CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cascading Events, Technology and the Floods Directive: future challenges

Pescaroli, Gianluca, Nones, Michael·2016·E3S Web of Conferences
DOI 10.1051/e3sconf/20160707003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1051/e3sconf/20160707003

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 The implementation steps required by the Floods Directive, with relative deadlines.
Figure 1 The implementation steps required by the Floods Directive, with relative deadlines.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 a) Linear path of events in disasters and b) non-linear path of cascading events (adapted from [19]).
Figure 2 a) Linear path of events in disasters and b) non-linear path of cascading events (adapted from [19]).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 Vulnerability path of cascading disasters and crossscale interactions (adapted from [23]).
Figure 3 Vulnerability path of cascading disasters and crossscale interactions (adapted from [23]).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Map of a) France and b) Ile-de-France.
Figure 4 Map of a) France and b) Ile-de-France.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 5
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 Territory subjected to flooding risk in the Ile-deFrance region (source [41]).
Figure 5 Territory subjected to flooding risk in the Ile-deFrance region (source [41]).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 a) Map of York; b) Flood Risk Maps released by the Environment Agency on December 26, 2015.
Figure 6 a) Map of York; b) Flood Risk Maps released by the Environment Agency on December 26, 2015.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 Map of Sicily, with location of Messina and Calatabiano.
Figure 7 Map of Sicily, with location of Messina and Calatabiano.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 Map of the Elbe basin and localization of the Spolana plant.
Figure 8 Map of the Elbe basin and localization of the Spolana plant.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 9 a) Map of England with the localization of the Gloucestershire; b) rainfall amount over England in autumn 2000 (source [68]).
Figure 9 a) Map of England with the localization of the Gloucestershire; b) rainfall amount over England in autumn 2000 (source [68]).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 10 Interacting dimensions of vulnerability, CI and feedback loops in Cascading Disasters triggered by floods.
Figure 10 Interacting dimensions of vulnerability, CI and feedback loops in Cascading Disasters triggered by floods.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 11 EU Floods Directive: from risk scenario to vulnerability scenario.
Figure 11 EU Floods Directive: from risk scenario to vulnerability scenario.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. de Moel, 2009, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9, 289, 10.5194/nhess-9-289-2009 · DOI
  2. Euripidou, 2004, Journal of Public Health, 26, 376, 10.1093/pubmed/fdh163 · DOI
  3. Nones M. and Pescaroli G. (2016). Implications of cascading effects for the EU Floods Directive.Int. Journal of River Basin Management. in press. doi: 10.1080/15715124.2016.1149074 · DOI
  4. Klijn, 2008, International Journal of River Basin Management, 6, 307, 10.1080/15715124.2008.9635358 · DOI
  5. Kundzewicz Z.W., Mata L.J., Arnell N.W., Döll P., Kabat P., Jimenez B., Miller K.A., Oki T., Sen Z. and Shiklomanox I. A. (2007). Freshwater resources and their management. inClimate change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. edited by Parry M.L., Canziani O.F., Palutikof J.P., van der Linden P.J. and Hanson C.E. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
  6. Milly, 2002, Nature, 415, 514, 10.1038/415514a · DOI
  7. Parker, 2009, Meteorological Applications, 16, 103, 10.1002/met.119 · DOI
  8. Pescaroli, 2015, Natural Hazards Earth System Science, 15, 703, 10.5194/nhess-15-703-2015 · DOI
  9. Heintz, 2012, Water, 4, 135, 10.3390/w4010135 · DOI
  10. Merz, 2010, Natural Hazards Earth System Sciences, 10, 509, 10.5194/nhess-10-509-2010 · DOI
  11. Batica J. and Gourbesville P. (2014). Flood Resilience Index -methodology And Application.International Conference of Hydroinformatics, paper433
  12. Roos A. and Van der Geer I. (2008). New approaches for flood risk management in the Netherlands.Proceedings of the 4thInternational Symposium on Flood Defence, 6–8 May 2008, Toronto, Canada
