Журнал

About Editorial Board Information for authors and reviewers Publication ethics Contacts User Account: send / review a manuscript
Archive
Volume 23, 2026
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 22, 2025
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 21, 2024
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 20, 2023
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 19, 2022
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 18, 2021
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 17, 2020
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 16, 2019
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 15, 2018
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 14, 2017
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 13, 2016
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 12, 2015
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 11, 2014
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 10, 2013
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 9, 2012
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5
Volume 8, 2011
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 7, 2010
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Issue 6, 2009
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 5, 2008
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 4, 2007
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 3, 2006
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 2, 2005
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 1, 2004
Volume 1
Search
Find:
русский
ISSN 2070-7401 (Print), ISSN 2411-0280 (Online)
Sovremennye problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniya Zemli iz kosmosa
CURRENT PROBLEMS IN REMOTE SENSING OF THE EARTH FROM SPACE

  

Sovremennye problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniya Zemli iz kosmosa, 2026, V. 23, No. 4, pp. 331-345

Validation of global flood hazard maps for Russian rivers using remote sensing data

E.D. Pavlyukevich 1, 2 , A.A. Derkacheva 1 
1 HSE University, Moscow, Russia
2 Water Problems Institute RAS, Moscow, Russia
Accepted: 26.06.2026
DOI: 10.21046/2070-7401-2026-23-4-331-345
The study presents a validation of the global flood hazard maps developed by the JRC (Joint Research Centre) for Russian rivers based on comparison with historical flood extents delineated from multi-temporal Landsat and Sentinel-2 satellite imagery. The aim was to assess the accuracy and applicability of global flood hazard maps for strategic, regional-scale flood risk assessment across Russia, given that domestic flood maps currently cover only individual settlements and do not form a unified national dataset. Fourteen representative river reaches were selected across different physiographic regions of the country where major floods had occurred within the past 30 years, and 26 satellite images corresponding to 26 flood events of varying return periods were processed and compared with the modeled inundation extents. Agreement between modeled and observed flood boundaries was quantified using the Hit Rate (HR), False Alarm Ratio (FAR), and Critical Success Index (CSI). Median values of the metrics were: 0,93 for HR, 0,12 for FAR, and 0,84 for CSI, indicating overall good quality of the global dataset. The model showed a systematic tendency to overestimate flood extents (by 13 % on average). JRC flood hazard maps have limitations for local-scale engineering applications and detailed hazard zonation, but are well-suited for strategic regional planning purposes, particularly in data-sparse regions.
Keywords: validation, global flood hazard maps, remote sensing, flood zones, spatial analysis, hydrological modeling
Full text

References:

  1. Biryukov E. S., Terentyev N. E., Towards the assessment of economic damage from floods in Russia and the potential for adaptation, Theory and Practice of Social Development, 2024, No. 11, pp. 162–168 (in Russian), DOI: 10.24158/tipor.2024.11.19.
  2. D’yakonova T. A., Krivko V. V., Agafonnikova E. O. et al., Determination of the boundaries of flooded zones based on hydrodynamic modeling, Mathematical Physics and Computer Simulation, 2020, V. 23, No. 3, pp. 12–22 (in Russian), DOI: 10.15688/mpcm.jvolsu.2020.3.2.
  3. Kornilova E. D., Krylenko I. N., Golovlyov P. P. et al., Verification of the two-dimensional hydrodynamic model of the Lena River near Yakutsk by time-varying satellite data, Sovremennye problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniya Zemli iz kosmosa, 2018, V. 15, No. 5, pp. 169–178 (in Russian), DOI: 10.21046/2070-7401-2018-15-5-169-178.
  4. Krylenko I. N., Golovlev P. P., Kornilova E. D., Sazonov A. A., Fingert E. A., Assessment of flooding characteristics based on a two-dimensional hydrodynamic model, 13-ya Obshcherossiiskaya nauchno-prakticheskaya konferentsiya i vystavka “Perspektivy razvitiya inzhenernykh izyskanii v stroitel’stve v Rossiiskoi Federatsii” (13th All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conf. and Exhibition “Prospects for the Development of Engineering Surveys in Construction in the Russian Federation”), Moscow: OOO “Geomarketing”, 2017, pp. 187–190 (in Russian).
  5. Miroshnichenko S. A., Luchnikov A. I., Lepeshkin S. A., Tiunov A. A., Development of a hydrodynamic model of the Vaga River to solve the problems of protecting settlements from flooding, Water Sector of Russia: Problems, Technologies, Management, 2024, No. 4, pp. 73–86 (in Russian), DOI: 10.35567/19994508-2024-4-73-86.
  6. Postanovlenie Pravitel’stva RF “Ob opredelenii granits zon zatopleniya i podtopleniya (s “Pravilami opredeleniya granits zon zatopleniya, podtopleniya”)” (Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation “On determining the boundaries of flood and inundation zones (with the “Rules for determining the boundaries of flood and inundation zones”)”), Apr. 18, 2014, No. 360 (in Russian).
  7. Tersky P. N., Fathi M. O., Tsyplenkov A. S., Zemlyanov I. V., Gorelits O. V., Pavlovsky A. E., Flood zones delineation for Moscow City rivers, Georisk, 2017, No. 3, pp. 20–29 (in Russian).
  8. Alfieri L., Salamon P., Bianchi A. et al., Advances in pan-European flood hazard mapping, Hydrological Processes, 2014, V. 28, pp. 4067–4077, DOI: 10.1002/hyp.9947.
  9. Bates P. D., de Roo A. P. J., A simple raster-based model for flood inundation simulation, J. Hydrology, 2000, V. 236, pp. 54–77, DOI: 10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00278-X.
  10. Baugh C., Colonese J., D’Angelo C. et al., Global river flood hazard maps, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 2026, DOI: 10.2905/JRC.VD32YWG.
  11. Bernhofen M. V., Trigg M. A., Sleigh P. A. et al., Global flood exposure from different sized rivers, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2021, V. 21, No. 9, pp. 2829–2847, DOI: 10.5194/nhess-21-2829-2021.
  12. Bernhofen M. V., Cooper S., Trigg M. et al., The role of global data sets for riverine flood risk management at national scales, Water Resources Research, 2022, V. 58, Article e2021WR031555, DOI: 10.1029/2021WR031555.
  13. Buchhorn M., Lesiv M., Tsendbazar N.-E. et al., Copernicus Global Land Cover layers — Collection 2, Remote Sensing, 2020, V. 12, Article 1044, DOI: 10.3390/rs12061044.
  14. Dottori F., Salamon P., Bianchi A. et al., Development and evaluation of a framework for global flood hazard mapping, Advances in Water Resources, 2016, V. 94, pp. 87–102, DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2016.05.002.
  15. Dottori F., Kalas M., Salamon P. et al., An operational procedure for rapid flood risk assessment in Europe, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2017, V. 17, No. 7, pp. 1111–1126, DOI: 10.5194/nhess-17-1111-2017.
  16. Dottori F., Alfieri L., Bianchi A. et al., A new dataset of river flood hazard maps for Europe and the Mediterranean Basin, Earth System Science Data, 2022, V. 14, No. 4, pp. 1549–1569, DOI: 10.5194/essd-14-1549-2022.
  17. Gassert F., Reig P., Shiao T., Luck M., Aqueduct global maps 2.1: Constructing decision-relevant global water risk indicators, World Resources Institute, 2015, 31 p.
  18. Hirabayashi Y., Mahendran R., Koirala S. et al., Global flood risk under climate change, Nature Climate Change, 2013, V. 3, No. 9, pp. 816–821, DOI: 10.1038/nclimate1911.
  19. Lindersson S., Brandimarte L., Mård J., Di Baldassarre G., Global riverine flood risk — how do hydrogeomorphic floodplain maps compare to flood hazard maps?, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2021, V. 21, No. 10, pp. 2921–2948, DOI: 10.5194/nhess-21-2921-2021.
  20. Martel J.-L., Mailhot A., Brissette F., Global and regional projected changes in 100-yr subdaily, daily, and multiday precipitation extremes estimated from three large ensembles of climate simulations, J. Climate, 2020, V. 33, No. 3, pp. 1089–1103, DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0764.1.
  21. Milly P. C. D., Wetherald R. T., Dunne K. A., Delworth T. L., Increasing risk of great floods in a changing climate, Nature, 2002, V. 415, No. 6871, pp. 514–517, DOI: 10.1038/415514a.
  22. Moghadas M., Asadzadeh A., Vafeidis A. et al., A multi-criteria approach for assessing urban flood resilience in Tehran, Iran, Intern. J. Disaster Risk Reduction, 2019, V. 35, Article 101069, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101069.
  23. Rachit T. V., Mohanty M. P., Pandey A., Gupta A. K., Rapid flood susceptibility mapping in the Indian Himalayan region using CNN-U-Net segmentation: insights from the 2025 monsoon events, Natural Hazards, 2026, V. 122, Article 424, DOI: 10.1007/s11069-026-08175-w.
  24. Risling A., Lindersson S., Brandimarte L., A comparison of global flood models using Sentinel-1 and a change detection approach, Natural Hazards, 2024, V. 120, pp. 11133–11152, DOI: 10.1007/s11069-024-06629-7.
  25. Rudari R., Silvestro F., Campo L., Rebora N., Boni G., Improvement of the Global Flood Model for the GAR15, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction, Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR, 2015, 69 p.
  26. Sampson C. C., Smith A. M., Bates P. D. et al., A high-resolution global flood hazard model, Water Resources Research, 2015, V. 51, pp. 7358–7381, DOI: 10.1002/2015WR016954.
  27. Sayers P., Li Y., Galloway G., Penning-Rowsell E., Shen F., Wen K., Chen Y., Le Quesne T., Flood risk management: A strategic approach, Paris, UNESCO, 2013, 202 p.
  28. Singh H., Mohanty M. P., Can atmospheric reanalysis datasets reproduce flood inundation at regional scales? A systematic analysis with ERA5 over Mahanadi River Basin, India, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2023, V. 195, Article 1143, DOI: 10.1007/s10661-023-11798-2.
  29. Tehrany M. S., Pradhan B., Jebur M. N., Flood susceptibility mapping using a novel ensemble weights-of-evidence and support vector machine models in GIS, J. Hydrology, 2014, V. 512, pp. 332–343, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.03.008.
  30. van der Knijff J. M., Younis J., de Roo A. P. J., LISFLOOD: a GIS-based distributed model for river basin scale water balance and flood simulation, Intern. J. Geographical Information Science, 2010, V. 24, pp. 189–212, DOI: 10.1080/13658810802549154.
  31. Vojinovic Z., Tutulic D., On the use of 1D and coupled 1D-2D modelling approaches for assessment of flood damage in urban areas, Urban Water J., 2009, V. 6, No. 3, pp. 183–199, DOI: 10.1080/15730620802566877.
  32. Wilby R. L., Keenan R., Adapting to flood risk under climate change, Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 2012, V. 36, No. 3, pp. 348–378, DOI: 10.1177/0309133312438908.
  33. Winsemius H. C., Aerts J. C. J. H., van Beek L. P. H. et al., Global drivers of future river flood risk, Nature Climate Change, 2016, V. 6, pp. 381–385, DOI:10.1038/nclimate2893.
  34. Yamazaki D., Kanae S., Kim H., Oki T., A physically based description of floodplain inundation dynamics in a global river routing model, Water Resources Research, 2011, V. 47, Article W04501, DOI: 10.1029/2010WR009726.
  35. Yamazaki D., Ikeshima D., Sosa J. et al., MERIT Hydro: A high-resolution global hydrography map based on latest topography dataset, Water Resources Research, 2019, V. 55, pp. 5053–5073, DOI: 10.1029/2019WR024873.
  36. Yazawa T., Sato J., Ngoksilp G. et al., Assessing community vulnerability and adaptive capacity for evidence based water governance in the lower Mekong basin, Discover Water, 2026, V. 6, Article 39, DOI: 10.1007/s43832-026-00364-9.