Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1938
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1938
12 May 2025
 | 12 May 2025
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).

Large discrepancies between event- and response-based compound flood hazard estimates

Sara Santamaria-Aguilar, Pravin Maduwantha, Alejandra R. Enriquez, and Thomas Wahl

Abstract. Most flood hazard assessments follow the event-based approach, assuming that the probability of flooding approximates the probability of flood drivers. However, this approach neglects information about the temporal and spatial variability of flood drivers and flood processes such as water propagation inland and its interaction with topography. The response-based approach accounts for these factors by using a large number of flood events that allow the calculation of flood probabilities. Here, we compare differences in flood hazards between the event- and response-based approaches for a case study in Gloucester City (NJ, U.S.). We find that compound events with return periods less than 20 years can produce the 100-year (i.e., 1 % annual exceedance probability) flood depths in large areas of the city. This is caused by the temporal and spatial characteristics of these events, such as prolonged high coastal water levels and rainfall fields with higher rainfall rates over urbanized areas. These event characteristics are not included in extreme value models of the flood drivers and are commonly simplified by using a single design event. However, flood hazards largely depend on them, introducing large discrepancies in resulting flood hazards if neglected. The temporal and spatial variabilities of flood drivers need to be incorporated in flood hazard assessments to produce robust estimates.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Share
Sara Santamaria-Aguilar, Pravin Maduwantha, Alejandra R. Enriquez, and Thomas Wahl

Status: open (until 29 Jun 2025)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Sara Santamaria-Aguilar, Pravin Maduwantha, Alejandra R. Enriquez, and Thomas Wahl
Sara Santamaria-Aguilar, Pravin Maduwantha, Alejandra R. Enriquez, and Thomas Wahl

Viewed

Total article views: 187 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
132 49 6 187 8 7 8
  • HTML: 132
  • PDF: 49
  • XML: 6
  • Total: 187
  • Supplement: 8
  • BibTeX: 7
  • EndNote: 8
Views and downloads (calculated since 12 May 2025)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 12 May 2025)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 192 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 192 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 17 Jun 2025
Download
Short summary
Traditional flood assessments use an event-based approach, assuming flood risk matches the chance of flood drivers. However, flooding also depends on topography and the spatio-temporal features of events. The response-based approach uses many events to estimate flood hazard directly. In Gloucester City (NJ, U.S.), we find that frequent events can cause rare (1 %) flood levels due to their spatio-temporal characteristics. Including these factors is key for accurate flood hazard estimates.
Share