The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
FLOPROS: an evolving global database of flood protection standards
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. With projected changes in climate, population and socioeconomic activity located in flood-prone areas, the global assessment of flood risk is essential to inform climate change policy and disaster risk management. Whilst global flood risk models exist for this purpose, the accuracy of their results is greatly limited by the lack of information on the current standard of protection to floods, with studies either neglecting this aspect or resorting to crude assumptions. Here we present a first global database of FLOod PROtection Standards, FLOPROS, which comprises information in the form of the flood return period associated with protection measures, at different spatial scales. FLOPROS comprises three layers of information, and combines them into one consistent database. The design layer contains empirical information about the actual standard of existing protection already in place; the policy layer contains information on protection standards from policy regulations; and the model layer uses a validated modelling approach to calculate protection standards. The policy layer and the model layer can be considered adequate proxies for actual protection standards included in the design layer, and serve to increase the spatial coverage of the database. Based on this first version of FLOPROS, we suggest a number of strategies to further extend and increase the resolution of the database. Moreover, as the database is intended to be continually updated, while flood protection standards are changing with new interventions, FLOPROS requires input from the flood risk community. We therefore invite researchers and practitioners to contribute information to this evolving database by corresponding to the authors.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Future flood losses in major coastal cities
Hallegatte, S., Green, C., Nicholls, R. J., & Corfee-Morlot, J. (2013) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate1979 · Cited by 2,503
Ensemble flood risk assessment in Europe under high end climate scenarios
Alfieri, L., Feyen, L., Dottori, F., & Bianchi, A. (2015) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.004 · Cited by 346
Cited by
Multi-Model Projections of River Flood Risk in Europe under Global Warming
Alfieri, L., Dottori, F., Betts, R., Salamon, P., & Feyen, L. (2018) · Climate · doi:10.3390/cli6010006 · Cited by 149
“[24] for JRC-EU and on the FLOPROS global database [36] for the two global case studies.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialExposure to Floods, Climate Change, and Poverty in Vietnam
Bangalore, M., Smith, A., & Veldkamp, T. (2019) · Economics of Disasters and Climate Change · doi:10.1007/s41885-018-0035-4 · Cited by 149
Metadata
- Authors
- Scussolini, P., Aerts, J. C. J. H., Jongman, B., Bouwer, L. M., Winsemius, H. C., de Moel, H., & Ward, P. J.
- Venue
- Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2016-05-03
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1049-1061
- ISSN
- 1561-8633 (ISSN-L)
- 1684-9981
- OpenAlex
- W2345815065
- Cited by
- 330
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 17.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.