The increase in frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events caused by the changing climate (e.g., cloudbursts, rainstorms, heavy rainfall, hail, heavy snow), combined with the high population density and concentration of assets, makes urban areas particularly vulnerable to pluvial flooding. Hence, assessing their vulnerability under current and future climate scenarios is of paramount importance. Detailed hydrologic-hydraulic numerical modeling is resource intensive and therefore scarcely suitable for performing consistent hazard assessments across large urban settlements. Given the steadily increasing availability of LiDAR (Light Detection And Ranging) high-resolution DEMs (Digital Elevation Models), several studies highlighted the potential of fast-processing DEM-based methods, such as the Hierarchical Filling-&-Spilling or Puddle-to-Puddle Dynamic Filling-&-Spilling Algorithms (abbreviated herein as HFSAs). We develop a fast-processing HFSA, named Safer_RAIN, that enables mapping of pluvial flooding in large urban areas by accounting for spatially distributed rainfall input and infiltration processes through a pixel-based Green-Ampt model. We present the first applications of the algorithm to two case studies in Northern Italy. Safer_RAIN output is compared against ground evidence and detailed output from a two-dimensional (2D) hydrologic and hydraulic numerical model (overall index of agreement between Safer_RAIN and 2D benchmark model: sensitivity and specificity up to 71% and 99%, respectively), highlighting potential and limitations of the proposed algorithm for identifying pluvial flood-hazard hotspots across large urban environments.

Our study develops and tests a geostatistical technique for locally enhancing macro-scale rainfall–runoff simulations on the basis of observed streamflow data that were not used in calibration. We consider Tyrol (Austria and Italy) and two different types of daily streamflow data: macro-scale rainfall–runoff simulations at 11 prediction nodes and observations at 46 gauged catchments. The technique consists of three main steps: (1) period-of-record flow–duration curves (FDCs) are geostatistically predicted at target ungauged basins, for which macro-scale model runs are available; (2) residuals between geostatistically predicted FDCs and FDCs constructed from simulated streamflow series are computed; (3) the relationship between duration and residuals is used for enhancing simulated time series at target basins. We apply the technique in cross-validation to 11 gauged catchments, for which simulated and observed streamflow series are available over the period 1980–2010. Our results show that (1) the procedure can significantly enhance macro-scale simulations (regional LNSE increases from nearly zero to ≈ 0.7) and (2) improvements are significant for low gauging network densities (i.e. 1 gauge per 2000 km²).

Flow–duration curves (FDCs) are essential to support decisions on water resources management, and their regionalization is fundamental for the assessment of ungauged basins. In comparison with calibrated rainfall–runoff models, statistical methods provide data-driven estimates representing a useful benchmark. The objective of this work is the interpolation of FDCs from ~500 discharge gauging stations in the Danube. To this aim we use total negative deviation top-kriging (TNDTK), as multi-regression models are shown to be unsuitable for representing FDCs across all durations and sites. TNDTK shows a high accuracy for the entire Danube region, with overall Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency values computed in a leave-p-out cross-validation scheme (p equal to one site, one-third and half of the sites), all above 0.88. A reliability measure based on kriging variance is attached to each interpolated FDC at ~4000 prediction nodes. The GIS layer of regionalized FDCs is made available for broader use in the region.

Spatial cross-correlation among flood sequences impacts the accuracy of regional predictors. Our study investigates this impact for two regionalization procedures, generalized least squares (GLS) regression and top-kriging (TK), which deal with cross-correlation in two fundamentally different ways and therefore might be associated with different accuracy and uncertainty of predicted flood quantiles. We perform a Monte Carlo experiment based on a dataset of annual-maximum-flood series for 20 catchments in a hydrologically homogeneous region. Based on a log-Pearson Type III parent distribution, we generate 3000 realizations of the region with different degrees of cross-correlation. For each realization, GLS and TK are applied in leave-one-out cross-validation to predict at-site flood quantiles. Our study shows that (a) TK outperforms GLS when catchment area is the only catchment descriptor used for predicting ‘true’ population (theoretical) flood quantiles, regardless of the level of cross-correlation, and (b) GLS and TK perform similarly when multiple catchment descriptors are used.

Recent literature shows several examples of simplified approaches that perform flood hazard (FH) assessment and mapping across large geographical areas on the basis of fast-computing geomorphic descriptors. These approaches may consider a single index (univariate) or use a set of indices simultaneously (multivariate). What is the potential and accuracy of multivariate approaches relative to univariate ones? Can we effectively use these methods for extrapolation purposes, i.e., FH assessment outside the region used for setting up the model? Our study addresses these open problems by considering two separate issues: (1) mapping flood-prone areas and (2) predicting the expected water depth for a given inundation scenario. We blend seven geomorphic descriptors through decision tree models trained on target FH maps, referring to a large study area (∼ 10⁵ km²). We discuss the potential of multivariate approaches relative to the performance of a selected univariate model and on the basis of multiple extrapolation experiments, where models are tested outside their training region. Our results show that multivariate approaches may (a) significantly enhance flood-prone area delineation (accuracy: 92 %) relative to univariate ones (accuracy: 84 %), (b) provide accurate predictions of expected inundation depths (determination coefficient ∼ 0.7), and (c) produce encouraging results in extrapolation.