Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />1. INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />A. Why We Need Historical Flood Damage Data <br />The National Weather Service (NWS) estimates that flooding caused approximately $50 <br />billion damage in the U,S, in the I990s (NWS-IDC 2001), Although flood damage fluctuates <br />greatly from year to year, estimates indicate that there has been an increasing trend over the past <br />century (Pielke and Downton 2000), Some have speculated that the trend is indicative of a <br />change in climate (e,g" Hamburger 1997), some blame population growth and development (e,g, <br />Kerwin and Verrengia 1997), others place the blame on federal policies (e,g" Coyle 1993), and <br />still others suggest that the trend distracts from the larger success of the nation's flood policies <br />(e,g, Labaton 1993), <br /> <br />To understand increasing damage and assess implications for policy, decision makers <br />need to resolve the independent and interdependent influences of climate, population growth and <br />development, and policy on trends in damage. Increased flood damage due to changing climate <br />requires different policy actions than would damage increases due to implementation of flood <br />policies, <br /> <br />The available records of historical flood damage are inadequate for policy evaluation, <br />scientific analysis, and disaster mitigation planning, There are no uniform guidelines for <br />estimating flood losses, and there is no central clearinghouse to collect, evaluate, and report <br />flood damage, The data that exist are rough approximations, compiled by the NWS from <br />damage estimates that are reported in many different ways. Moreover, most published <br />summaries of the damage estimates focus primarily on aggregate national damage totals, <br /> <br />Scientists need historical flood damage data at a variety of spatial scales to analyze <br />variations in flood damage and what contributes to them, For example, during El Nino years, <br />southern California receives more precipitation than in the typical year, Conventional wisdom <br />suggests that the increase in precipitation should result in an increase in damaging floods, If <br />California's emergency planners knew this to be the case, they could prepare for the floods that <br />come with El Nino, possibly reducing damage, In this case, scientists looking for a causal <br />relationship would want to determine to what degree historical high damage years in southern <br />California are associated with EI Nino events. This requires sub-state-level data sets, rather than <br />a national data set. <br /> <br />Social scientists looking at the effect of policies designed to reduce flood damage also <br />need access to historical data at regional and local scales, Take the example of the National <br />Flood Insurance Program, created in 1968 to "assist in reducing damage caused by floods" (42 <br />U,S,C, ~ 4102 (c)(3)), Researchers evaluating the program would like to isolate the effect of the <br />program from all other factors influencing flood damage in particular areas, At the river basin or <br />community level, the effect of a federal policy implemented in 1968 might be isolated and <br />measured, <br /> <br />In sum, historical damage data are essential for any study that seeks to understand the <br />role that climate, population growth and development, and policy play in determining trends in <br />flood damage, Some studies might require data at the national level, and others at the state or <br /> <br />1 <br />