Open Access
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 7, 2016
3rd European Conference on Flood Risk Management (FLOODrisk 2016)
Article Number 11001
Number of page(s) 8
Section Risk evaluation and assessment
Published online 20 October 2016
  1. Jongejan, R.B., Maaskant, B. (2015). Quantifying flood risks in the Netherlands. Risk Analysis, 35(2):252–64. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Hall, J.W., Sayers, P.B., Dawson, R.J. (2005) National-scale assessment of current and future flood risk in England and Wales. Nat. Hazards (36) 1–2 Pp. 147–164, 2005. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. De Bruijn, K.M., Diermanse, F.L.M., Beckers, J.V.M. (2014). An advanced method for flood risk analysis in river deltas, applied to societal flood fatality risk in the Netherlands. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 2767–2781. doi:10.5194/nhess-14-2767-2014 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Vorogushyn, S., Merz, B., Lindenschmidt, K.-E., Apel, H. (2010) A new methodology for flood hazard assessment con-sidering dike breaches. Water Resources Research 46, W08541. [Google Scholar]
  5. Olson, K.R., & Morton, L.W. (2012). The effects of 2011 Ohio and Mississippi river valley flooding on Cairo, Illinois, area. J. Soil Water Conserv. 67, 42A–46A. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Amadio, M. (2012). Flood risk assessment in the Po River basin under a climate change scenario. Msc Thesis, Joint Master’s programme in sustainable development. Ca’ Foscari University & Utrecht University. Accessible through: [Google Scholar]
  7. Klerk, W.J. Kok, M., De Bruijn, K.M., Jonkman, S.N., Van Overloop, P.J.A.T.M. (2014). Influence of load interdependencies of flood defences on probabilities and risks at the Bovenrijn/Ijssel area, The Netherlands. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Flood Management, September 2014, Sao Paulo, Brazil. [Google Scholar]
  8. Apel, H., Thieken, A., Merz, B., Blöschl, G. (2004). Flood risk assessment and associated uncertainty. NHESS, 4, 295–308, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  9. Apel, H., Merz, B., Thieken, A.H. (2009). Influence of dike breaches on flood frequency estimation. Computers & Geosciences 35, 907–923, 2009. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Van Mierlo, M.C.L.M. Vrouwenvelder, A.C.W.M., Calle, E.OF., Vrijling., J.K., Jonkman, S.N., De Bruijn, K.M., Weerts, A.H. (2007). Assessment of floods risk accounting for River System Behaviour, Intl J. River Basin Manage. 5, (2), 93–104. [Google Scholar]
  11. Vorogushyn, S., Lindenschmidt, K.-E., Kreibich, H., Apel, H., Merz, B. (2012): Analysis of a detention basin impact on dike failure probabilities and flood risk for a channel-dike-floodplain system along the river Elbe, Germany. - Journal of Hydrology, 436–437, 120–131. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.03.006 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Vrouwenvelder A.C.W.M. et al. (2010). Risk analysis for flood protection systems. Main report, TNO & Deltares, Delft, the Netherlands, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  13. Deelprogramma Veiligheid. (2014). Technischinhoudelijke uitwerking van eisen aan primaire waterkeringen (DPV 2.2). WVL & Deltares, Nederland (In Dutch). [Google Scholar]
  14. Diermanse, F.L.M., De Bruijn, K.M. and Beckers, J.: Importance sampling for efficient modelling of hydraulic loads in flood risk analysis. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. DOI 10.1007/s00477-014-0921-4 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hegnauer, M., Kwadijk, J., Klijn, F. (2015). The plausibility of extreme high discharges in the river Rhine. Project 1220042-004, Deltares, Delft. The Netherlands. [Google Scholar]
  16. Sperna Weiland, F.C., Hegnauer, M., Van den Boogaard, H., Buiteveld, H., Lammersen, R. and Beersma, J. (2016) Implications of CMIP5 derived climate scenarios for discharge extremes of the Rhine, submitted to 4th IAHR Europe Congress, Liege Belgium 27-29 July 2016. [Google Scholar]
  17. Ververs, M. & Klijn, F. (2004). Werken noodoverloopgebieden? Wat leert ons de overstroming van 1926? Geografie 7 (September 2004): 14–17 [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.