Michael Kunz

Michael Kunz

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Michael Kunz

Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research Troposphere Research (IMKTRO), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
22 April 2020 in Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PWPhilip J. Ward
Philip J. Ward
VBVeit Blauhut
Veit Blauhut
NBNadia Bloemendaal
Nadia Bloemendaal
JDJames E. Daniell
James E. Daniell
MRMarleen C. de Ruiter
Marleen C. de Ruiter
HWHessel Winsemius
Hessel Winsemius
Since 1990, natural hazards have led to over 1.6 million fatalities globally, and economic losses are estimated at an average of around USD 260–310 billion per year. The scientific and policy communities recognise the need to reduce these risks. As a result, the last decade has seen a rapid development of global models for assessing risk from natural hazards at the global scale. In this paper, we review the scientific literature on natural hazard risk assessments at the global scale, and we specifically examine whether and how they have examined future projections of hazard, exposure, and/or vulnerability. In doing so, we examine similarities and differences between the approaches taken across the different hazards, and we identify potential ways in which different hazard communities can learn from each other. For example, there are a number of global risk studies focusing on hydrological, climatological, and meteorological hazards that have included future projections and disaster risk reduction measures (in the case of floods), whereas fewer exist in the peer-reviewed literature for global studies related to geological hazards. On the other hand, studies of earthquake and tsunami risk are now using stochastic modelling approaches to allow for a fully probabilistic assessment of risk, which could benefit the modelling of risk from other hazards. Finally, we discuss opportunities for learning from methods and approaches being developed and applied to assess natural hazard risks at more continental or regional scales. Through this paper, we hope to encourage further dialogue on knowledge sharing between disciplines and communities working on different hazards and risk and at different spatial scales.

6 October 2020 in Reviews of Geophysics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BMBruno Merz
Bruno Merz
CKChristian Kuhlicke
Christian Kuhlicke
MKMichael Kunz
Michael Kunz
MPMassimiliano Pittore
Massimiliano Pittore
ABAndrey Babeyko
Andrey Babeyko
AWAndreas Wurpts
Andreas Wurpts
Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties, and livelihood. While early warning systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location, and timing of potentially damaging events, these systems rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected amount and distribution of physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services, or financial loss. Complementing early warning systems with impact forecasts has a twofold advantage: It would provide decision makers with richer information to take informed decisions about emergency measures and focus the attention of different disciplines on a common target. This would allow capitalizing on synergies between different disciplines and boosting the development of multihazard early warning systems. This review discusses the state of the art in impact forecasting for a wide range of natural hazards. We outline the added value of impact‐based warnings compared to hazard forecasting for the emergency phase, indicate challenges and pitfalls, and synthesize the review results across hazard types most relevant for Europe.

1 July 2016 in Atmospheric Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HPH.J. Punge
H.J. Punge
MKM. Kunz
M. Kunz

6 February 2023 in Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SMSusanna Mohr
Susanna Mohr
UEUwe Ehret
Uwe Ehret
MKMichael Kunz
Michael Kunz
PLPatrick Ludwig
Patrick Ludwig
ACAlberto Caldas-Alvarez
Alberto Caldas-Alvarez
CWChristina Wisotzky
Christina Wisotzky
The July 2021 flood in central Europe was one of the five costliest disasters in Europe in the last half century, with an estimated total damage of EUR 32 billion. The aim of this study is to analyze and assess the flood within an interdisciplinary approach along its entire process chain: the synoptic setting of the atmospheric pressure fields, the processes causing the high rainfall totals, the extraordinary streamflows and water levels in the affected catchments, the hydro-morphological effects, and the impacts on infrastructure and society. In addition, we address the question of what measures are possible to generate added value to early response management in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. The superposition of several factors resulted in widespread extreme precipitation totals and water levels well beyond a 100-year event: slow propagation of the low pressure system Bernd, convection embedded in a mesoscale precipitation field, unusually moist air masses associated with a significant positive anomaly in sea surface temperature over the Baltic Sea, wet soils, and steep terrain in the affected catchments. Various hydro-morphodynamic processes as well as changes in valley morphology observed during the event exacerbated the impact of the flood. Relevant effects included, among many others, the occurrence of extreme landscape erosion, rapidly evolving erosion and scour processes in the channel network and urban space, recruitment of debris from the natural and urban landscape, and deposition and clogging of bottlenecks in the channel network with eventual collapse. The estimation of inundation areas as well as the derived damage assessments were carried out during or directly after the flood and show the potential of near-real-time forensic disaster analyses for crisis management, emergency personnel on-site, and the provision of relief supplies. This study is part one of a two-paper series. The second part (Ludwig et al., 2022) puts the July 2021 flood into a historical context and into the context of climate change.

9 February 2021 in Nature Reviews Earth & Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TRTimothy H. Raupach
Timothy H. Raupach
OMOlivia Martius
Olivia Martius
JAJohn T. Allen
John T. Allen
MKMichael Kunz
Michael Kunz
SLSonia Lasher-Trapp
Sonia Lasher-Trapp
QZQinghong Zhang
Qinghong Zhang

1 January 2016 in Ecology and Society
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ATAnnegret Henriette Thieken
Annegret Henriette Thieken
SKSarah Kienzler
Sarah Kienzler
HKHeidi Kreibich
Heidi Kreibich
CKChristian Kuhlicke
Christian Kuhlicke
MKMichael Kunz
Michael Kunz
KSKai Schröter
Kai Schröter
Thieken, A. H., S. Kienzler, H. Kreibich, C. Kuhlicke, M. Kunz, B. Mühr, M. Müller, A. Otto, T. Petrow, S. Pisi, and K. Schröter. 2016. Review of the flood risk management system in Germany after the major flood in 2013. Ecology and Society 21(2):51.http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-08547-210251