Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
12
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
12 results for “Flood protection”
Data: Cutting the costs of coastal protection by integrating vegetation in flood defences.
<p>File: levee_crest_height_reduction_per_country_version_July2021.nc<br>Fields: (1) Crest height reduction m per km along the populated coastline susceptible to flooding (return period = 100 years)<br> (2) Crest height reduction cost saving per country in million USD<sub>2005</sub> PPP along the populated coastline susceptible to flooding (return period = 100 years)<br> (3) Cost savings as percentage of GDP<sub>2005</sub> along the urban populated coastline susceptible to flooding (return period = 100 years)</p> <p>File: transectdata_version_July2021.nc<br> Transectdata of vegetated transects within the study area.<br>Fields: <br>(1) rps = return period <br>(2) fid = id of the transects<br>(3) centroids = coordinates of the transects<br>(4) inun = (1) in area susceptible to flooding<br>(5) urban = (1) in urban area, (0) not in urban area<br>(6) veg_width = derived coastal vegetation belt width along the foreshore<br>(7) veg_type = derived coastal vegetation type along the foreshore (1: salt marshes, 2: mangroves)<br>(8) hsig = Offshore significant wave heights (multiple return periods) corresponding to the transects<br>(9) wave period = Offshore peak wave period (multiple return periods) corresponding to the transects<br>(10) surge = Extreme water level combination of surge and tide (m +MSL) (multiple return periods)<br>(11) veg_z0 = elevation at the start of the vegetated zone (m +MSL)<br>(12) hrms_end_noveg = root mean square wave height at the end of the foreshore (without vegetation) (multiple return periods)<br>(13) hrms_endveg = root mean square wave height at the end of the foreshore (with vegetation) (multiple return periods) <br>(14) pdens_15km = population density derived using buffer of 15 kilometre radius</p>
Projections of the Timing of Decreasing Coastal Flood Protection
<p>This data set contains projections of the timing of decreasing coastal flood protection (i.e., projections of the timing of frequency amplifications of estimated flood protection standards) associated with Hermans et al. (in revision), The Timing of Decreasing Coastal Flood Protection Due to Sea-Level Rise. It contains the output of extreme value analysis of high-frequency GESLA3 tide gauge observations (daily maxima, generalized Pareto distribution fits and return curves), total AR6 sea-level projections interpolated to GESLA3 tide gauge locations, and the required sea-level rise for and the timing of frequency amplifications relative to estimated coastal flood protection standards (FLOPROS) or to the historical centennial event. Results are included for both automatically selected extremes thresholds and for a constant threshold of 98.8% at all locations.</p> <p>The manuscript that this data accompanies can be found at <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01616-5">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01616-5</a>.</p> <p>The code used to produce this data can be found at <a href="https://github.com/Timh37/TimingAFs">https://github.com/Timh37/TimingAFs</a>.</p> <p><strong>Required Acknowledgements and Citations</strong></p> <p>Users of this dataset are asked to cite:</p> <ul> <li>The manuscript that this dataset accompanies: Hermans, T.H.J., Malagón-Santos, V., Katsman, C.A. <em>et al.</em> The timing of decreasing coastal flood protection due to sea-level rise. <em>Nat. Clim. Chang.</em> <strong>13</strong>, 359–366 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01616-5</li> <li>Garner, G. G., T.H.J. Hermans, R. E. Kopp, A. B. A. Slangen, T. L. Edwards, A. Levermann, S. Nowikci, M. D. Palmer, C. Smith, B. Fox-Kemper, H. T. Hewitt, C. Xiao, G. Aðalgeirsdóttir, S. S. Drijfhout, T. L. Edwards, N. R. Golledge, M. Hemer, G. Krinner, A. Mix, D. Notz, S. Nowicki, I. S. Nurhati, L. Ruiz, J-B. Sallée, Y. Yu, L. Hua, T. Palmer, B. Pearson, 2021. IPCC AR6 Global Mean Sea-Level Rise Projections. Version 20210809. Dataset accessed [YYYY-MM-DD] at <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5914709">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5914709</a></li> <li>Tiggeloven, T., de Moel, H., Winsemius, H. C., Eilander, D., Erkens, G., Gebremedhin, E., Diaz Loaiza, A., Kuzma, S., Luo, T., Iceland, C., Bouwman, A., van Huijstee, J., Ligtvoet, W., and Ward, P. J.: Global-scale benefit–cost analysis of coastal flood adaptation to different flood risk drivers using structural measures, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 1025–1044, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1025-2020">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1025-2020</a>, 2020</li> </ul> <pre><code>R.E.K. was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) as part of the Megalopolitan Coastal Transformation Hub (MACH) under NSF award ICER-2103754. T.H.J.H., V.M.-S. and A.B.A.S. were supported by PROTECT. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 869304, PROTECT contribution number TBD.</code></pre> <p> </p>
