Natural Hazards and Earth System Science www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net 1561-8633 1684-9981 10 1 2010 10.5194/nhess-10-3-2010 http://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/10/3/2010/ http://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/10/3/2010/nhess-10-3-2010.html http://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/10/3/2010/nhess-10-3-2010.pdf 3 5 2010-01-05 Reply to Comment on "Significance of "high probability/low damage" versus "low probability/high damage" flood events" by C. M. Rheinberger (2009) B. Merz bmerz@gfz-potsdam.de F. Elmer A. H. Thieken Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam, Section 5.4, Germany alpS – Centre for Natural Hazard and Risk Management and University of Innsbruck, Grabenweg 3, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria In a comment to our recently published paper on the "Significance of "high probability/low damage" versus "low probability/high damage" flood events" (Merz et al., 2009), C. M. Rheinberger questions the use of relative damage as a suitable indicator for risk aversion and the use of the resulting risk aversion functions in judging flood mitigation measures. While the points of criticism are important and should be accounted for, most of these points are considered in our original paper. More importantly, we do not agree with the conclusion that the use of relative damage as indicator for risk aversion is generally not appropriate in decision making about flood mitigation measures. Green, C.: Evaluating vulnerability and resilience in flood management, in: In search of a common methodology on damage estimation, edited by: Van der Veen, A., Vetere-Arellano, A. L., and Nordvik, J. P., EU Joint Research Centre Ispra, Proc. Workshop, Delft, 19–52, 23–24 May 2003. Merz, B.: Hochwasserrisiken. Grenzen und Möglichkeiten der Risikoabschätzung, E Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, 334~pp., 2006. Merz, B., Elmer, F., and Thieken, A. H.: Significance of "high probability/ low damage" versus "low probability/high damage" flood events, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 1033-1046, 2009. Munich Re: Topics, Annual review: Natural catastrophes 2000, Münchener Rückversicherungs-Gesellschaft, Munich, 56~pp., 2001. Rheinberger, C. M.: Comment on "Significance of "high probability/low damage" versus "low probability/high damage" flood events" by Merz et al (2009), Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 10, 1-2, 2010. Rose, A.: Economic principles, issues, and research priorities in natural hazard loss estimation, in: Modelling the spatial economic impacts of natural hazards, edited by: Okuyama, Y. and Chang, S., Springer, Heidelberg, 13–36, 2004. Schwarze, R.: Personal communication, Reimund Schwarze, Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, 2009. Schwarze, R.: Indirekte regionalwirtschaftliche und makroökonomische Schäden, in: Hochwasserschäden. Erfassung, Abschätzung und Vermeidung, edited by: Thieken, A. H., Seifert, I., and Merz, B., Oekom-Verlag, Munich, 217-222, 2010. Siegrist, M. and Gutscher, H.: Natural hazards and motivation for mitigation behavior. People cannot predict the affect evoked by a severe flood, Risk Anal., 28(3), 771–778, 2008. Van der Veen, A., Steenge, A. E., Bockarjova, M., and Logtmeijer, C.: Structural economic effects of large-scale inundations. A simulation of the Krimpen dike breakage, in: In search of a common methodology on damage estimation, edited by: Van der Veen, A., Vetere-Arellano, A. L., and Nordvik, J. P., EU Joint Research Centre Ispra, Proc. Workshop, Delft, 53–77, 23–24 May 2003. Van der Veen, A. and Logtmeijer, C.: Economic hotspots. Visualizing vulnerability to flooding, Nat. Hazards, 36(1–2), 65–80, 2005. Yamano, N., Kajitani, Y., and Shumuta, Y.: Modelling the regional economic loss of natural disasters. The search for economic hotspots, Economic Systems Research, 19(2), 163–181, 2007.