Global warming to increase flood risk on European railways

  • Philip BubeckEmail author
  • Lisa Dillenardt
  • Lorenzo Alfieri
  • Luc Feyen
  • Annegret H. Thieken
  • Patric Kellermann


For effective disaster risk management and adaptation planning, a good understanding of current and projected flood risk is required. Recent advances in quantifying flood risk at the regional and global scale have largely neglected critical infrastructure, or addressed this important sector with insufficient detail. Here, we present the first European-wide assessment of current and future flood risk to railway tracks for different global warming scenarios using an infrastructure-specific damage model. We find that the present risk, measured as expected annual damage, to railway networks in Europe is approx. €581 million per year, with the highest risk relative to the length of the network in North Macedonia, Croatia, Norway, Portugal, and Germany. Based on an ensemble of climate projections for RCP8.5, we show that current risk to railway networks is projected to increase by 255% under a 1.5 °C, by 281% under a 2 °C, and by 310% under a 3 °C warming scenario. The largest increases in risk under a 3 °C scenario are projected for Slovakia, Austria, Slovenia, and Belgium. Our advances in the projection of flood risk to railway infrastructure are important given their criticality, and because losses to public infrastructure are usually not insured or even uninsurable in the private market. To cover the risk increase due to climate change, European member states would need to increase expenditure in transport by €1.22 billion annually under a 3 °C warming scenario without further adaptation. Limiting global warming to the 1.5 °C goal of the Paris Agreement would result in avoided losses of €317 million annually.


Funding information

Lorenzo Alfieri and Luc Feyen received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007–2013 under grant agreement no 603864 (HELIX: “High-End cLimate Impacts and eXtremes”; and from DG CLIMA of the European Commission under the administrative agreement N° 340202/2017/763714/SER/CLIMA.A.3 (PESETAIV: “Climate impacts and adaptation in Europe”). Patric Kellermann received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007–2013 under grant agreement no 308438 (ENHANCE: “Enhancing risk management partnerships for catastrophic natural hazards in Europe;

Supplementary material

10584_2019_2434_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.1 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1090 kb)