Data for: How natural foreshores offer flood protection during dike breaches: An explorative flume study
<p>Data from an explorative flume study on dike breaches with foreshores. </p><p>1. Data from pressure sensors to obtain water depths at three locations within the flume.<br>2. Images from video material to analyse top view flume. </p><p>The data is described in the following publication:<br>van den Hoven, K., J. van Belzen, M.G. Kleinhans. D.M.J. Schot, J. Merry, J.M. van Loon-Steensma, T.J. Bouma. How natural foreshores offer flood protection during dike breaches: An explorative flume study. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 108560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2023.108560</p>
Flood protection and vulnerability estimates for Europe, 1950-2020
<p>This dataset provides estimates of flood protection levels and flood vulnerability at scale of 1422 subnational regions of 42 European countries over the period 1950–2020. Estimates are based on a set of vine-copula models quantified with data on flood impacts from the HANZE catalogue.</p> <p>The dataset contains two ZIP files with a total of five shapefiles, each containing a "Code" column with the code of the subnational region (based mainly on EU's NUTS3, v2010 classification) and other column estimates per each year between 1950 and 2020.</p> <ul> <li>NUTS3_Flood_Protection_coast: estimated flood protection level from coastal floods, as average return period in years between occurrence of significant flood impacts;</li> <li>NUTS3_Flood_Protection_riverine: as above, but for riverine floods;</li> <li>NUTS3_Vulnerability_Fat_comb: estimated actual fatalities from an hypothetical average flood, as % of potential impact under assumption of a static depth-fatality function and no flood protection within region (S-shaped function shown in Jonkman et al. 2008, <a title="Jonkman2008" href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9227-5">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9227-5</a>)</li> <li>NUTS3_Vulnerability_Pop_aff: estimated actual population affected from an hypothetical average flood, as % of exposed population under assumption of no flood protection within region</li> <li>NUTS3_Vulnerability_Eco_less: estimated actual direct economic loss (damage to assets) from an hypothetical average flood, as % of potential impact under assumption of static depth-damage functions (from Huizinga et al. 2017, <a title="Huizinga2017" href="https://doi.org/10.2760/16510">https://doi.org/10.2760/16510</a>) and no flood protection within region.</li> </ul> <p>Detailed methodology is explained in the underlying publication. Code and data to reproduce the results are also available on Zenodo (see "Related works").</p> <p>Data can be also viewed on <a title="Natural Hazards" href="https://naturalhazards.eu/">https://naturalhazards.eu/</a></p>
Archive Documents Covering Rhode Island Coastal Flood Protection (1954-2002)
<p>This is a repository of nearly 2000 primary and secondary documents covering the politics of coastal flood protection infrastructure projects form the 1950s through the end of the 20th century. Nearly all documents are from the 1950s and 1960s. They are in the form of mostly scans and photos and were collected from public and private archives between September and November 2019.</p> <p> </p> <p>Documents include internal memos, project-related materials, and newspaper clippings from the New England District of the USACE archived at the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration facility (Waltham, Massachusetts), personal papers from Congressman John E. Fogarty, Senator John Pastore, and Governor Dennis J. Roberts archived at Providence College, over three decades of newspaper articles on microfilm from the Providence Journal and Evening Bulletin archived at both the Rhode Island Historical Society and the Providence Public Library, and additional materials associated with the Fox Point Hurricane Barrier at the Providence City Archive (all Providence, Rhode Island).</p> <p> </p> <p>A selection of documents from this repository were used to reconstruct event sequences associated with the Fox Point Hurricane Barrier in Providence Rhode Island and the proposed (but never built) Narragansett Bay Hurricane Barrier.</p> <p> </p> <p>This selection of documents is in an organized folder tree, entitled "Rasmussen2022" and is used to support the arguments in a climate change adaptation study. As of February 2022, the study is under review with the Journal of Water Resources Policy and Management, "Coastal defense megaprojects in an era of sea-level rise: politically feasible strategies or Army Corps fantasies?", by D.J. Rasmussen, Robert E. Kopp, and Michael Oppenheimer.</p>
Survey instrument, data, and code for paper "Freihardt, Buntaine, Bernauer (2024): Choosing to protect: Public support for flood defense over relocation in climate change adaptation. Environmental Research Letters. DOI 10.1088/1748-9326/ad6781"
<p>This is the survey instrument, data, and code underlying the manuscript:</p> <p>"Freihardt, Buntaine, Bernauer (2024): Choosing to protect: Public support for flood defense over relocation in climate change adaptation. Environmental Research Letters. DOI 10.1088/1748-9326/ad6781"</p>
Data and code from: Spatial selection undermines flood protection in U.S. wetland markets
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Impact of a workshop with visualization and ethics discussion on awareness of flood risk and intent to protect
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data used to estimate the influence of habitat protection, habitat heterogeneity, and periodic flooding on species richness and abundance of waterbirds of the lower Paraná River, Argentina
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data Sets for Utilizing Graceful Failure as An Opportunity for Flood Mitigation Downstream to Protect Communities and Infrastructure
<p>This spreadsheet provides the volume analysis calculations associated with the project. This project focused on exploring the potential feasibility to utilize other locations along the inland waterway system where “graceful failure” or planned breach of levees may be used as a means of flood protection for downstream communities and infrastructure. Spatial analysis techniques were used with development of specific criteria to screen national-level data sets to identify probable locations for such mitigative approaches. The criteria were primarily focused on identifying non-urbanized, non-developed land where intentional flooding for storage of flood waters would minimize impacts. Each location that was identified as a potential candidate was further evaluated for capacity for flood water detention. A consolidated set of areas were identified that could provide some storage capacity for flood mitigation. Additional engineering and localized analysis would be necessary to vet the areas for actual storage implementation. However, this study provides an example of an unconventional approach to flood mitigation on inland waterways which could reduce the need for disaster response and assist in transportation planning during extreme flood conditions.</p>
Distribution records: Reconciling biodiversity conservation and flood risk reduction: the new strategy for freshwater protected areas
<p><span><strong>Aim:</strong> </span><span>Natural disaster risk reduction (DRR) is becoming a more important function of protected area (PAs) for current and future global warming. However, biodiversity conservation and DRR have been handled separately and their interrelationship has not been explicitly addressed. This is mainly because, due of prevailing strategies and criteria for PA placement, a large proportion of PAs are currently located far from human-occupied areas, and habitats in human-occupied areas have been largely ignored as potential sites for conservation despite their high biodiversity. If intensely developed lowland areas with high flooding risk overlap with important sites for biodiversity conservation, it would be reasonable to try to harmonize biodiversity conservation and human development in human-inhabited lowland areas. Here, we examined whether extant PAs can conserve macroinvertebrate and freshwater fish biodiversity and whether human-inhabited lowland flood risk management sites might be suitable to designate as freshwater protected areas (FPAs).</span></p> <p><span><strong>Location:</strong> </span><span>Across Japan</span></p> <p><span><strong>Methods:</strong> </span><span>We examined whether extant PAs can conserve macroinvertebrate and freshwater fish biodiversity and analyzed the relationship between candidate sites for new FPAs and flood disaster risk and land use intensity at a national scale across Japan based on</span><span> distribution data for 131 freshwater fish species and 1395 macroinvertebrate species.</span></p> <p><span><strong>Results:</strong> </span><span>We found that extant PAs overlapped with approximately 30% of conservation-priority grid cells (1 km<sup>2</sup>) for both taxa. Particularly for red-listed species, only one species of freshwater fish and three species of macroinvertebrate achieved the representation target within extant PAs.</span><span> Moreover, more than 40% of candidate conservation-priority grid cells were located in </span><span>flood risk and human-occupied areas for both taxa.</span></p> <p><span><strong>Main conclusions:</strong> </span><span>Floodplain conservation provides suitable habitat for many freshwater organisms and helps control floodwaters, so establishing new FPAs in areas with high flood risk could be a win-win strategy for conserving freshwater biodiversity and enhancing ecosystem-based DRR (eco-DRR).</span></p>
Distribution records: Reconciling biodiversity conservation and flood risk reduction: the new strategy for freshwater protected areas
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.