Item

Abstract

Two different approaches are used to assess the impacts associated with natural hazards and climate change in cities. A bottom-up approach uses high resolution data on constituent assets within the urban area. In contrast, a top-down approach uses less detailed information but is consequently more readily transferable. Here, we compare damage curves generated by each approach for coastal flooding in London. To compare them, we fit a log-logistic regression with three parameters to the calculated damage curves. We find that the functions are remarkably similar in their shape, albeit with different inflection points and a maximum damage that differs by 13%–25%. If rescaled, the curves agree almost exactly, which enables damage assessment to be undertaken following the calculation of the three parameters.