January 2023), 2020.
Chan, S. C., Kendon, E. J., Roberts, N. M., Fowler, H. J., and Blenkinsop,
S.: The characteristics of summer sub-hourly rainfall over the southern UK
in a high-resolution convective permitting model, Environ. Res. Lett., 11,
094024, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/9/094024, 2016.
Cloke, H. L., Wetterhall, F., He, Y., Freer, J. E., and Pappenberger, F.:
Modelling climate impact on floods with ensemble climate projections,
Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 139, 282–297, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.1998, 2013.
Committee for Climate Change: Independent Assessment of UK Climate Risk,
Committee for Climate Change, London, UK, https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/independent-assessment-of-uk-climate-risk/ (last access: 20 January 2023), 2021.
Coxon, G., Freer, J., Lane, R., Dunne, T., Knoben, W. J. M., Howden, N. J. K., Quinn, N., Wagener, T., and Woods, R.: DECIPHeR v1: Dynamic fluxEs and ConnectIvity for Predictions of HydRology, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2285–2306, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2285-2019, 2019.
Environment Agency: Flooding in England: national assessment of flood risk,
Environment Agency, Bristol, UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/flooding-in-england-national-assessment-of-flood-risk (last access: 20 January 2023), 2009.
Environment Agency: Coastal flood boundary conditions for the UK: 2018
update, Environment Agency, Bristol, UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coastal-flood-boundary-conditions-for-uk-mainland-and-islands-design-sea-levels (last access: 20 January 2023), 2019a.
Environment Agency: Long-term investment scenarios (LTIS) 2019, Environment
Agency, Bristol, UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/flood-and-coastal-risk-management-in-england-long-term-investment/long-term-investment-scenarios-ltis-2019 (last access: 20 January 2023), 2019b.
Environment Agency: AIMS Spatial Flood Defences (inc. standardised
attributes), Environment Agency, Bristol, UK, https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/cc76738e-fc17-49f9-a216-977c61858dda/aims-spatial-flood-defences-inc-standardised-attributes (last access: 20 January 2023), 2022.
Fewtrell, T. J., Bates, P. D., Horritt, M., and Hunter, N. M.: Evaluating
the effect of scale in flood inundation modelling in urban environments,
Hydrol. Process., 22, 5107–5118, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7148, 2008.
Fewtrell, T. J., Neal, J. C., Bates, P. D., and Harrison, P. J.: Geometric
and structural river channel complexity and the prediction of urban
inundation, Hydrol. Process., 25, 3173–3186, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8035, 2011.
French, C. E., Waite, T. D., Armstrong, B., Rubin, G. J., English National Study of Flooding and Health Study Group, Beck, C. R., and Oliver, I.: Impact of repeat flooding on
mental health and health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional analysis
of the English National Study of Flooding and Health, BMJ Open, 9, e031562,
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031562, 2019.
Haigh, I. D., Ozsoy, O., Wadey, M. P., Nicholls, R. J., Gallop, S. L., Wahl,
T., and Brown, J. M.: An improved database of coastal flooding in the United
Kingdom from 1915 to 2016, Sci. Data, 4, 170100, https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2017.100, 2017.
Hall, J. W., Dawson, R. J., Sayers, P. B., Rosu, C., Chatterton, J. B., and
Deakin, R.: A methodology for national-scale flood risk assessment,
P. I. Civil Eng.-Water, 156, 235–247, https://doi.org/10.1680/wame.2003.156.3.235,
2003.
Hausfather, Z. and Moore, F. C.: Net-zero commitments could limit warming to
below 2 ∘C, Nature, 604, 247–248, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00874-1, 2022.
Hawker, L., Neal, J., Tellman, B., Liang, J., Schumann, G., Doyle, C.,
Sullivan, J. A., Savage, J., and Tshimanga, R.: Comparing earth observation
and inundation models to map flood hazards, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 124032,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abc216, 2020.
Hawker, L., Uhe, P., Paulo, L., Sosa, J., Savage, J., Sampson, C., and Neal,
J.: A 30 m global map of elevation with forests and buildings removed,
Environ. Res. Lett., 17, 024016, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac4d4f, 2022.
Heffernan, J. E. and Tawn, J. A.: A conditional approach for multivariate
extreme values (with discussion), J. Roy. Stat. Soc. B, 66, 497–546,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9868.2004.02050.x, 2004.
Hocini, N., Payrastre, O., Bourgin, F., Gaume, E., Davy, P., Lague, D., Poinsignon, L., and Pons, F.: Performance of automated methods for flash flood inundation mapping: a comparison of a digital terrain model (DTM) filling and two hydrodynamic methods, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2979–2995, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2979-2021, 2021.
Horritt, M. S. and Bates, P. D.: Effects of spatial resolution on a raster
based model of flood flow, J. Hydrol., 253, 239–249,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00490-5, 2001a.
Horritt, M. S. and Bates, P. D.: Predicting floodplain inundation:
raster-based modelling versus the finite-element approach, Hydrol. Process., 15, 825–842, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.188, 2001b.
Horritt, M. S. and Bates, P. D.: Evaluation of 1D and 2D numerical models
for predicting river flood inundation, J. Hydrol., 268, 87–99,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00121-X, 2002.
Horritt, M. S., Mason, D. C., and Luckman, A. J.: Flood boundary delineation
from Synthetic Aperture Radar imagery using a statistical active contour
model, Int. J. Remote Sens., 22, 2489–2507,
https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160116902, 2001.
Horsburgh, K. J. and Wilson, C.: Tide-surge interaction and its role in the
distribution of surge residuals in the North Sea, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 112, C08003, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JC004033, 2007.
Hunter, N. M., Bates, P. D., Neelz, S., Pender, G., Villanueva, I., Wright,
N. G., Liang, D., Falconer, R. A., Lin, B., Waller, S., Crossley, A. J., and
Mason, D. C.: Benchmarking 2D hydraulic models for urban flooding,
P. I. Civil Eng.-Water, 161, 13–30, https://doi.org/10.1680/wama.2008.161.1.13, 2008.
Kay, A. L., Rudd, A. C., Fry, M., Nash, G., and Allen, S.: Climate change
impacts on peak river flows: Combining national-scale hydrological modelling
and probabilistic projections, Climate Risk Management, 31, 100263,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2020.100263, 2021.
Keef, C., Svensson, C., and Tawn, J. A.: Spatial dependence in extreme river
flows and precipitation for Great Britain, J. Hydrol., 378,
240–252, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.09.026, 2009.
Keef, C., Tawn, J. A., and Lamb, R.: Estimating the probability of
widespread flood events, Environmetrics, 24, 13–21,
https://doi.org/10.1002/env.2190, 2012.
Kendon, M., McCarthy, M., Jevrejeva, S., Matthews, A., Sparks, T., and
Garforth, J.: State of the UK Climate 2020, Int. J. Climatol., 41, 1–76, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.7285, 2021.
Knox, R. L., Morrison, R. R., and Wohl, E. E.: Identification of Artificial
Levees in the Contiguous United States, Water Resour. Res., 58,
e2021WR031308, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR031308, 2022.
Kopp, R. E., Horton, R. M., Little, C. M., Mitrovica, J. X., Oppenheimer,
M., Rasmussen, D. J., Strauss, B. H., and Tebaldi, C.: Probabilistic 21st
and 22nd century sea-level projections at a global network of tide-gauge
sites, Earths Future, 2, 383–406, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014EF000239, 2014.
Lavers, D. A., Allan, R. P., Wood, E. F., Villarini, G., Brayshaw, D. J.,
and Wade, A. J.: Winter floods in Britain are connected to atmospheric
rivers, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L23803, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL049783, 2011.
