Extreme events: a framework for assessing natural hazards

  • Franck MazasEmail author
Original Paper


The two-step framework for over-threshold modelling of environmental extremes proposed in Bernardara et al. (Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 14:635–647, 2014) for univariate analyses is generalized to an event-based framework applicable to multivariate analyses. The distinction between sequential values (temporal observations at a given time step) and the event-describing values (such as storm peaks in univariate Peaks-Over-Threshold extrapolations) is further detailed and justified. The classification of multivariate analyses introduced in Mazas and Hamm (Coast Eng 122:44–59, 2017) is refined and linked to the meaning of the concepts of event, sampling and return period that is thoroughly examined, their entanglement being highlighted. In particular, sampling is shown to be equivalent to event definition, identification and description. Event and return period definition are also discussed with respect to the source phenomena or to response (or structure) phenomena. The extreme event approach is thus proposed as a comprehensive framework for univariate and multivariate analyses for assessing natural hazards, seemingly applicable to any field of environmental studies.


Event Sampling Return period Extreme values Peaks-Over-Threshold Multivariate analyses 



This paper presents the true substance of nearly a decade of research at Artelia, gathered in a PhD on published works. Thus, many fellow researchers were involved in the slow development and understanding of this concept. Among them are in particular Dr Luc Hamm, who oversaw years of research and co-authored my papers. My thesis director Dr Nicole Goutal and the conscientious and benevolent rapporteurs Pr Eric Gaume and Dr Xavier Bertin helped a lot to improve the result. During these years, collaboration and discussions with researchers such as Pr Michel Benoit, Dr Pietro Bernardara, Dr Xavier Kergadallan, Dr Ivan Haigh and other young fellows played a major role to develop these ideas, not to mention many people met in conferences. Last, the reviewers certainly helped to very much improve the quality of this paper by their thorough review and relevant comments.


  1. Ancey C (2012) Are there “dragon-kings” events (ie genuine outliers) among extreme avalanches? Eur Phys J Spec Top 205(1):117–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernardara P, Mazas F, Kergadallan X, Hamm L (2014) A two-step framework for over-threshold modelling of environmental extremes. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 14:635–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blitzstein J, Hwang J (2014) Introduction to probability. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bulteau T, Idier D, Lambert J, Garcin M (2015) How historical information can improve estimation and prediction of extreme coastal water levels: application to the Xynthia event at La Rochelle (France). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 15:1135–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Callaghan DP, Nielsen P, Short A, Ranasinghe R (2008) Statistical simulation of wave climate and extreme beach erosion. Coast Eng 55:375–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cipriani T, Toilliez T, Sauquet E (2012) Estimation régionale des débits décennaux et durées caractéristiques de crue en France. La Houille Blanche 4–5:5–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coles SG (2001) An introduction to statistical modeling of extreme values. Springer, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dell’Agnese A, Mazzorana B, Comiti F, Von Maravic P, D’agostino V (2013) Assessing the physical vulnerability of check dams through an empirical damage index. J Agric Eng 44(1):2Google Scholar
  9. Det Norske Veritas (2010) Recommended practice: DNV-RP-C205 environmental conditions and environmental loads. Technical reportGoogle Scholar
  10. Favre AC, El Adlouni S, Perreault L, Thiémonge N, Bobée B (2004) Multivariate hydrological frequency analysis using copulas. Water Resour Res 40(1)Google Scholar
  11. Fuller WE (1914) Flood flows. Trans Am Soc Civ Eng 77(1):564–617.Google Scholar
  12. Galiatsatou P, Prinos P (2007) Bivariate models for extreme of significant wave height and period. An application to the Dutch coast. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IMA conference on flood risk assessment, 2007, Plymouth, Institute of Mathematics & Its Applications, pp 77–84Google Scholar
  13. Giloy N, Duluc CM, Frau R, Ferret Y, Bulteau T, Mazas F, Sauzeau T (2018) La base de données TEMPETES: un support pour une expertise collégiale et interdisciplinaire des informations historiques de tempêtes et de submersions. Presented at the XVèmes Journées Nationales Génie Côtier - Génie Civil, La Rochelle, France, 29–31 May 2018Google Scholar
  14. Goda Y (2010) Random seas and design of maritime structures, vol 33. World Scientific Publishing Company, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Goda Y (2011) Plotting-position estimator for the L-moment method and quantile confidence interval for the GEV, GPA, and Weibull distributions applied for extreme wave analysis. Coast Eng J 53:111–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goda Y, Kudaka M (2009) Bounded and unbounded distribution functions for extreme wave analysis. In: Proceedings of the Asian and Pacific coasts 2009, World Scientific, pp 8–14Google Scholar
  17. Haigh ID, Wadey MP, Gallop SL, Loehr H, Nicholls RJ, Horsburgh K et al (2015) A user-friendly database of coastal flooding in the United Kingdom from 1915–2014. Sci Data 2:150021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haigh ID, Ozsoy O, Wadey MP, Nicholls RJ, Gallop SL, Wahl T, Brown JM (2017) An improved database of coastal flooding in the United Kingdom from 1915 to 2016. Sci Data 4:170100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Haselsteiner AF, Ohlendorf JH, Wosniok W, Thoben KD (2017) Deriving environmental contours from highest density regions. Coast Eng 123:42–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hawkes PJ, Gouldby BP, Tawn JA, Owen MW (2002) The joint probability of waves and water levels in coastal engineering design. J Hydraul Res 40:241–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hawkes P, Gonzalez-Marco D, Sánchez-Arcilla A, Prinos P (2008) Best practice for the estimation of extremes: a review. J Hydraul Res 46(Extra Issue 2):324–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Holdgate MW (1979) A perspective of environmental pollution. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Hosking JRM (1990) L-moments: analysis and estimation of distributions using linear combinations of order statistics. J R Stat Soc 52:105–124Google Scholar
  24. Huseby AB, Vanem E, Natvig B (2013) A new approach to environmental contours for ocean engineering applications based on direct Monte Carlo simulations. Ocean Eng 60:124–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hyndman RJ (1996) Computing and graphing highest density regions. Am Stat 50(2):120–126Google Scholar
  26. JCGM (2012) Joint committee for guides in metrology: the international vocabulary of metrology—basic and general concepts and associated terms, 3rd edn, JCGM 200:2012Google Scholar
  27. Jonathan P, Flynn J, Ewans K (2010) Joint modelling of wave spectral parameters for extreme sea states. Ocean Eng 37(11–12):1070–1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kergadallan X (2015) Estimation des niveaux marins extrêmes avec et sans l’action des vagues le long du littoral métropolitain. Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris-EstGoogle Scholar
  29. Kinsman B (1965) Wind waves: their generation and propagation on the ocean surface. Courier Corporation, North ChelmsfordGoogle Scholar
  30. Lang M, Ouarda TBMJ, Bobée B (1999) Towards operational guidelines for over-threshold modeling. J Hydrol 225:103–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Leadbetter MR (1983) Extremes and local dependence in stationary sequences. Probab Theory Relat Fields 65:291–306Google Scholar
  32. Lehmann EL (1983) Theory of point estimation. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Li F, van Gelder PHAJM, Ranasinghe R, Callaghan DP, Jongejan RB (2014) Probabilistic modelling of extreme storms along the Dutch coast. Coast Eng 86:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mathiesen M, Goda Y, Hawkes PJ, Mansard E, Martin MJ, Peltier E, Thompson EF, Van Vledder G (1994) Recommended practice for extreme wave analysis. J Hydraul Res 32:803–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mazas F (2017) Evènements météo-océaniques extremes – Extreme meteo-oceanic events. Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris-EstGoogle Scholar
  36. Mazas F, Hamm L (2011) A multi-distribution approach to POT methods for determining extreme wave heights. Coast Eng 58:385–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mazas F, Hamm L (2017) An event-based approach for extreme joint probabilities of waves and sea levels. Coast Eng 122:44–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mazas F, Garat P, Hamm L (2014a) Questioning MLE for the estimation of environmental extreme distributions. Ocean Eng 92:44–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mazas F, Kergadallan X, Garat P, Hamm L (2014b) Applying POT methods to the revised joint probability method for determining extreme sea levels. Coast Eng 91:140–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Melby JA, Kobayashi N (1998) Progression and variability of damage on rubble mound breakwaters. J Waterw Port Coast Ocean Eng 124(6):286–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pickands J (1975) Statistical inference using extreme order statistics. Ann Stat 3:119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Piton G, Recking A (2015) Design of sediment traps with open check dams. I: hydraulic and deposition processes. J Hydraul Eng 142(2):04015045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Piton G, Recking A (2017) The concept of travelling bedload and its consequences for bedload computation of mountain streams. Earth Surf Process Landf 42(10):1505–1519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rickenmann D (2001) Comparison of bed load transport in torrents and gravel bed streams. Water Resour Res 37:3295–3305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rickenmann D, Koschni A (2010) Sediment loads due to fluvial transport and debris flows during the 2005 flood events in Switzerland. Hydrol Process 24:993–1007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rickenmann D, Badoux A, Hunzinger L (2016) Significance of sediment transport processes during piedmont floods: the 2005 flood events in Switzerland. Earth Surf Proc Land 41(2):224–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Serinaldi F (2015) Dismissing return periods! Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 29:1179–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith RL (1989) Extreme value analysis of environmental time series: an application to trend detection in ground-level ozone. Stat Sci 4:367–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sumer BM (2014) Liquefaction around marine structures. World Scientific, SingaporeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tawn JA, Vassie JM (1989) Extreme sea levels: the joint probabilities method revisited and revised. In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers, part 2, pp 429–442Google Scholar
  51. Van Vledder G, Goda Y, Hawkes P, Mansard E, Martin MJ, Mathiesen M, Peltier E, Thompson E (1994) Case studies of extreme wave analysis: a comparative analysis. In: Proceedings of the second symposium on ocean wave measurement and analysis, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, pp 978–992Google Scholar
  52. Volpi E, Fiori A (2014) Hydraulic structures subject to bivariate hydrological loads: return period, design, and risk assessment. Water Resour Res 50(2):885–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wahl T, Plant NG, Long JW (2016) Probabilistic assessment of erosion and flooding risk in the northern Gulf of Mexico. J Geophys Res Oceans 121(5):3029–3043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wallingford HR (2002) Risk, performance and uncertainty in flood and coastal defence: a review. SR 587, 2nd edn. H R Wallingford, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  55. Winterstein SR, Ude TC, Cornell CA, Bjerager P, Haver S (1993) Environmental parameters for extreme response: inverse FORM with omission factors. In: Proceedings of the ICOSSAR-93, Innsbruck, Austria, pp 551–557Google Scholar
  56. Yue S, Rasmussen P (2002) Bivariate frequency analysis: discussion of some useful concepts in hydrological application. Hydrol Process 16:2881–2898CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ArteliaÉchirollesFrance

Personalised recommendations