  13. Bubeck P., Kreibich H., Penning-Rowsell E.C., Botzen W.J.W., De Moel H. and Klijn F. (2015). Explaining differences in flood management approaches in Europe and in the USA – a comparative analysis.Journal of Flood Risk Management. in press. doi: 10.1111/jfr3.1215 · DOI
  14. Van Alphen, 2009, Journal of Flood Risk Management, 2, 285, 10.1111/j.1753-318X.2009.01045.x · DOI
  15. Pescaroli, 2015, Planet@Risk, 2, 1
  16. Müller, 2013, International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 4, 115, 10.1007/s13753-013-0013-y · DOI
  17. Nones, 2015, Water and Environmental Journal, 29, 412, 10.1111/wej.12129 · DOI
  18. Birkmann J., Kienberger S. and Alexander D.E. (2014).Assessment of Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: A European Perspective. Eds. Elsevier.
  19. Pescaroli G. and Alexander D.E. (2016). Critical infrastructure, panarchies and the vulnerability paths of cascading disasters.Natural Hazards, 1–18. doi: 10.1007/s11069-016-2186-3 · DOI
  20. Alexander D.E. (2000).Confronting Catastrophe. Terra Publishing, Harpenden. Oxford University Press, New York
  21. Burzel A., Hounjet M., Becker B.P.J., Di Pietro A. and Pollino M. (2014). Towards A Decision Support System For Consequence Analysis of Flooding On Critical Infrastructure.International Conference of Hydroinformatics, paper99.
  22. Evers, 2013, International Journal of River Basin Management, 11, 139, 10.1080/15715124.2013.811416 · DOI
  23. Dráb, 2010, Natural Hazards Earth System Sciences, 10, 1977, 10.5194/nhess-10-1977-2010 · DOI
  24. Birkmann, 2010, Sustainability Science, 5, 171, 10.1007/s11625-010-0108-y · DOI
  25. Khan, 2000, Process Safety Progress, 19, 40, 10.1002/prs.680190110 · DOI
  26. May F. (2007). Cascading Disaster Models in Postburn Flash Flood. in Butler B.W., Cook W.The Fire Environment – Innovations, Management and Policy; Conference Proceedings. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Washington, DC, 446–463
  27. Gill J.C. and Malamud B.D. (2016). Hazard Interactions and Interaction Networks (Cascades) within Multi-Hazard Methodologies.Earth System Dynamics Discussion. doi:10.5194/esd-2015-94 · DOI
  28. Hellström, 2007, Safety Science, 45, 415, 10.1016/j.ssci.2006.07.007 · DOI
  29. Ansell, 2010, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 18, 195, 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2010.00620.x · DOI
  30. Labaka, 2016, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 103, 21, 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.005 · DOI
  31. Tockner, 2010, Freshwater Biology, 55, 135, 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02371.x · DOI
  32. Slowik, 2015, Geomorphology, 251, 50, 10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.05.031 · DOI
  33. Ashton V., Aziz H., Keith S. and Smith T. (2003). Review of EU Flood R&D Projects. Report prepared as a part of the group management project on theM.Sc. Water Resources Technology and Management Course, University of Birmingham, Department of Civil Engineering, Birmingham
  34. Kay, 2009, Climatic Change, 92, 41, 10.1007/s10584-008-9471-4 · DOI
  35. Young, 2004, Science of The Total Environment, 322, 3, 10.1016/S0048-9697(03)00446-7 · DOI
  36. Marzo, 2012, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 12, 3241, 10.5194/nhess-12-3241-2012 · DOI
  37. Shaluf, 2007, Disaster Prevention and Management, 16, 380, 10.1108/09653560710758332 · DOI
  38. Galderisi, 2008, Natural Hazards, 46, 221, 10.1007/s11069-008-9224-8 · DOI
  39. Cozzani, 2010, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 175, 501, 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.10.033 · DOI
  40. Krausmann, 2011, Natural Hazards, 59, 285, 10.1007/s11069-011-9754-3 · DOI
  41. Whitfield, 2002, Process safety and environmental protection, 80, 40, 10.1205/095758202753502406 · DOI
  42. Suchara, 2008, Environmental Pollution, 151, 352, 10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.029 · DOI
  43. Ulbrich, 2003, Weather, 58, 371, 10.1256/wea.61.03A · DOI
  44. Stachel, 2005, Journal of Environmental Science and Health, 40, 265, 10.1081/ESE-200045531 · DOI
  45. Hudec, 2004, Loss Prevention Bulletin (LPB), LPB180, 36
  46. Vácha, 2003, Plant Soil and Environment, 49, 307, 10.17221/4129-PSE · DOI
  47. Crichton, 2008, The Geneva Papers, 33, 117

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 15

Metadata

Authors
Pescaroli, G., & Nones, M.
Venue
E3S Web of Conferences
Publisher
EDP Sciences
Published
2016
Volume
7
Pages
07003
ISSN
2267-1242
DOI
10.1051/e3sconf/20160707003
Cited by
15
References
2

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review