Lewis, E., Quinn, N., Blenkinsop, S., Fowler, H. J., Freer, J., Tanguy, M.,
Hitt, O., Coxon, G., Bates, P., and Woods, R.: A rule based quality control
method for hourly rainfall data and a 1 km resolution gridded hourly
rainfall dataset for Great Britain: CEH-GEAR1hr, J. Hydrol., 564,
930–943, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.07.034, 2018.
LISFLOOD-FP developers: LISFLOOD-FP 8.1 hydrodynamic model (8.1), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6912932, 2022.
Luca, P. D., Hillier, J. K., Wilby, R. L., Quinn, N. W., and Harrigan, S.:
Extreme multi-basin flooding linked with extra-tropical cyclones, Environ.
Res. Lett., 12, 114009, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa868e, 2017.
Meinshausen, M., Lewis, J., McGlade, C., Gütschow, J., Nicholls, Z.,
Burdon, R., Cozzi, L., and Hackmann, B.: Realization of Paris Agreement
pledges may limit warming just below 2 ∘C, Nature, 604, 304–309,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04553-z, 2022.
Merz, B., Blöschl, G., Vorogushyn, S., Dottori, F., Aerts, J. C. J. H.,
Bates, P., Bertola, M., Kemter, M., Kreibich, H., Lall, U., and Macdonald,
E.: Causes, impacts and patterns of disastrous river floods, Nature Reviews
Earth & Environment, 2, 592–609, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-021-00195-3, 2021.
Morales-Hernández, M., Sharif, M. B., Gangrade, S., Dullo, T. T., Kao,
S.-C., Kalyanapu, A., Ghafoor, S. K., Evans, K. J., Madadi-Kandjani, E., and
Hodges, B. R.: High-performance computing in water resources hydrodynamics,
J. Hydroinform., 22, 1217–1235, https://doi.org/10.2166/hydro.2020.163, 2020.
Neal, J., Schumann, G., and Bates, P.: A subgrid channel model for
simulating river hydraulics and floodplain inundation over large and data
sparse areas, Water Resour. Res., 48, W11506, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012WR012514, 2012.
Neal, J., Hawker, L., Savage, J., Durand, M., Bates, P., and Sampson, C.:
Estimating River Channel Bathymetry in Large Scale Flood Inundation Models,
Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028301, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028301, 2021.
Neal, J. C., Bates, P. D., Fewtrell, T. J., Hunter, N. M., Wilson, M. D.,
and Horritt, M. S.: Distributed whole city water level measurements from the
Carlisle 2005 urban flood event and comparison with hydraulic model
simulations, J. Hydrol., 368, 42–55, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.01.026, 2009.
Parkes, B. and Demeritt, D.: Defining the hundred year flood: A Bayesian
approach for using historic data to reduce uncertainty in flood frequency
estimates, J. Hydrol., 540, 1189–1208, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.07.025, 2016.
Penning-Rowsell, E., Priest, S., Parker, D., Morris, J., Tunstall, S.,
Viavattene, C., Chatterton, J., and Owen, D.: Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk
Management: A Manual for Economic Appraisal, Routledge, London, 448 pp.,
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203066393, 2013.
Penning-Rowsell, E. C.: A realistic assessment of fluvial and coastal flood
risk in England and Wales, T. I. Brit. Geogr., 40, 44–61, https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12053, 2015.
Penning-Rowsell, E. C.: Comparing the scale of modelled and recorded current
flood risk: Results from England, J. Flood Risk Manag., 14,
e12685, https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12685, 2021.
Pralle, S.: Drawing lines: FEMA and the politics of mapping flood zones,
Climatic Change, 152, 227–237, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2287-y, 2019.
Quinn, N., Bates, P. D., Neal, J., Smith, A., Wing, O., Sampson, C., Smith,
J., and Heffernan, J.: The Spatial Dependence of Flood Hazard and Risk in
the United States, Water Resour. Res., 55, 1890–1911,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR024205, 2019.
