As flood impacts are increasing in large parts of the world, understanding the primary drivers of changes in risk is essential for effective adaptation. To gain more knowledge on the basis of empirical case studies, we analyze eight paired floods, that is, consecutive flood events that occurred in the same region, with the second flood causing significantly lower damage. These success stories of risk reduction were selected across different socioeconomic and hydro‐climatic contexts. The potential of societies to adapt is uncovered by describing triggered societal changes, as well as formal measures and spontaneous processes that reduced flood risk. This novel approach has the potential to build the basis for an international data collection and analysis effort to better understand and attribute changes in risk due to hydrological extremes in the framework of the IAHSs Panta Rhei initiative. Across all case studies, we find that lower damage caused by the second event was mainly due to significant reductions in vulnerability, for example, via raised risk awareness, preparedness, and improvements of organizational emergency management. Thus, vulnerability reduction plays an essential role for successful adaptation. Our work shows that there is a high potential to adapt, but there remains the challenge to stimulate measures that reduce vulnerability and risk in periods in which extreme events do not occur.

Methodologies to estimate economic flood damages are increasingly important for flood risk assessment and management. In this work, we present a new synthetic flood damage model based on a component-by-component analysis of physical damage to buildings. The damage functions are designed using an expert-based approach with the support of existing scientific and technical literature, loss adjustment studies, and damage surveys carried out for past flood events in Italy. The model structure is designed to be transparent and flexible, and therefore it can be applied in different geographical contexts and adapted to the actual knowledge of hazard and vulnerability variables. The model has been tested in a recent flood event in northern Italy. Validation results provided good estimates of post-event damages, with similar or superior performances when compared with other damage models available in the literature. In addition, a local sensitivity analysis was performed in order to identify the hazard variables that have more influence on damage assessment results.

One common approach to cope with floods is the implementation of structural flood protection measures, such as levees or flood-control reservoirs, which substantially reduce the probability of flooding at the time of implementation. Numerous scholars have problematized this approach. They have shown that increasing the levels of flood protection can attract more settlements and high-value assets in the areas protected by the new measures. Other studies have explored how structural measures can generate a sense of complacency, which can act to reduce preparedness. These paradoxical risk changes have been described as levee effect, safe development paradox or safety dilemma. In this commentary, we briefly review this phenomenon by critically analysing the intended benefits and unintended effects of structural flood protection, and then we propose an interdisciplinary research agenda to uncover these paradoxical dynamics of risk.

In recent years, awareness of a need for more effective disaster data collection, storage, and sharing of analyses has developed in many parts of the world. In line with this advance, Italian local authorities have expressed the need for enhanced methods and procedures for post-event damage assessment in order to obtain data that can serve numerous purposes: to create a reliable and consistent database on the basis of which damage models can be defined or validated; and to supply a comprehensive scenario of flooding impacts according to which priorities can be identified during the emergency and recovery phase, and the compensation due to citizens from insurers or local authorities can be established. This paper studies this context, and describes ongoing activities in the Umbria and Sicily regions of Italy intended to identifying new tools and procedures for flood damage data surveys and storage in the aftermath of floods. In the first part of the paper, the current procedures for data gathering in Italy are analysed. The analysis shows that the available knowledge does not enable the definition or validation of damage curves, as information is poor, fragmented, and inconsistent. A new procedure for data collection and storage is therefore proposed. The entire analysis was carried out at a local level for the residential and commercial sectors only. The objective of the next steps for the research in the short term will be (i) to extend the procedure to other types of damage, and (ii) to make the procedure operational with the Italian Civil Protection system. The long-term aim is to develop specific depth–damage curves for Italian contexts.

Effective flood risk management requires a realistic estimation of flood losses. However, available flood damage estimates are still characterized by significant levels of uncertainty, questioning the capacity of flood damage models to depict real damages. With a joint effort of eight international research groups, the objective of this study was to compare, in a blind-validation test, the performances of different models for the assessment of the direct flood damage to the residential sector at the building level (i.e. microscale). The test consisted of a common flood case study characterized by high availability of hazard and building data but with undisclosed information on observed losses in the implementation stage of the models. The nine selected models were chosen in order to guarantee a good mastery of the models by the research teams, variety of the modelling approaches, and heterogeneity of the original calibration context in relation to both hazard and vulnerability features. By avoiding possible biases in model implementation, this blind comparison provided more objective insights on the transferability of the models and on the reliability of their estimations, especially regarding the potentials of local and multivariable models. From another perspective, the exercise allowed us to increase awareness of strengths and limits of flood damage modelling, which are summarized in the paper in the form of take-home messages from a modeller's perspective.