Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Floods account for a substantial share of disaster damage, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite the Official Development Aid mobilised between 2000 and 2024 to address flooding in LMICs, damage has not decreased significantly. During this period, the number of flood risk assessments (FRAs) increased exponentially, particularly after 2018. However, literature reviews have paid little attention to this proliferation and the contribution of FRAs to risk management. This study examines the usability of FRAs for risk treatment in LMICs. We analysed 164 FRAs covering rural areas in 38 LMICs, published over the past 20 years, assessing data and information quality and the knowledge-building process. Only 7% of FRAs publicly share information through a repository, 15% identify populations at risk, 22% map inundation depth, and 56% recommend risk-treatment measures. In 86% of cases, knowledge production is based primarily on desk work rather than involving flood-prone communities. We recommend that FRAs be supported by data meeting the ISO 25024 standard. FRAs developed with public funds should make all underlying data publicly available, in accordance with FAIR principles. Moreover, FRAs should support risk treatment, while knowledge should be transdisciplinary and co-produced with communities at risk of flooding.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tiepolo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: