Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40504835›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Has flood damage being reduced? A resident perspective on the effectiveness of flood management.

Lumin Hong, Guangwei Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lumin HongSchool of Sociology and Humanities, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, China.
Guangwei HuangGraduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Sophia University, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8950-7881

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flood disasters have been studied intensively and extensively. However, studies to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of flood management from social perspectives are limited. Questions such as whether flood damage has been reduced or exacerbated have been insufficiently examined and poorly answered from the residents' view angle. Usually, annual flood damage is used to quantify the economic impact of flood. However, as the estimation of flood-caused damage is affected by various uncertainties in methodology, the development of an indicator without ambiguity is needed for the assessment of flood management effectiveness. Moreover, annual flood damage is often the focus of researchers and administrators. The aim of this paper was to address the often-neglected question of what is the right perspective to better understand long-term changes in flood damage over time, and a related question of what perspective is most tangible to residents and can be used to promote public participation in flood risk management. Thus, the present work used Japan's flood damage data over the past several decades to analyze various flood damage indices and identify the ones that can be used to detect significant changes in flood impacts without uncertainty, which can also bridge science with residents. The main finding is that the number of flooded houses and semi-damaged houses divided by the annual inundated residential area fit for the purpose of the present study. Since house inundation is more tangible to residents than annual flood economic loss, the findings suggested that the resident-oriented indicator can better reflect the change in flood impact and promote residents' involvement in the building of coping capacity. In addition, the drivers for flood impact reduction in Japan were discussed and a framework for promoting citizen science for flood risk management was proposed. The overall value of the present work is that it has identified and attempted to fill the knowledge gap in flood impact assessment.

Indexed as

Disaster PlanningDisastersFloodsRisk ManagementHumansJapan

Identifiers

PMID40504835
PMCPMC12161554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.