Expert-based versus data-driven flood damage models: A comparative evaluation for data-scarce regions

This paper compares expert-based and data-driven flood damage models. The knowledge about potential flood damage is a key issue for disaster risk reduction. However, the scarcity of empirical data has limited flood damage modeling in several regions. As a result, studies in data-scarce regions have mostly been restricted to either building exposure assessment or identification of vulnerability indicators without a further linkage to probable damage. As expert-based approaches do not require empirical damage data, they have a high potential for flood damage modeling in data-scarce regions. In this study, we carried out a comparative assessment between an expert-based and a data-driven approach.

Results from both methods showed i) a predictive accuracy of 30% and 38% for the expert-based and data-driven approaches respectively, ii) that distance to channel, wall material, building condition, and building quality are significant regional damage drivers, and iii) comparable model performance can be achieved even with a reduced number of variables. Furthermore, the study demonstrated how experts are likely to underestimate damage at low water depths and how a difference in conformity to building standards can add to challenges in flood damage prediction.