Human Impacts of Flood Disasters: A Global Systematic Review (1980–2025)

Floods are the most frequent and destructive natural hazards globally, yet the human impacts remain unevenly documented across regions. Evidence on mortality, displacement, health outcomes, and livelihood disruption remains incomplete, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This review investigates global evidence on the human impacts of floods published from 1980 to 2025, focussing on vulnerability patterns, reporting gaps, and socio-spatial inequities. The systematic Scopus search yielded 19,105 records, where 82 met the inclusion criteria. The reviewed studies examined outcomes related to mortality, displacement, injuries, health effects, and livelihood consequences. A formal meta-analysis was not undertaken because of methodological heterogeneity. Instead, we applied narrative synthesis, complemented by methodological quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Among the outcomes examined, mortality was reported most consistently, appearing in 86.6% of studies, whereas displacement, health effects, and livelihood impacts were documented less consistently. The literature was geographically skewed toward Asia and North America, while Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East remained underrepresented despite substantial exposure and vulnerability. Risk was socially uneven, with older adults, children, low-income households, rural populations, and marginalized groups experiencing disproportionate vulnerability. Cross-study comparability and risk estimation are constrained by inconsistent reporting, limited outcome standardization, and the underrepresentation of non-fatal impacts. Flood impacts are strongly mediated by the interaction of hazard, exposure, governance, infrastructure, and social vulnerability. Global understanding remains constrained by systematic gaps in the literature, especially in relation to displacement, long-term health effects, and livelihood consequences. Expanding research coverage, standardizing reporting, and integrating social vulnerability metrics are critical to support evidence-based, equitable flood risk reduction strategies. • Systematic review synthesizes 82 studies on flood impacts globally (1980–2025). • Mortality is the most frequently reported outcome; displacement, health, and livelihoods are underreported. • Evidence is geographically uneven, with major gaps in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. • Vulnerability is socially differentiated; older adults, children, low-income households, and marginalized groups face higher risk. • Findings inform improved disaster risk reduction, standardized reporting, and equitable policy interventions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
H2Open Journal
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.htopen.2026.100019
Primary Topic
Disaster Management and Resilience
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human Impacts of Flood Disasters: A Global Systematic Review (1980–2025)

Linda Sarpong, Samuel Koranteng Fianko, Nana Agyemang Prempeh, Naomi Kumi et al.
H2Open Journal
Disaster Management and Resilience
article

Human Impacts of Flood Disasters: A Global Systematic Review (1980–2025)

Linda Sarpong, Samuel Koranteng Fianko, Nana Agyemang Prempeh, Naomi Kumi, Zhongfang Jin, Isaac Kwesi. Nooni
article en

Abstract

Floods are the most frequent and destructive natural hazards globally, yet the human impacts remain unevenly documented across regions. Evidence on mortality, displacement, health outcomes, and livelihood disruption remains incomplete, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This review investigates global evidence on the human impacts of floods published from 1980 to 2025, focussing on vulnerability patterns, reporting gaps, and socio-spatial inequities. The systematic Scopus search yielded 19,105 records, where 82 met the inclusion criteria. The reviewed studies examined outcomes related to mortality, displacement, injuries, health effects, and livelihood consequences. A formal meta-analysis was not undertaken because of methodological heterogeneity. Instead, we applied narrative synthesis, complemented by methodological quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Among the outcomes examined, mortality was reported most consistently, appearing in 86.6% of studies, whereas displacement, health effects, and livelihood impacts were documented less consistently. The literature was geographically skewed toward Asia and North America, while Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East remained underrepresented despite substantial exposure and vulnerability. Risk was socially uneven, with older adults, children, low-income households, rural populations, and marginalized groups experiencing disproportionate vulnerability. Cross-study comparability and risk estimation are constrained by inconsistent reporting, limited outcome standardization, and the underrepresentation of non-fatal impacts. Flood impacts are strongly mediated by the interaction of hazard, exposure, governance, infrastructure, and social vulnerability. Global understanding remains constrained by systematic gaps in the literature, especially in relation to displacement, long-term health effects, and livelihood consequences. Expanding research coverage, standardizing reporting, and integrating social vulnerability metrics are critical to support evidence-based, equitable flood risk reduction strategies. • Systematic review synthesizes 82 studies on flood impacts globally (1980–2025). • Mortality is the most frequently reported outcome; displacement, health, and livelihoods are underreported. • Evidence is geographically uneven, with major gaps in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. • Vulnerability is socially differentiated; older adults, children, low-income households, and marginalized groups face higher risk. • Findings inform improved disaster risk reduction, standardized reporting, and equitable policy interventions.

H2Open Journal
Central University of Technology (ZA), China Atomic Energy Authority (CN), University of Energy and Natural Resources (GH), Ghana Atomic Energy Commission (GH)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Disaster Management and Resilience
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.