  1. Alfieri L, Salamon P, Bianchi A, Neal J, Bates P, Feyen L (2014) Advances in pan-European flood hazard mapping. Hydrol Process 28:4067–4077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alfieri L, Feyen L, Dottori F, Bianchi A (2015) Ensemble flood risk assessment in Europe under high end climate scenarios. Glob Environ Chang 35:199–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alfieri L, Feyen L, Di Baldassarre G (2016a) Increasing flood risk under climate change: a pan-European assessment of the benefits of four adaptation strategies. Clim Chang 136:507–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alfieri L, Feyen L, Salamon P, Thielen J, Bianchi A, Dottori F, Burek P (2016b) Modelling the socio-economic impact of river floods in Europe. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 16:1401–1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alfieri L, Bisselink B, Dottori F, Naumann G, Roo A, Salamon P, Wyser K, Feyen L (2017) Global projections of river flood risk in a warmer world. Earth’s Future 5:171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Alfieri L, Dottori F, Betts R, Salamon P, Feyen L (2018) Multi-model projections of river flood risk in Europe under global warming. Climate 6:6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Apel H, Aronica GT, Kreibich H, Thieken AH (2009) Flood risk analyses—how detailed do we need to be? Nat Hazards 49:79–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bednar-Friedl B, Wolkinger B, König M, Bachner G, Formayer H, Offenthaler I, Leitner M (2015) Transport in Steininger KW, König M, Bednar-Friedl B, Kranzle L, Loible W, Prettenthaler F (eds.) economic evaluation of climate change impacts. Development of a cross-sectoral framework and results for Austria. Springer International Publishing Sitzerland BerlinGoogle Scholar
  9. Bouwer LM, Crompton RP, Faust E, Höppe P, Pielke RA Jr (2007) Confronting disaster losses. Science 318:753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bubeck P, de Moel H, Bouwer LM, Aerts JCJH (2011) How reliable are projections of future flood damage? Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11:3293–3306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burek P, Van Der Knijff J, Roo A (2013) LISFLOOD - distributed water balance and flood simulation model. Revised user manual. Report EUR 26162 EN. Joint Research CentreGoogle Scholar
  12. Council of the European Union (2002) COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) no 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund. Official Journal of the European CommunitiesGoogle Scholar
  13. Council of the European Union (2008) COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2008/114/EC of 8 December 2008 on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection. Official Journal of the European UnionGoogle Scholar
  14. Dobney K, Baker CJ, Quinn AD, Chapman L (2009) Quantifying the effects of high summer temperatures due to climate change on buckling and rail related delays in south-east United Kingdom. Meteorol Appl 16:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doll C, Klug S, Enei R (2014) Large and small numbers: options for quantifying the costs of extremes on transport now and in 40 years. Nat Hazards 72:211–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. European Commission (2013) An EU strategy on adaptation to climate change COM(2013) 216, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  17. European Environment Agency (2010) Mapping the impacts of natural hazards and technological accidents in Europe — an overview of the last decade. CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  18. European Union (2013) Regulation (EU) no 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility, amending Regulation (EU)no 913/2013 and repealing Regulations (EC) no 680/2007 and (EC) no 67/2010. Official Joural of the European UnionGoogle Scholar
  19. Floodsite (2006) Guidelines for socio-economic flood damage evaluationsGoogle Scholar
  20. Forzieri G, Bianchi A, e Silva FB, Herrera MAM, Leblois A, Lavalle C, Aerts JCJH, Feyen L (2018) Escalating impacts of climate extremes on critical infrastructures in Europe. Glob Environ Chang 48:97–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hallegatte S, Green C, Nicholls RJ, Corfee-Morlot J (2013) Future flood losses in major coastal cities. Nat Clim Chang 3:802–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hirabayashi Y, Mahendran R, Koirala S, Konoshima L, Yamazaki D, Watanabe S, Kim H, Kanae S (2013) Global flood risk under climate change. Nat Clim Chang 3:816–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hosking JR (1990) L-moments: analysis and estimation of distributions using linear combinations of order statistics. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol:105-124Google Scholar
  24. Huizinga HJ (2007) Flood damage functions for the EU member states. Implemented in the framework of the contract #382442-F1SC awarded by the European Commission – Joint Research Centre. HKV consultantsGoogle Scholar
  25. IPCC (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the Fith assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. United Kingdom and New York, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  26. IPCC (2014a) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part a: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. IPCC (2014b) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. United Kingdom and New York, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Jongman B, Kreibich H, Apel H, Barredo J, Bates P, Feyen L, Gericke A, Neal J, Aerts JCJH, Ward P (2012a) Comparative flood damage model assessment: towards a European approach. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:3733–3752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jongman B, Ward PJ, Aerts JCJH (2012b) Global exposure to river and coastal flooding: long term trends and changes. Glob Environ Chang 22:823–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jongman B, Hochrainer-Stigler S, Feyen L, Aerts JCJH, Mechler R, Botzen WJW, Bouwer LM, Pflug G, Rojas R, Ward PJ (2014) Increasing stress on disaster-risk finance due to large floods. Nat Clim Chang 4:264–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kellermann P, Schöbel A, Kundela G, Thieken AH (2015) Estimating flood damage to railway infrastructure – the case study of the March River flood in 2006 at the Austrian northern railway. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 15:2485–2496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kellermann P, Bubeck P, Kundela G, Dosio A, Thieken A (2016a) Frequency analysis of critical meteorological conditions in a changing climate—assessing future implications for railway transportation in Austria. Climate 4:25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kellermann P, Schönberger C, Thieken AH (2016b) Large-scale application of the flood damage model railway infrastructure loss (RAIL). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 16:2357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kreibich H, van den Bergh JCJM, Bouwer LM, Bubeck P, Ciavola P, Green C, Hallegatte S, Logar I, Meyer V, Schwarze R, Thieken AH (2014) Costing natural hazards. Nat Clim Chang 4:303–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kundzewicz ZW, Pińskwar I, Brakenridge GR (2017) Changes in river flood hazard in Europe: a review. Hydrol Res 49:294–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lin L, Wang Z, Xu Y, Fu Q (2016) Sensitivity of precipitation extremes to radiative forcing of greenhouse gases and aerosols. Geophys Res Lett 43:9860–9868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Merz B, Elmer F, & Thieken AH (2009) Significance of" high probability/low damage" versus" low probability/high damage" flood events. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(3):1033-1046Google Scholar
  38. Merz B, Kreibich H, Schwarze R, Thieken A (2010) Review article “assessment of economic flood damage”. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10:1697–1724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Meyer V, Becker N, Markantonis V, Schwarze R, van den Bergh JCJM, Bouwer LM, Bubeck P, Ciavola P, Genovese E, Green C, Hallegatte S, Kreibich H, Lequeux Q, Logar I, Papyrakis E, Pfurtscheller C, Poussin J, Przyluski V, Thieken AH, Viavattene C (2013) Review article: assessing the costs of natural hazards – state of the art and knowledge gaps. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13:1351–1373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Munich Re (2017) TOPICS GEO. Natural catastrophes 2016. Analyses, assessments, positions MunichGoogle Scholar
  41. Perez J, Menendez M, Mendez FJ, Losada IJ (2014) Evaluating the performance of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models over the north-east Atlantic region. Clim Dyn 43:2663–2680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. te Linde AH, Bubeck P, Dekkers JEC, de Moel H, Aerts JCJH (2011) Future flood risk estimates along the river Rhine. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11:459–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. The White House (2013) Presidential policy directive - critical infrastructure security and resilience. Office of the Press SecretaryGoogle Scholar
  44. Thieken AH, Bessel T, Kienzler S, Kreibich H, Müller M, Pisi S, Schröter K (2016) The flood of June 2013 in Germany: how much do we know about its impacts? Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 16:1519–1540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. United Nations (2015) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. A/CONF.224/CRP.1.,Google Scholar
  46. Van Der Knijff J, Younis J, De Roo A (2010) LISFLOOD: a GIS-based distributed model for river basin scale water balance and flood simulation. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 24:189–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ward PJ, Jongman B, Weiland FS, Bouwman A, van Beek R, Bierkens MF, Ligtvoet W, Winsemius HC (2013) Assessing flood risk at the global scale: model setup, results, and sensitivity. Environ Res Lett 8:044019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Winsemius HC, Aerts JCJH, van Beek LP, Bierkens MF, Bouwman A, Jongman B, Kwadijk JC, Ligtvoet W, Lucas PL, van Vuuren DP (2016) Global drivers of future river flood risk. Nat Clim Chang 6:381–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zurich Insurance Group (2013) European floods: using lessons learned to reduce risks. Zurich Insurance Group Zurich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Environmental Science and GeographyUniversity of PotsdamPotsdamGermany
  2. 2.European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC)Directorate E – Space, Security and MigrationIspraItaly
  3. 3.Section 4.4 HydrologyGFZ German Research Centre for GeosciencesPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations