A semantic notation for comparing global high-resolution coastal flooding studies

Introduction Global coastal flooding maps are now achieving a level of detail suitable for local applications. The resolution of these maps, derived from widely available open data sources, is approaching that of local flooding maps (0.5–100 m), increasing the need for a standardized approach to evaluate underlying assumptions and indicators for local applications. Methods This study introduces the Waterlevel, Elevation, Protection, Flood, Impact, Future (WEPFIF) notation, a structured notation for documenting and comparing key methodological choices and data variations across global coastal flooding studies. This approach enhances the understanding and explanation of the fitness-for- purpose of flood maps. This notation builds on commonly used methodological choices, dataset variations, and model approaches in global flooding risk research. Analysis of these workflows identifies common elements and highlights the need for a more structured reporting approach to improve comparability. Results Applying the WEPFIF notation to a case study in the Netherlands reveals significant variations in flood risk assessments originating from differences in Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and water level selection, and inclusion of protective infrastructure. Discussion WEPFIF, by annotating these methodological variations, enables more informed comparisons between local and global flood studies. This allows researchers and practitioners to select appropriate data and models, based on their specific research objectives. The study proposes tailored approaches for three common types of flood studies: raising concern, optimizing flood protection investments, and representing the state of coastal risk.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Earth Science
Published
2024-12-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2024.1465040
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Flood Risk Assessment and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.28

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A semantic notation for comparing global high-resolution coastal flooding studies

Mark van Koningsveld, Fedor Baart, Maarten Pronk, Sanne Muis et al.
1 citations
Frontiers in Earth Science
Flood Risk Assessment and Management
0.28
article

A semantic notation for comparing global high-resolution coastal flooding studies

Mark van Koningsveld, Fedor Baart, Maarten Pronk, Sanne Muis, Gerben de Boer
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Introduction Global coastal flooding maps are now achieving a level of detail suitable for local applications. The resolution of these maps, derived from widely available open data sources, is approaching that of local flooding maps (0.5–100 m), increasing the need for a standardized approach to evaluate underlying assumptions and indicators for local applications. Methods This study introduces the Waterlevel, Elevation, Protection, Flood, Impact, Future (WEPFIF) notation, a structured notation for documenting and comparing key methodological choices and data variations across global coastal flooding studies. This approach enhances the understanding and explanation of the fitness-for- purpose of flood maps. This notation builds on commonly used methodological choices, dataset variations, and model approaches in global flooding risk research. Analysis of these workflows identifies common elements and highlights the need for a more structured reporting approach to improve comparability. Results Applying the WEPFIF notation to a case study in the Netherlands reveals significant variations in flood risk assessments originating from differences in Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and water level selection, and inclusion of protective infrastructure. Discussion WEPFIF, by annotating these methodological variations, enables more informed comparisons between local and global flood studies. This allows researchers and practitioners to select appropriate data and models, based on their specific research objectives. The study proposes tailored approaches for three common types of flood studies: raising concern, optimizing flood protection investments, and representing the state of coastal risk.

Frontiers in Earth ScienceVol. 12
Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management (NL), Deltares (NL), J.M. Burgerscentrum (NL), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL), Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences (NL), Delft University of Technology (NL)
Rijkswaterstaat
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Flood Risk Assessment and Management
0.28
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.