 |
| Titel |
Reply to Comment on "Significance of "high probability/low damage" versus "low probability/high damage" flood events" by C. M. Rheinberger (2009) |
| VerfasserIn |
B. Merz, F. Elmer, A. H. Thieken |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
1561-8633
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Natural Hazards and Earth System Science ; 10, no. 1 ; Nr. 10, no. 1 (2010-01-05), S.3-5 |
| Datensatznummer |
250007870
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/nhess-10-3-2010.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| 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. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|