Robson, A. J. and Reed, D. W.: Statistical procedures for flood frequency estimation, Volume 3 of the Flood Estimation Handbook, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, UK, 356 pp., ISBN 978-1-906698-03-4, 1999.
Rözer, V. and Surminski, S.: Current and future flood risk of new build
homes across different socio-economic neighbourhoods in England and Wales,
Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 054021, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abec04, 2021.
Sampson, C. C., Smith, A. M., Bates, P. D., Neal, J. C., Alfieri, L., and
Freer, J. E.: A high-resolution global flood hazard model, Water Resour. Res., 51, 7358–7381, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016954, 2015.
Sayers, P.: Projections of future flood risk in the UK, Climate Change
Committee, London, UK, https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/sayers-for-the-asc-projections-of-future-flood-risk-in-the-uk/ (last access: 20 January 2023), 2017.
Sayers, P., Horritt, M., Penning-Rowsell, E., McKenzie, A., and Thompson,
D.: The analysis of future flood risk in the UK using the Future Flood
Explorer, 3rd European Conference On Flood Risk Management (FLOODRISK 2016), 17–21 October 2016, Lyon, France, https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160721005, 2016.
Sayers, P., Penning-Rowsell, E. C., and Horritt, M.: Flood vulnerability,
risk, and social disadvantage: current and future patterns in the UK, Reg.
Environ. Change, 18, 339–352, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1252-z, 2018.
Schumann, G., Di Baldassarre, G., and Bates, P. D.: The Utility of
Spaceborne Radar to Render Flood Inundation Maps Based on Multialgorithm
Ensembles, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 47, 2801–2807, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2009.2017937, 2009.
Shustikova, I., Neal, J. C., Domeneghetti, A., Bates, P. D., Vorogushyn, S.,
and Castellarin, A.: Levee Breaching: A New Extension to the LISFLOOD-FP
Model, Water, 12, 942, https://doi.org/10.3390/w12040942, 2020.
Stephens, E., Schumann, G., and Bates, P.: Problems with binary pattern
measures for flood model evaluation, Hydrol. Process., 28, 4928–4937,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9979, 2014.
Swain, D. L., Wing, O. E. J., Bates, P. D., Done, J. M., Johnson, K. A., and
Cameron, D. R.: Increased Flood Exposure Due to Climate Change and
Population Growth in the United States, Earths Future, 8, e2020EF001778,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020EF001778, 2020.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Voukouvalas, E., Mentaschi, L., Dottori, F., Giardino, A., Bouziotas, D., Bianchi, A., Salamon, P., and Feyen, L.: Developments in large-scale coastal flood hazard mapping, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 1841–1853, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-1841-2016, 2016.
Ward, P. J., Jongman, B., Weiland, F. S., Bouwman, A., Beek, R. van,
Bierkens, M. F. P., Ligtvoet, W., and Winsemius, H. C.: Assessing flood risk
at the global scale: model setup, results, and sensitivity, Environ. Res.
Lett., 8, 044019, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/044019, 2013.
Ward, P. J., Jongman, B., Aerts, J. C. J. H., Bates, P. D., Botzen, W. J.
W., Loaiza, A. D., Hallegatte, S., Kind, J. M., Kwadijk, J., Scussolini, P.,
and Winsemius, H. C.: A global framework for future costs and benefits of
river-flood protection in urban areas, Nat. Clim. Chang., 7, 642–646,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3350, 2017.
Wilson, M., Bates, P., Alsdorf, D., Forsberg, B., Horritt, M., Melack, J.,
Frappart, F., and Famiglietti, J.: Modeling large-scale inundation of
Amazonian seasonally flooded wetlands, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34,
L15404, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL030156, 2007.
Wing, O. E. J., Bates, P. D., Sampson, C. C., Smith, A. M., Johnson, K. A.,
and Erickson, T. A.: Validation of a 30 m resolution flood hazard model of
the conterminous United States, Water Resour. Res., 53, 7968–7986,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020917, 2017.
Wing, O. E. J., Bates, P. D., Smith, A. M., Sampson, C. C., Johnson, K. A., Fargione, J., and Morefield, P.: Estimates of present and future flood
risk in the conterminous United States, Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 034023,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaac65, 2018.
Wing, O. E. J., Bates, P. D., Neal, J. C., Sampson, C. C., Smith, A. M.,
Quinn, N., Shustikova, I., Domeneghetti, A., Gilles, D. W., Goska, R., and
Krajewski, W. F.: A New Automated Method for Improved Flood Defense
Representation in Large-Scale Hydraulic Models, Water Resour. Res.,
55, 11007–11034, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025957, 2019.
Wing, O. E. J., Lehman, W., Bates, P. D., Sampson, C. C., Quinn, N., Smith,
A. M., Neal, J. C., Porter, J. R., and Kousky, C.: Inequitable patterns of
US flood risk in the Anthropocene, Nat. Clim. Chang., 12, 156–162,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01265-6, 2022.
Yamazaki, D., Ikeshima, D., Tawatari, R., Yamaguchi, T., O'Loughlin, F.,
Neal, J. C., Sampson, C. C., Kanae, S., and Bates, P. D.: A high-accuracy
map of global terrain elevations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44,
5844–5853, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL072874, 2017.
Yang, X., Pavelsky, T. M., Ross, M. R. V., Januchowski-Hartley, S. R.,
Dolan, W., Altenau, E. H., Belanger, M., Byron, D., Durand, M., Van Dusen,
I., Galit, H., Jorissen, M., Langhorst, T., Lawton, E., Lynch, R.,
Mcquillan, K. A., Pawar, S., and Whittemore, A.: Mapping Flow-Obstructing
Structures on Global Rivers, Water Resour. Res., 58, e2021WR030386,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR030386, 2022.
Zhao, G., Bates, P., Neal, J., and Pang, B.: Design flood estimation for global river networks based on machine learning models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5981–5999, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5981-2021, 2021.
Executive editor
The NHESS paper “A climate-conditioned catastrophe risk model for UK flooding” by Bates and colleagues presents and validates a new flood model for the UK that simulates pluvial, fluvial and coastal flood risks at a resolution of 20 to 25 metres. The authors then use their scheme to estimate the probability-loss distribution for UK flooding under various future climate and policy scenarios. Their paper provides the most detailed and realistic analysis to date of current and future flood risk in the UK. The key findings of their work are: (1) Previous UK flood losses based on government data and used in national climate change risk assessments are overestimated by a factor of about 3. (2) Official UK estimates lie well outside the paper's modelled loss distribution, which is plausibly centred on the observations. (3) The UK 1% annual probability flood losses were only about 6% greater in the average climate conditions of 2020 than for the period of historical river flow and rainfall observations (centred approximately on 1995). (4) Increases in risk can be kept to around ~8% if all COP26 2030 carbon emission reduction pledges and ‘net zero’ commitments are implemented in full. (5) Implementing only the COP26 pledges increases UK 1% annual probability flood losses by ~23% above recent historical values, and potentially ~37% if climate sensitivity turns out to be higher than currently thought.
The NHESS paper “A climate-conditioned catastrophe risk model for UK flooding” by Bates and...
Short summary
We present and validate a model that simulates current and future flood risk for the UK at high resolution (~ 20–25 m). We show that UK flood losses were ~ 6 % greater in the climate of 2020 compared to recent historical values. The UK can keep any future increase to ~ 8 % if all countries implement their COP26 pledges and net-zero ambitions in full. However, if only the COP26 pledges are fulfilled, then UK flood losses increase by ~ 23 %; and potentially by ~ 37 % in a worst-case scenario.
We present and validate a model that simulates current and future flood risk for the UK at high...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint