Springer Science Reviews
DOI 10.1007/s40362-017-0043-8
SYSTEMATIC STUDENT REVIEW
Do Remote Sensing Mapping Practices Adequately Address
Localized Flooding? A Critical Overview
Radek Malinowski1 • Geoffrey B. Groom2 • Goswin Heckrath1
Wolfgang Schwanghart3
Received: 12 August 2016 / Revised: 8 February 2017 / Accepted: 19 April 2017
Ó Springer International Publishing AG 2017
Abstract Local-scale flooding (LSF) is usually character-
ized by much less severe damage compared to extreme
flood events; however, it does have marked local envi-
ronmental influence, especially when it is characterized by
regular and frequent occurrence and long duration.
Knowledge about the spatial extent of flood-prone areas is
essential for flood risk and land management purposes,
spatial planning, or emergency response. Flood mapping
procedures have been supported by remote sensing for
several decades, and progress in remote sensing technology
and image processing over the last two decades has made
flood extent analysis possible at an unprecedented level of
detail. Here we provide an overview of applications of
remote sensing technologies for analyzing the extent of
flood events and discuss their applicability for LSF. We
report on applications of data from the optical visible and
reflective infrared spectrum, active microwave spectrum,
and airborne laser scanning technology. Additionally,
applications of elevation data supporting flood extent
mapping are reviewed. The review reveals that in general
remote sensing techniques and data types are likely to have
Endorsed by Goswin Heckrath.
& Radek Malinowski
radekmali@yahoo.com
Goswin Heckrath
goswin.heckrath@agro.au.dk
1
Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Blichers
Allé 20, Postboks 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
2 tern, Central, and Eastern Europe alone [29]. Thus, detailed
Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Grenaavej 14,
8410 Roende, Denmark
3 manage the risks that floods pose to human health, envi-
Institute of Earth and Environmental Science, University of
Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, 14476 Potsdam-Golm,
Germany
•
similar capabilities and limitations for analyzing LSF as
they have for extreme floods. However, data from many
current remote sensing sensors are inadequate for LSF
analysis, since very high spatial resolution data are required
for mapping localized flooding. Finally, airborne laser
scanning is found to be an emerging and promising tech-
nology in flood-related water surface analysis.
Keywords Flood  Inundation  Landsat  LiDAR  Remote
sensing  SAR
Introduction
Floods are one of the most serious extreme events in nat-
ure, occurring very widely on the Earth with a broad
spectrum of magnitudes, frequencies, and impacts.
Although floods also affect areas away from rivers (e.g.,
coastal flooding and storm-related urban flooding), inun-
dations associated with rivers are the major form of
flooding. Depending on the topographic setting and flood
magnitude, floods can be restricted to just a few hectares of
land, or may affect large swaths of land and evolve into
national or regional catastrophes (e.g., floods of the Danube
and the Elbe Rivers in 2002 and the Chao Phraya (Thai-
land) in 2011).
Despite advances in prevention, protection, and fore-
casting, floods have high socioeconomic costs. In the years
2000–2011, floods killed 970 people and generated an
estimated economic damage of *50 billion US$ in Wes-
knowledge of flood hazards is required to reduce and
ronment, and the economy [28]. Maps that indicate flood
extent aid flood risk management. Advances in flood
123

mapping will thus directly impact the work of authorities
and decision-makers in assessing and mitigating the
adverse effects of flood events and will contribute to
understanding and managing flood processes and impacts.
Remote sensing (RS) techniques for flood mapping have
been applied for several decades and complement or
replace traditional methods based on ground surveying.
Determining the extent of floods is usually based on the
detection of floodwaters. The distinctive spectral charac-
teristics of open water permit inundated land to be distin-
guished from other land cover types using either passive or
active RS systems. In contrast to ground surveying, the use
of RS in inundation analyses enables data acquisition on a
more regular basis, quicker and in areas that are remote or
inaccessible.
In recent years, several scientific articles have critically
reviewed RS applications in flood inundation mapping in
terms of floodwater extent and/or depth [11, 84, 87, 94, 99].
These works have been mainly focused on extensive
flooding events, and a distinct gap can be identified in RS
flood mapping reviews with regard to mapping small-scale,
localized flooding. Therefore, the main aim of this paper is
to review RS techniques, both passive and active, as well as
the use of digital terrain data, for their applicability to
mapping and modeling less extreme flood inundation cases,
which we refer here to as ‘‘local-scale flooding’’ (LSF).
LSF has previously been associated with meteorological
phenomena with small areal extent and short duration, such
as thunderstorms [41]. At variance with that space–time
domain-based definition, we refer to LSF as events char-
acterized by low inundation extents of 101 to 107 m2
covering low-lying topography that generates complex
spatial patterns of inundated and dry patches. These floods
are frequent, and their interaction with high groundwater
levels, lack of discharge of direct precipitation onto the
floodplain as well spring sapping at valley margins invoke
that these floods are often static and prolonged (Fig. 1)
[47]. Long-lasting inundation entails that LSF can cause
significant damages including loss of crops, disruptions of
Fig. 1 Local-scale flooding in the Nørreå River valley at Vejrumbro, Jutland, Denmark
123
Springer Science Reviews
transportation, and damage to property and possessions
which are associated with high economic costs [97]. In
addition, frequent and long-lasting LSF has a direct impact
on flora, fauna, and soil, leading to changes in habitat
characteristics and agricultural land suitability. Thus,
information about the extent and spatio-temporal patterns
of LSF may play a crucial role in decision-making pro-
cesses at administrative levels with respect to land use
planning, river management, emergency response plans
[28], and lowland agricultural and wetland habitat
management.
There have been many developments during the last two
decades in the availability of RS data and in their pro-
cessing methods. Data acquired by sensors with sub-meter
spatial resolution, such as IKONOS (launched in 1999) or
TerraSAR-X (2007) or new spectral bands available
through the recent very high spatial resolution (VHSR)
sensors, such as the WorldView-2 (2009), provide new
possibilities for image interpretation and raise the level of
details which can be achieved using data from satellite. A
great improvement has also been achieved through the
development and dissemination of techniques (e.g., laser
scanning and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) interfer-
ometry) that provide elevation data with sub-meter accu-
racy [71, 91]. In addition, new approaches to image
analysis, like object-based image analysis (OBIA), which
have seen substantial developments in the last decade,
provide new opportunities for obtaining more information,
especially from VHSR imagery [8]. We argue that these
recent advances are especially valuable for studying inun-
dation of highly heterogeneous, vegetated floodplain areas.
A specific objective of this review is to investigate
whether the existing RS techniques are relevant and
applicable to inundation analysis of areas which are often
predominated by floodplain vegetation that is only partly
submerged during flooding period. In addition, we aim at
identifying which types of RS techniques and spatial data
may be particularly appropriate for such studies. Therefore,
the reviewed literature contains examples of fluvial and
Springer Science Reviews
coastal flooding, wetlands monitoring, and various studies
related to water surface mapping in general.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows.
Section ‘‘Remote Sensing Approaches to Mapping Flood
Inundation’’ reviews RS approaches to flood mapping
according to the data type used, i.e., optical, radar, and
LiDAR. Section ‘‘Discussion’’ discusses the applicability of
the reviewed methodologies for LSF analyses. The con-
cluding section ‘‘Conclusions’’ indicates the challenges and
areas of future works related to LSF mapping activities.
Remote Sensing Approaches to Mapping Flood
Inundation
Our review updates and expands upon the earlier review by
Smith [94] who stressed the importance of medium and
high spatial resolution imagery obtained from visible/in-
frared sensors. Active remote sensing applications, such as
radar, were largely confined, at that time, to airborne sys-
tems. Although Smith [94] concluded that a combination of
optical and SAR data will be necessary for an effective
monitoring of inundation extent, the currently reviewed
literature (Table 1) shows that there are only a few studies
that have pursued synergy of these two types of data
[4, 33, 40, 89]. We consider that developments in sensor
technology and data processing during the last decade
necessitate a fresh review based upon studies reported
since those examined by Smith [94].
Applications of Optical Imagery for Inundation
Mapping
The pioneering work from the early 1970s on inundation
mapping using optical imagery, reviewed by Smith [94],
has undergone continued development, testing, and oper-
ationalization through the subsequent decades with the
widespread use of Landsat data.
The discriminatory power of the infrared bands for water
surface mapping [94] was corroborated by Frazier and Page
[32], who demonstrated the applicability of spectral bands of
the Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) sensor, in the near-,
short-, and mid-wavelength infrared parts of the electro-
magnetic spectrum, using density slicing and supervised
maximum likelihood classification (MLC) methods.
Progress has been made with the introduction of the
Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) [70] devel-
oped on TM data. The NDWI employs the reflected near-
infrared radiation and visible green light to enhance the
presence of open water features, while eliminating the
presence of soil and terrestrial vegetation features, utilizing
the formula (Eq. 1):
NDWI ¼ ðGREEN  NIRÞ=ðGREEN þ NIRÞ; ð1Þ
where GREEN and NIR are the reflectance values of
respective spectral bands of TM sensor. Water surfaces
have positive index values between 0 and 1, while land
surface and vegetation cover have negative values (be-
tween -1 and 0).
Since its development, the NDWI has been frequently
modified [49, 52, 61, 75, 101]. Jain et al. [49] used images
from the TM and IRS LISS III sensors to evaluate NDWI
discrimination performance against (1) density slicing of
band 4 of TM imagery and band 3 of IRS data, (2) the
wetness band of the Tasseled Cap Transformation (TCT)
(Eq. 2) [21], and (3) hydraulic modeling using digital
elevation model (DEM) and records from river gauge sta-
tions. The NDWI method provided the best results as other
methods were more significantly affected by mixed pixels
in the image data.
TCT Wetness ¼ 0:1509  BLUE þ 0:1793  GREEN
þ 0:3299  RED þ 0:3406  NIR
þ 0:3060  SWIR1  0:7112
 THERMAL0:4572  SWIR2;
ð2Þ
where BLUE, GREEN, RED, NIR, SWIR1, THERMAL,
and SWIR2 are the reflectance values of respective spectral
bands of TM sensor.
Xu [101] found that the NDWI fails in differentiating
between water features and built-up areas and developed
the modified NDWI (MNDWI). The MNDWI replaces the
NIR band (band 4) in Eq. 1 with the band 5 (SWIR) and
achieves superior performance compared to the NDWI
when applied to TM and Landsat Enhanced Thematic
Mapper Plus (ETM?) imagery. The higher performance of
MNDWI as compared to NDWI was also showed by Li
et al. [60] while tested on the spectral bands of Advanced
Land Imager (EO-1) sensor. Ouma and Tateishi [75]
modified the NDWI using the TM/ETM? bands SWIR and
NIR ((SWIR - NIR)/(SWIR ? NIR)). Combination of
their modified NDWI with the wetness band of the TCT
into the Water Index (WI) led to higher precision in
delineating water–land boundaries and shallow water. Lu
et al. [61] applied the NDWI to HJ-1B imagery. Combining
the NDWI with the Normalized Differentiated Vegetation
Index (NDVI), NIR band, and topographic slope informa-
tion enabled them to reduce misclassification of water with
shadowed and built-up areas. A validation showed that the
method performs well for large water bodies (reservoirs).
However, problems with detecting water surfaces of rivers
and ponds limit the method’s use for mapping small-scale
floodplain inundation. Feyisa et al. [31] developed the
Automated Water Extraction Index (AWEI). The AWEI
performs particularly well in shadowed and built-up areas,
123
 Springer Science Reviews

Table 1 The reviewed studies in which flooding or different types of water surfaces were mapped or modeled using remotely sensed and
topographic data
Methods applied

Spatial resolution (m)

Main data typed used

Analysis approach

Rule based/ knowledge

classifiers (e.g. CART)

Topography analysis
Data Transformation

Index based (NDWI,

Snake segmentation

Statistical classifier
based classification

Texture & context

Change detection

(e.g. PCA, HSV)

References

(e.g. MLC, NN,

Non-parametric
Mathematical

Thresholding
Sensor

morphology
AWEI, etc.)

Isodata)
Andresen et al. (2002) O Ikonos 4 OBIA ●
Antonarakis et al. (2008) L OBIA ●
Arnesen et al. (2013) SAR/ O ALOS/PALSAR, TM- 90, 30, OBIA ● ● ● ●
5, MODIS 250
Bates et al. (2006) SAR Airborne SAR-X, 1.2 PB ●
Brennan and Webster L OBIA ●
(2006)
Brivio et al. (2002) SAR/ ERS-1 12.5 PB ● ●
DEM
Brzank et al. (2008) L PointB ●
Burnett et al. (2003) O CIR 1:20K OBIA ●
Chormanski et al. (2011) O ETM+ 25 PB ● ● ●
Davranche et al. (2013) O SPOT-5 10 PB ● ●
De Roo et al. (1999) SAR ERS-1 / ERS-2 12.5 PB ● ●
Dissanska et al. (2009) O QuickBird, AP 0.6, OBIA ● ● ●
0.84
Feyisa et al. (2014) O TM-5 30 PB ● ●
Frazier and Page (2000) O TM-5 30 PB ● ●
Grenier et al. (2007) O/ SAR ETM+, Radarsat-1 30, ~25 OBIA ● ●
Hagg and Sties (1998) SAR Radarsat-1, ERS, TM- 7, 12.5, PB ● ● ●
5 30

Henry et al. (2006) SAR Envisat, ERS-2 12.5 PB ●

Heremans et al. (2003) SAR Envisat 12.5 OBIA ● ● ● ● ●
Herrera-Cruz et al. O/ SAR TerraSAR-X, ETM+ 3/18, 30 OBIA ● ● ●
(2009)
Höfle et al. (2009) L OBPA ● ●
Jain et al. (2005) O TM-5, IRS III 30, 23 PB ● ● ● ●
Lang and McCarty L PB ●
(2009)
Lu et al. (2011) O HJ-1A/B 30 PB ● ●
Malinowski et al. (2015) O WorldView-2 2 OBIA/PB ● ● ● ● ●
Malinowski et al. (2016) L PointB ● ●
Mallinis et al. (2011) O TM-5, Envisat ASAR 30, 30 OBIA ● ● ●
Mason et al. (2007) SAR/L/D ERS-1 12.5 PB ● ●
EM
McFeeters (1996) O MSS 60 PB ●
Nico et al. (2000) SAR ERS-1/2 12.5 PB ● ●
Ouma and Tateishi O TM-5, ETM+ 30 PB ● ●
(2006)
Pierdicca et al. (2008) SAR ERS-1 12.5 PB ● ● ●
Pulvirenti et al. (2011a) SAR COSMO-SkyMed 1 PB ● ● ●

Pulvirenti et al. (2011b) SAR COSMO-SkyMed 5 PB ● ● ● ●

Robertson et al. (2011) O/ SAR WorldView/2, 2, 30, 8 OBIA/ ● ●
TM-5, Radarsat-2 PB
Schäfer and Lundström SAR ERS-2, Envisat 12.5 PB ● ● ● ●
(2011)
Schumann et al. (2011) SAR/ O TerraSAR-X, Envisat, 3, ● ● ●
Radarsat-1, AP 150/25,
25, 1
Smeeckaert et al. (2013) L PB ● ●
Tuxen and Kelly (2008) O/DEM AP 0.2 OBIA ● ● ● ●
Wang (2002) DEM PB ● ●
Xu (2006) O TM-5 30 PB ●

AP aerial photography, ETM ? Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus, L LiDAR, MSS Landsat Multispectral Scanner System, NN nearest neighbor,
O optical, OBIA object-based image analysis, OBPA object-based point analysis, PB pixel-based, PointB point-based, TM Landsat Thematic Mapper

123
Springer Science Reviews
and in mixed pixels recognition. The AWEI consists of two
equations (Eqs. 3 and 4) and utilizes five spectral bands of
the TM sensor.
AWEInsh ¼ 4  ðGREEN  SWIR1Þ
ð3Þ
ð0:25  NIR þ 2:75  SWIR2Þ
AWEIsh ¼ BLUE þ 2:5  GREEN  1:5
 ðNIR þ SWIR1Þ  0:25  SWIR2; ð4Þ
where BLUE, GREEN, NIR, SWIR1, and SWIR2 are the
reflectance values of respective spectral bands of TM
sensor. The AWEI ranges between -1 and 1 with separa-
tion of water and non-water land covers at a threshold of 0.
The AWEInsh equation is designed to deal specifically with
built surfaces, while the AWEIsh more efficiently elimi-
nates shadowed areas. The AWEI was tested in a variety of
settings [31], and was shown to outperform MNDWI and
MLC.
Many studies augmented multispectral data from
Landsat sensors for water body delineation using advanced
processing and analysis techniques. Mallinis et al. [64]
used the Classification and Regression Trees (CART)
technique in an OBIA setting for processing pre- and post-
flood TM-derived MNDWI images to distinguish com-
pletely inundated areas and those covered by shallow dis-
persed pools of water on the transboundary area of the
Evros River. Chormanski et al. [15] mapped inundation on
the Biebrza River floodplain by applying MLC to a com-
position of images derived from bands of the ETM? sen-
sor: the moisture ratio (band 7/NIR), the NDVI, and the
first component of the principal component analysis (PCA).
A slightly different approach presented [22]. The
authors analyzed wetland inundation indirectly through the
vegetation canopy, assuming that the registered reflectance
of the canopy is dependent on the combination of the
presence of free water under the canopy, the plant water
content, and photosynthetic activity. Therefore, the authors
assumed that the spectral signatures of inundated vegeta-
tion should be reflected and possible to detect from spectral
bands of multi-temporal images (SPOT5) and various
vegetation indices calculated from them. The reported
relatively high efficiency of that method shows its potential
but also requires further testing in different environmental
settings [22].
VHSR sensors have made data available with spatial
resolutions that allow the derivation of inundation patterns
at large map scales. Dissanska et al. [27] investigated water
pools as an important feature of peatlands and indicator of
aqualysis progress. Pools were classified with OBIA
methods from two datasets: aerial photography and
panchromatic QuickBird imagery acquired with an interval
of almost 50 years. The segmentation and classification
process, which included textural and context-based (e.g.,
mutual relations of analyzed land cover classes) analyses of
the imagery with combination of membership functions
and a nearest neighbor classifier, provided results with a
high level of accuracy in areas of both deep and shallow
water.
An good example of application of VHSR data for
mapping of localized flooding was presented by Mali-
nowski et al. [62]. These authors followed assumptions of
Davranche et al. [22] and adopted their method to
WorldView-2 imagery additionally including OBIA
approach and topographic data, which led to achieving very
high overall accuracy of above 90%.
Examples of other studies in which water bodies were
mapped as a part of a wetland ecosystem include
[2, 13, 82, 96]. In each case, VHSR data (satellite or air-
borne) were processed using object-based approaches for
mapping standing (pools) or flowing (river) water. Also
Grenier et al. [34] developed procedures for classifying
shallow water among other wetland classes, with spectral,
context-based, and textural analyses combined in an object-
based approach, with data fusion of ETM ? and
RADARSAT-1 data.
Application of Microwave Imagery for Inundation
Mapping
Inundation patterns have been analyzed with both passive
and active microwave systems [23, 24, 94]. Since passive
systems provide low spatial resolution data (e.g., coarser
than 1 km), we refer only to active microwave systems
(i.e.,SAR).
Prior to the early 1990s, radar data were mostly acquired
by airborne platforms, but with the launches of long mis-
sion satellites such as ERS-1 (1991) and ERS-2 (1995),
JERS-1 (1992) and RADARSAT (1995), spaceborne radar
data began to be widely used, starting with single polar-
ization mode systems and followed with sensors operating
in multi-polarization modes (Envisat (2002), PALSAR
(2006), COSMO-SkyMed (2007), and Sentinel-1 (2014)).
The radar signal backscattered from an open water
surface is typically associated with low values in all bands
as a result of specular reflection (Figs. 2, 3). In contrast,
inundated vegetation (e.g., trees, reeds) produces higher
backscatter values, exceeding those from dry soil, owing to
a double-bounce effect. This effect occurs when the signal
is reflected first from the water surface and then from
upstanding vegetation, or vice versa (Figs. 2, 4). The
incidence angle influences the intensity of backscatter, and
generally the received energy is inversely proportional to
the incidence angle. In water surface analysis, however,
sensing at larger incidence angle is more suitable, because
it enhances the specular reflection [35, 79, 100]. Mapping
open waters or flooded areas covered by sparse vegetation
123

Fig. 2 Presentation of the characteristic behavior of radar backscat-
tering in interaction with a water surface. On the left, the specular
reflection effect resulting from radar radiation reflected away from the
sensor associated with a smooth water surface. In this case, only a
small amount of energy is backscattered toward the sensor resulting in
dark areas in the image. On the right, the mechanism of double-
bounce reflection is presented, in which the radar backscattering is
enhanced by the corner-reflection of microwave radiation between
water surface and vegetation (trees) stems. This results in very high
backscattering and bright areas in the image
can be accomplished using C- (approx. 5.5 cm wavelength)
and X- (approx. 3 cm wavelength) band data; however
inundation under a canopy is studied more efficiently using
L-band data, owing to the enhanced ability of longer
wavelengths to penetrate vegetation [51].
Co-polarization modes (HH, VV) should be preferred to
cross-polarization modes (HV, VH) for detecting inunda-
tion under vegetation [94] and authors report that with the
same wavelength and incident angle, inundated forests are
better analyzed by horizontal than vertical polarization
[79, 84, 92]. Henry et al. [38] confirmed the suitability of
HH polarization for analysis of water bodies in variable
land cover types.
Two techniques for deriving inundation maps from ERS
imagery were investigated by De Roo et al. [26]. The
authors compared the performance of a supervised MLC
with a statistical active contour technique (Snake) that
performs an image segmentation into regions of homoge-
neous speckle statistics [45]. Both methods resulted in
similar overall accuracies of around 80%; however, the
output of MLC required posterior manual corrections to
reach this accuracy level. A higher performance of the
Snake algorithm was observed when applied to a series of
four SAR images in study on flood dynamics of the Severn
River (UK) [7]. An estimated accuracy of 95% was
achieved due to the use of VHSR data (1.2 m) that pro-
vided additional fine scale details and a means to validate
the performance of a hydrodynamic flood inundation
model. The active contour method (with a modification
proposed by Chesnaud et al.) [14] for flood analysis was
evaluated against the result of an object-based classifica-
tion by Heremans et al. [39] using Envisat SAR data. In
both approaches, the analyses were conducted using two
images, presenting pre-flood and flooding conditions. The
123
Springer Science Reviews
Fig. 3 A scene of a COSMO-SkyMed X-band SAR image presenting
various types of water bodies in the form of dark areas as a result of
the specular reflection effect. COSMO-SkyMed Image ÓASI. All
rights reserved
approach based on OBIA consisted of multiresolution
segmentation [5] followed by classification of derived
segments using membership function. The flooded areas
were recognized by low backscattering values during the
flooding period and high value on the pre-flood image. The
active contour method was preceded by mathematical
morphology operations which automated the process of
finding initial polygons. After running the Snake algo-
rithms on both images, the resulting segments were sub-
tracted from each other in order to remove permanent water
objects. While the OBIA approach provided a very detailed
delineation of water bodies, the active contour segmenta-
tion resulted in a more generalized flood map. The gener-
alization in the Snake method was not regarded as a
negative result, since the larger polygons comprised the
open waters that were detected by OBIA and also inun-
dated vegetation [39].
Herrera-Cruz et al. [40] combined an object-based
approach with change detection analysis for the develop-
ment of a near-real-time automated method for flood extent
mapping. The procedure utilized during-flood-event Ter-
raSar-X data and pre-flood-event image data, including
optical imagery. A rule-based classification was carried out
on both datasets using a pattern of low mean backscattering
Springer Science Reviews

Fig. 4 A radar map of part of

the Amazon Basin, composed of
images acquired by JERS-1
satellite with representation of
the double-bounce effect of
radar backscattering. The upper
image represents a dry season
situation. The lower image is
from a wet season with
inundation depicted as light
gray areas due to radar
backscattering enhanced by the
double-bounce effect. The
permanent watercourses are
associated with low backscatter
(black) and forested areas with
mid-level backscatter (dark
gray). By courtesy of
earthobservatory.nasa.gov

values for the radar data and low mean reflectance in the
NIR spectrum, for optical imagery. A comparison of results
enabled the distinction between floodwater extent and
perennial water bodies.
Arnesen et al. [4] applied an object-based analysis with
L-band SAR data and ancillary data (e.g., TM, DEM) to
investigate floodplain inundation in the lower Amazon
River. A hierarchical, four-level classification provided
accuracies of inundation maps of 84 and 94% for low and
high water stages, respectively. The OBIA procedure used
results of an analysis of backscattering variation of dif-
ferent land cover classes under flooded and non-flooded
conditions (multi-temporal analysis) and different radar
incidence angles, and employed a decision tree algorithm
to define classification thresholds for backscattering
attributes.
Schäfer and Lundström [85] used an unsupervised
classification on 16 SAR images from ERS-2 and Envisat
sensors for mapping temporary flooding in Swedish
lowlands. From different methods tested, the best perfor-
mance was produced by ISODATA classification of a
synthetic color image, derived from hue, saturation, and
value transformation (HSV) into RGB space. First, the
mean ‘dry’ image, i.e., composition of images representing
dry periods, was subtracted from the image depicting the
flooding period. The resulting gray scale image was pro-
cessed by high- and low-pass filters. The HSV image was
derived from low-frequency information (hue), high-fre-
quency information (value), and fixed saturation level.
Despite a high overall accuracy of 85%, the approach
performed weakly when mapping inundation in forested
areas, thus highlighting the difficulties of C-band micro-
wave data in penetrating vegetation structure.
Nico et al. [72] tested the applicability of interferometric
coherence data to flood mapping. The radar signal ampli-
tude was supported by coherence data in analysis of pre-
and during-flood images. This procedure significantly
increased the predictive accuracy since the coherence is

123

lower between pairs of images of flooded areas for which
the dielectric constant and the surface roughness are
changed. Nevertheless, interferometric data should be
analyzed carefully since there can be other causes of low
coherence between images [1, 19, 46, 72].
Using a temporal sequence of images covering a flood
event enables the assessment of flood dynamics in space
and time [7]. Schumann et al. [89] studied flood dynamics
of an urbanized floodplain along the River Severn, UK,
using aerial photography and radar data with spatial reso-
lutions ranging from 1 to 150 m, and covering a six-day-
period after the flood peak in a combined analysis of flood
extent and stage. The extent of inundation was mapped by
visual interpretation from aerial photography, by a region-
growing algorithm for Envisat and Radarsat-1 data and by
an algorithm for urban flood extraction [68], which com-
bines the Snake and the region-growing technique, from
TerraSar-X data.
The constellation of COSMO-SkyMed (CSM) satellites
meets the requirements for conducting high-quality multi-
temporal analysis providing data with the same character-
istics in high temporal resolution. Pulvirenti et al. [80]
analyzed temporal variations in land inundation of a rural
landscape, during flooding of the Tanaro River, Italy by a
series of five VHSR CSM images taken within a period of
19 days. They proposed a processing chain of morpho-
logical operations and clustering procedures. This proce-
dure resulted in segments presenting multi-temporal
signatures which were analyzed according to their mean
backscattering coefficient. To fully use information from
the signatures, a model which simulates interactions of
radar energy with terrain objects was applied.
Hagg and Sties [35] combined inundation mapping from
SAR data (i.e., ERS-1 and RADARSAT) with fuzzy set
theory. Their approach used additional contextual infor-
mation which supported the change detection analysis of
images acquired, respectively, before and during a flood
event, in order to analyze changes in backscattering coef-
ficient caused by the presence of floodwaters. In addition,
fuzzy logic was used to include the assumption that there is
a decreasing probability of flooding with increasing dis-
tance from a river channel. This procedure improved
inundation classification results compared to simple
thresholding approaches.
Another approach using fuzzy logic and SAR data was
adopted by Pierdicca et al. [78]. Their analysis of ERS-1
SAR data was augmented by land cover/land use and
topographic data. Fuzzy sets were developed and included
the analysis of specular reflection from open water, inten-
sified backscattered signal caused by a double-bounce
effect from forested and urban areas, and elevation and
topography (slope, concavity) analyses. The authors
assessed the commission error to be in the order of 5%. The
123
Springer Science Reviews
approach presented by Pierdicca et al. [78] was refined
using CSM data by Pulvirenti et al. [81]. The authors
describe an automatic method developed as an operational
flood management system, which integrates SAR images,
land cover, and DEM datasets. Fuzzy logic was combined
with information generated by three electromagnetic scat-
tering models which simulated the SAR observations from
agricultural, forested, and urban areas under inundation
conditions. Additional conditions were introduced includ-
ing the vicinity to different types of water bodies (rivers,
lakes, etc.) as potential sources of flooding (cf. [35]. The
final defuzzification process, based on the Otsu threshold-
ing algorithm [74], differentiated flooded from dry areas.
A major achievement of the work by Pierdicca et al. [78]
and Pulvirenti et al. [81] has been the development of
methods capable of mapping open water and inundation in
densely vegetated (agricultural and forested) areas, which
is problematic with other mapping techniques. The tool
developed by Pulvirenti et al. [81] was examined for flood
case studies in Albania (January 2010) and elsewhere [79],
and was shown also to cope with shaded areas which are
very often misclassified as flooded on both radar and
optical images.
Application of LiDAR Data for Inundation Mapping
Airborne laser scanning (ALS), also known as airborne
LiDAR (Light Detection And Ranging), which provides
data in the form of a point cloud (i.e., set of data points
with known coordinates) [73], is not a new technology but
its commercial and wide use started only in the early 1990s
[77]. Despite numerous LiDAR applications in forestry,
urban mapping, and DEM generation [10, 48, 53, 57], its
use for inundation analysis is not yet fully explored, and
only few studies have highlighted the potential of LiDAR
for mapping water surfaces [3, 12, 44, 58]. Since LiDAR
systems mostly use the near-infrared spectrum, the ampli-
tude of recorded energy backscattered from the water
surface is reduced by water absorption (Fig. 5). Low
intensity LiDAR signals from water bodies allow for dif-
ferentiating them from other surfaces. If most of the energy
is absorbed by water, the returning laser pulse is too weak
to be recorded by the receiver and thus no return is regis-
tered, resulting in laser dropouts [44] (Fig. 5). Dropouts
can also result from specularly reflected laser pulses from
smooth water surface, especially in higher incidence
angels, leading to a reflection of the pulse away from the
receiver. Hence, water surfaces are characterized by lower
point cloud density than other surfaces [12]. Low intensity
signals and dropouts of LiDAR data thus provide useful
information for water surface mapping. In general, there
are two main approaches to water surface mapping from
ALS data; one approach is based on raster datasets derived
Springer Science Reviews
Fig. 5 LiDAR intensity image derived from LiDAR point cloud data
by interpolation of the intensity values, the Nørreå River valley,
Jutland, Denmark. The blue area, in the image, represents locations of
laser dropouts (no laser pulse returns detected). The dark area (e.g.,
located around dropouts) indicates low amplitude value. Both
phenomena are fundamental characteristics of LiDAR data, enabling
detection of the water presence
from LiDAR and the second comprises methods operating
on point cloud data directly.
Antonarakis et al. [3] and Brennan and Webster [9]
examined the use of LiDAR in a land cover classification
context using object-based approach. The authors separated
open water bodies from other land cover classes using the
mean intensity value of segmented rasterized data. In the
latter study, the intensity data were supported by the veg-
etation height model (difference between DSM and DTM).
In both approaches, water was classified with very high
accuracy of above 95%. The rasterized data were also used
in other studies, which focused directly on water detection.
For example, the classification by the Support Vector
Machine algorithm was evaluated for large-scale mapping
of water-covered areas [93] using purely LiDAR geometric
data, i.e., point height, point density, and 3D distribution of
points (based on eigenvalue measures). The method being
designed for mapping water areas mainly on a
regional/national scale fails, however, to recognize water
surfaces in water-logged areas. Lang and McCarty [58]
used rasterized LiDAR intensity data for mapping inun-
dation in a forested area. By using the histogram thresh-
olding of the LiDAR intensity values, the authors managed
to map inundation under a forest canopy with a high
accuracy. However, the authors used data acquired in leaf-
off conditions; thus, limitations can be expected when
applying that method to data representing a growing
season. In another study, LiDAR was used for mapping
open water areas in an Arctic region [20]. Authors per-
formed decision tree classification using different deriva-
tives from geometric and intensity LiDAR data to derive
highly accurate maps of water extent.
There are only a few studies in which water surface was
analyzed from LiDAR point cloud data directly. Brzank
et al. [12] used height, intensity, and 2D point density
attributes of LiDAR points with fuzzy logic method to
accurately (*90%) distinguish water bodies from mudflats
in the Wadden Sea coastal wetlands. The method was
further developed by Schmidt et al. [86] with the condi-
tional random field classifier. This was the first study that
used the full-waveform LiDAR attribute, the echo width, to
map water objects and supported the three point features
used by Brzank et al. [12]. The performance of these
methods stays, however, questionable in vegetated areas.
Höfle et al. [44] analyzed reaches of two mountainous
rivers and developed a region-growing approach to seg-
ment the 3D point cloud and, in a subsequent step, to
classify the segments into water class using point features
such as elevation, intensity, intensity density, intensity
variation, and roughness. The processing chain also
included modeling of the laser dropouts, which were sub-
sequently used in segmentation together with registered
laser echoes. This method also successfully mapped a
water-covered area below a tree canopy, and demonstrated
the potential of LiDAR data to map water on vegetated
areas.
In the latest study, Malinowski et al. [63] presented a
detailed analysis of the interaction between laser pulses and
water surfaces with varying vegetation cover. The resulting
information was used for classification of laser points into
flooded and non-flooded classes by applying three machine
learning techniques, AdaBoost with Decision Tree, Naı̈ve
Bayes, and Random Forest. All three methods received the
best accuracy of flooding extent maps when radiometric
and geometric point features were combined, reaching
nearly 90% of the overall accuracy. This study demon-
strated the potential of radiometrically calibrated ALS data
to detect water surfaces on areas with limited water surface
exposition through the vegetation canopy.
Terrain and Image Data Integration for Inundation
Analysis
DEMs are often integrated in image data processing chains
to support analysis of flooding events or flood-prone areas.
Examples include the studies of Pierdicca et al. [78] and
Pulvirenti et al. [81] who coupled DEM derivatives (ele-
vation, slope, and concavity) with SAR and LC/LU data.
Mason et al. [67] combined LiDAR DEMs with SAR data
(ERS-1) to increase the accuracy of high-resolution,
123

waterline mapping. The introduction of height data to SAR
image processing by the Snake algorithm permitted a 3D
analysis in which the more elevated areas with low
backscatter values similar to water could be discriminated
as dry land with higher accuracy.
Brivio et al. [11] used a DEM in an analysis of flood
extent at a receding floodwater stage. Since remote sensing
imagery (SAR) was acquired a few days after the flood
peak, it only enabled detection of the residual flooded
areas. To estimate the maximum area inundated during the
flood peak, a least accumulative cost-distance analysis was
conducted. The cost matrix was designed to account for the
cost of water movement from one cell to another and
included a weighting scheme of vertical (slope gradient)
and horizontal (surface roughness) factors. This approach
integrated DEM and SAR data in a spatial analysis and
provided a high level of coincidence (over 96%) with the
reference data derived from field survey.
Wang [99] integrated elevation data in an inundation
analysis with river stage records obtained from a gauging
station network. The author used topographic data and
combined them with pre-flood and during-flood records
from three gauging stations for a flood simulation along a
78-km reach of the Tar/Pamlico River, USA. After inter-
polating the water level data for areas along the river
between gauging stations, the heights of the water during
low flow and during the flooding period and the heights of
surrounding lands were compared, enabling the discrimi-
nation of inundated areas, non-inundated areas, and regu-
lar/permanent water bodies. Reliable and accurate
estimation of the inundation extent was observed based on
comparison with aerial photography and field data. This
clearly demonstrated the potential of the approach in sce-
nario-based analyses for flood forecasting. However, this
approach oversimplifies the hydrodynamics of the flood
wave and is highly data driven; therefore, it may fail if
sparsely located gauging stations are available, limiting its
usage to large-scale applications.
Elevation data have been frequently used to improve
flood mapping and parameterization of hydrodynamic
models. In addition, when combined with flood extent data
(e.g., mapped from remotely sensed data), it enables esti-
mation of other flood parameters such as water depth or
volume [7, 89, 102]. LiDAR-derived DEMs should there-
fore improve the accuracy of flood analysis products and
facilitate accurate analysis of LSF.
Discussion
The growing frequency of flood events in Europe [6]
increases public interest in flood and river management for
which flood inundation maps play a crucial role
123
Springer Science Reviews
[25, 28, 30]. RS data have gained importance for flood
extent mapping; and technological advances in sensor
technology, new methods for image processing, and inte-
gration of different data products now enable that RS can
be directly applied for the analysis of LSF. However, most
methods described previously (see Table 1) fail to perform
equally well in different environmental settings. We will
discuss selected approaches and suitability of RS tech-
nologies (summary in Table 2) for mapping LSF patterns
below.
Optical Imagery and the Landsat Series
Data from optical sensors have played a crucial role in
flood analyses in the past and are still widely used today.
The Landsat series, in particularly, is important owing to its
nearly 40-year active history, now being continued with the
initiation of the Landsat Data Continuity Mission (LDCM)
[59].
Optical RS data are widely used because of their ease of
availability, pre-processing, and visual interpretation of
data, allowing for quick and straightforward information
retrieval. Spectral indices such as the NDWI enable
detection of inundated surfaces [70] and support informa-
tion retrieval since the bands required to calculate the
NDWI are commonly available with RS systems, including
VHSR RS systems. Modified indices such as the MNDWI
or AWEI may have precluded more widespread application
in LSF mapping since the required spectral bands are
available from only few sensors with medium and high
spatial resolution (e.g., TM, ETM?, SPOT 4 and 5). The
exception is the Worldview-3 sensor (launched 13th
August 2014) that overcomes these limitations providing
numerous spectral bands from SWIR spectrum at 3.7-m
spatial resolution and enabling to calculate water-related
indices with high level of details. Moreover, due to avail-
ability of multiple spectral bands in many optical RS sys-
tems, they deliver additional information from which
floodwater quality, sediment content, and characteristics of
floodplain vegetation associated with LSF events can be
inferred [66].
Despite their longstanding tradition in flood mapping,
Landsat data and similar optical imagery have various lim-
itations particularly in LSF analyses. These include the
inability of optical sensors to penetrate clouds, limiting their
use in situations where acquisition is restricted to short
periods or where ad hoc information on rapidly changing
flood dynamics is required. Thus, data from optical sensors
are more valuable for mapping long-term inundation patterns
and may provide valuable input for LSF.
The inability of optical RS data to penetrate the vege-
tation canopy, even during leaf-off periods, limits its use in
inundation analysis at any scale, including LSF. Inundation
Springer Science Reviews
Table 2 The main advantages and disadvantages of different type of remote sensing data in LSF mapping
Data type Advantages
Optical Possibility for calculating spectral indices (e.g., NDWI)
imagery Richness of data/information (spectral)
Ease of visual interpretation
SAR data Measurement independent on weather and sun illumination
Provides specific backscattering in relation to water presence
(e.g., specular reflection and double-bounce)
Depending on available band possibility for vegetation
penetration
LiDAR Independent on sun illumination
data Independent on weather conditions if acquisition not
combined with optical imagery
Very precise measurement
Possibility for very dense sampling
High rate of vegetation penetration
Possibility for bathymetric measurement with dual-
wavelength systems
Elevation Provides important information for hydrological analysis
data (terrain gradient)
Useful in differentiation between water-covered and
vegetated areas
maps derived from optical data tend to underestimate
inundation extents, because inundation in forested areas or
under agricultural crops often remains undetected. Flood-
plains are often covered with natural and semi-natural
vegetation or agricultural crops, and methods to minimize
the impact of vegetation cover on flood detection are cru-
cially needed. However, studies by Chormanski et al. [15
and Thomas et al. [95] show that mapping of some types of
inundated vegetation is possible.
According to Hengl [37], a spatial resolution finer than
10 m is the optimal for mapping at local scale (i.e., larger
than 1:25,000) as used in land use planning and manage-
ment at local level [30]. Coarser spatial resolutions may
introduce uncertainties since different features that should
be distinguished in mapping LSF are spatially aggregated
in a mixed pixel. Hence, much of the detail required when
mapping local floodplain or wetland inundation can only be
resolved by VHSR aerial photography or satellite imagery
with pixel sizes below 5 m [89], particularly if the data are
to be used for validation of dynamic flood models based on
high spatial resolution DEM data. Some of the limits of
low spatial resolution of optical imagery may be overcome
by spectral unmixing (sub-pixel analysis) [56] and use of
hyperspectral data. These methods could potentially solve,
to some degree, the problem of mixed pixels appearing in
areas of high land cover heterogeneity (mainly mix of
water, vegetation, and soil in the case of LSF).
Disadvantages
Highly dependent on weather conditions, inefficient if ad hoc
acquisition necessary (cloudiness)
Small number of sensors with broad range of spectral bands and
VHSR
Relatively low temporal resolution of sensors with VHSR
Impenetrable through closed vegetation canopy
Efficiency of water detection dependent on weather conditions
(wind and rain make water surface rough)
Less intuitive interpretation of data
Problem with speckle noise that may be mistaken for irregular
distribution of water and vegetation in the case of LSF
Mostly limited to measurement with one wavelength
Acquisition limited to airborne platforms; inefficient if ad hoc
acquisition necessary
Lack of highly detailed elevation models for many locations
The development in recent decade of OBIA methods
complements the pixel-based approaches for LSF mapping
with VHSR image data. One of the advantages and chal-
lenges with OBIA is the ease of integration of data from
different sources such as VHSR images, DEMs, and vector
information [2, 62, 96] and application of fuzzy set theory
[13, 64, 96]. The integration of different data sources has
been one of the main endeavors over the last decade
[34, 62, 96] and has successfully reduced the method-
ological limits inherent in using optical data alone.
SAR Data Application
SAR RS has the advantage over optical RS systems in that
being active, it has its own energy source and is thus able to
operate independent of daylight. Radar sensors operate
largely independent of weather conditions. Thus, even
during prolonged wet periods and with persistent cloud
cover, radar sensors provide imagery for inundation map-
ping, a distinct advantage that underlies that SAR RS has
been established in operational use for rapid mapping of
flooded areas [40, 79], enabling quick estimation of flood
extent and risk analysis.
Progress in recent years includes systems operating as
satellite constellations (e.g., CSM and the TerraSAR-X
systems) providing image data of similar radar modes and
spatial resolutions at daily or even hourly intervals, a feat
123

rarely achieved by optical sensors [79–81]. This enables
frequent observation of flood stages and monitoring and
analysis of associated hydraulic and geomorphic processes.
Radar data have thus become invaluable for relief efforts
during extreme flood events. Considerably improved spa-
tial resolution of SAR images (\1 m) from the newer
systems (e.g., CSM, TerraSAR-X) is important for LSF
analysis since it enables the spatial details of the floodplain
environment to be extracted.
A major issue with SAR data is the specular reflection
effect which is fundamental in inundation mapping, but is
affected by a rough water surface generated by wind or
rain. Wave influence on the backscattered signal is reduced
by the application of longer wavelengths such as L-band
(approx. 24-cm wavelength) (available e.g., from the
PALSAR-2 sensor), which is much less sensitive to small
waves [1], typical for water extents with limited fetch, such
as LSF.
Emerging plants reduce specular reflection, and the
application of a change detection analysis helps to interpret
this phenomenon: the double-bounce effect significantly
increases the backscattered signal during flooding when
compared to dry conditions. Combining the images taken
during dry and wet conditions enables detection of water
below vegetation cover. However, such analysis is com-
plicated, since the double-bounce effect is dependent on
various factors such as sensor parameters and vegetation
characteristics. The double-bounce effect is enhanced for
tall ([1.5 m) and dense vegetation, but is less apparent for
small herbaceous plants [92], resulting in, that it is easier to
analyze inundated forest than floodplain grasslands, limit-
ing its applicability in LSF analyses.
Owing to better vegetation penetration with longer
wavelengths, systems operating with the L-band will be
more efficient in studies of vegetated areas [4]. The new
PALSAR-2 sensor (launched on ALOS-2 satellite on 24th
May 2014) with full polarization capability and improved
spatial resolution (1.0 m azimuth and 3.0-m range resolu-
tion) [55] may greatly support and improve inundation
analysis of vegetated areas, assuring a high level of detail,
as required in LSF studies.
A particular drawback of SAR RS data is the speckle
noise effect, a random pattern of bright and dark pixels [51]
that may be reduced by filtering algorithms [88, 102].
While speckle noise may be less problematic during
mapping of large swaths of inundated land, clear separation
of noise and highly variable inundation patterns of LSF
may not always be possible. Data patterns, similar to those
associated with radar speckle, of neighboring bright and
dark pixels may also be related to the distribution of water
and vegetation.
The incidence angle and the polarization mode are two
additional parameters of radar data. While the former
123
Springer Science Reviews
influences the strength of the backscatter value and
mechanisms of specular reflection and double-bounce, the
latter helps to highlight certain land cover classes (e.g., HH
polarization preferred for water surface analysis [38]. Thus,
by the selection of data from sensors with multiple polar-
ization modes and adjustable look angle, such as several of
the current radar sensors provide, it is possible to config-
ure acquisitions to fulfill flood inundation analysis
requirements. The current acquisition configuration possi-
bilities of SAR RS are well suited for LSF since the longer
duration that is often a feature of LSF renders its analysis
less reliant upon rapid data acquisition.
Water Mapping with LiDAR Data
The use of LiDAR data for mapping water surfaces is still
in its infancy. However, recent developments suggest that
LiDAR may become an important tool in flood and water
surface analyses, including LSF, using both intensity and
elevation data. The high water absorption of the NIR
energy results in reduced intensity of the reflected laser
pulse or missing signal returns (dropouts). These response
patterns are indications of the presence or absence of water
and aid the delineation of water bodies. Besides high data
accuracy and precision, one of the major advantages of
LiDAR is the ability of a laser pulse to penetrate the
vegetation canopy, enabling both precise DEMs to be
generated and the detection of water surfaces in areas
covered by vegetation [44]. Owing to the small size of a
laser footprint, spectral information is integrated over much
smaller areas than is the case of typical optical RS and
radar RS systems. Spatial aggregation of spectral infor-
mation is thus reduced. Nonetheless, the LiDAR penetra-
tion ability may fail when vegetation is extremely dense
and data are acquired during the leaf-on period [63].
Similarly to passive optical RS, LiDAR is better suited
for analysis of long-lasting LSF than short-duration
extreme flood events. This is because LiDAR surveys
require careful planning and are currently limited to air-
borne platforms. An airborne laser survey cannot be effi-
ciently used for rapid mapping and analyses of extensive
flooding as the spatial extent is currently constrained by
high flight costs. A large number of flight lines may be
necessary during a LiDAR survey to cover large flood-
plains, while just one scene from a satellite RS system may
suffice to cover the same extent. A LiDAR survey also
requires good weather conditions, especially if it is
undertaken, as is often the case, together with the acqui-
sition of optical imagery, which precludes data acquisition
during rainy or cloudy periods that are typical during or
just after a flood occurrence.
An important aspect in LiDAR data processing is the use
of direct point cloud analysis [12, 44, 63], instead of
Springer Science Reviews
converting it to different surface layers (e.g., DEMs,
intensity map, and density map) [3, 93]. The former assures
use of original point data without the need for LiDAR data
rasterization, whereas rasterization of point cloud data
requires interpolation, which introduces additional uncer-
tainties to the data. A particular form of point cloud anal-
ysis is the recently developed object-based point cloud
analysis approach [42, 83]. This new techniques are
adapted to the complex geometry of point clouds and are
thus able to extract contextual information from analyses of
larger spatial units (objects) [44, 83].
Developments in LiDAR data acquisition include
attempts to standardize radiometric correction procedures
to ensure the availability of high-quality data representing
values proportional to surface reflectance [43, 54, 98], and
thereby better suited to the extraction of different features
including water bodies. New types of LiDAR, such as full-
waveform, require further investigation of how they sup-
port flood mapping, particularly in the presence of inun-
dated short vegetation such as that found on grassy
floodplains [63]. Additional developments in LiDAR
technology are dual-wavelength and multispectral sensors
[16, 36] which may provide better distinction between
water and other features such as vegetation (e.g., use of the
Normalized Difference LiDAR Vegetation Index) [16].
Finally, it is crucial to mention applications of bathy-
metric LiDAR. Although the main application of such
technology is to measure topography of a water body
bottom (e.g., river- or coastal seabed), it may also be used
to derive the extent and elevation of the water surface [65].
Miscellaneous Issues
A common problem in flood mapping using RS techniques
is the presence of shaded areas in the image [49, 61, 64],
which affects both optical and radar RS. Shadows are
caused by topographic relief, high vegetation, buildings, or
clouds and appear as dark areas in an image with a low
digital number values that are easily confused with inun-
dated areas, e.g., a low backscattered value or a low
response in NIR bands from water surfaces. The NDWI is
an example of a data processing method that is often
adversely affected by shadowing leading to overestimation
of flood extent. This problem is partly solved by the
incorporation of elevation data or DEM derivatives (e.g.,
slope and standard deviation) together with the analysis of
the solar incidence angle [61, 64]. For optical data, the
problem can be minimized using the newly developed
AWEI [31], if the required spectral bands are available.
Most RS techniques perform best when mapping open
water bodies with no protruding vegetation, yet accurate
mapping is challenging in forested areas or areas with short
grassy or aquatic vegetation. In such case, a ‘‘divide and
conquer’’ strategy have been found adequate, in which
different classes related to flood inundation (shallow and
deep water, submerged vegetation, short vegetation, inun-
dated forest) are analyzed separately [62]. This strategy can
be effectively applied with the use of OBIA hierarchical
structuring [2]. Mapping precision may be additionally
increased by a combination of different sources and types
of data such as multispectral optical and radar data or
DEMs [62].
The lack of detailed temporal and spatial coverage of
flooding events is one of the major drawbacks in inundation
mapping using RS. A high temporal resolution is especially
important when very dynamic floods are analyzed. It may
however be also important for LSF, despite its rather pro-
longed character, when floods occur on flat areas and the
area under water may change rapidly even with small
changes in water stage. The availability of data with a pos-
sible revisit interval of less than 12 h (e.g., the CSM radar
system) enables the stages of a flood event to be monitored,
thus leading to a better understanding of flood dynamics.
The application of optical data will particularly benefit from
short revisit intervals due to the increased likelihood of
acquiring image data during cloud-free periods. An impor-
tant change to this situation is the launch of Copernicus
Program [18], which is based on several constellations of
satellites carrying SAR and optical sensors, called Sentinels.
With 5-m spatial resolution of Sentinal-1 data (SAR
instrument) and 10–20 m spatial resolution of Sentinel-2
multispectral imagery, the Copernicus provides satellite
imagery with the highest spatial resolution under fully free
and open access policy. Even though such data do not come
with VHSR recommended for LSF analysis, the free access
and the very high temporal resolution with revisit planned
for every 6 and 5 days for Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2,
respectively, cause that Sentinel data have a chance to
become soon an extremely valuable data source for different
environmental studies, including flood mapping at local
scale. This, however, needs to be verified with due research.
The need of a short revisit interval may be also
addressed by application of rapidly developing technology
of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) [76]. Such tech-
nology enable ad hoc acquisition of data with high tem-
poral resolution and additionally VHSR in the centimeter’s
range. Moreover, application of UAVs makes it possible to
utilize different sensing equipment including optical,
thermal, radar, and LiDAR sensors or even combination of
them. Application of this technology may assure high
accuracy of measurement and acquisition of data also
during cloudy period while flying below the cloud level.
Therefore analysis of LSF may benefit from UAV systems
by overcoming problems met by spaceborne sensors such
as cloud cover, closed vegetation canopies, inefficient
temporal resolution, and viewing angle [90].
123

A crucial issue in flood inundation studies is the lack of
good reference data on which to base method assessments
[17, 69]. Reference data need to be appropriate for the
given problem, meaning having relevant purpose, spatial,
temporal, and semantic relationships [50]. However, get-
ting good reference data of a flood situation (including
LSF) is challenging. The water cover may change rapidly
and may include situations where the meaning of ‘‘the
water extent’’ is ambiguous, for example, where open
water grades to dry ground through zones of more or less
saturated soil or areas with numerous small water pools. As
in all fieldwork related to RS, objective and exe-
cutable sampling and data collection protocols need to be
established and followed. Fieldwork in a flood situation can
also be hazardous. Thus, visual interpretations of other
image data often have to serve as ‘‘best substitute’’ for field
acquired reference data. This can have the bonus of
obtaining reference data from a larger portion of the study
area than could be possible to cover in a timely way by
field survey. However, the more interpretative character of
such reference data must be accounted for in its use in
method assessment.
Conclusions
The usefulness of various remote sensing (RS) methods for
analyzing local-scale flooding (LSF) has not been widely
discussed in the literature. Mapping and modeling of LSF
requires highly detailed RS data to analyze the heteroge-
neous landscape of riverine lowlands composed of different
vegetation types (natural, semi-natural, and arable plants)
and water bodies both open and partially covered by veg-
etation. This requirement is particularly met by very high
spatial resolution (VHSR) data made available by the
developments in RS technologies during the last decade.
However, there are only few published applications of
VHSR data for water body mapping (especially regarding
optical data), which are mainly related to wetlands moni-
toring or land cover/land use classification, rather than
flood mapping. Studies that have focused on water body
mapping have demonstrated that indices based on optical
remote sensing spectral bands alone and in synergy with
synthetic aperture radar image data and/or auxiliary data
(e.g., elevation, land cover) can map flooding extent.
However, the presence of higher, dense vegetation and the
availability of image data relative to the flood event can
condition the accuracy and usefulness of the RS solutions.
Most of the published studies have been mainly con-
cerned with large flooding events in situations without
marked vegetation cover, and mapping LSF of vegetated
floodplains with RS technologies is still rather unexplored.
With flooding events expected to become much more
123
Springer Science Reviews
prevalent in a changing climate, testing various VHSR data
processing methods on localized floods ought to be
advanced in the future. Also, in the complex landscapes of
riverine lowlands, the fusion and combination of various,
often complementary data types (e.g., optical, radar, Light
Detection And Ranging (LiDAR), and digital elevation
model), is likely to increase the efficiency of mapping LSF
and should be more widely explored.
Applications of LiDAR data present a recent and
exciting avenue in inundation analysis, especially those
based on the use of LiDAR radiometric characteristics.
LiDAR owes its great potential for mapping LSF to its high
spatial detail, precision, and ability to penetrate vegetation.
Hence, the use of LiDAR for flood mapping will certainly
be developed in the coming years, potentially comple-
menting or replacing other RS techniques to some degree.
Multispectral LiDAR sensors are particularly worth
exploring for achieving a better differentiation between
water surfaces and other landscape features.
Acknowledgements The funding of this work for Radosław Mali-
nowski, Geoff Groom and Goswin Heckrath, by aresearch grant from
the Danish AgriFish Agency is gratefully acknowledged (Grant Num-
ber: 923063).Wolfgang Schwanghart acknowledges the support by the
Potsdam Research Cluster for GeoriskAnalysis, Environmental Change
and Sustainability (PROGRESS) for his contribution to this work.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
References
1. Alsdorf DE, Rodrı́guez E, Lettenmaier DP (2007) Measuring
surface water from space. Rev Geophys 45:RG2002. doi:10.
1029/2006rg000197
2. Andresen T, Mott C, Zimmermann S, Schneider T, Melzer A
(2002) Object-oriented information extraction for the monitor-
ing of sensitive aquatic environments. In: IGARSS ‘02.
pp 3083–3085
3. Antonarakis AS, Richards KS, Brasington J (2008) Object-based
land cover classification using airborne LiDAR. Remote Sens
Environ 112:2988–2998. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2008.02.004
4. Arnesen AS, Silva TSF, Hess LL, Novo EMLM, Rudorff CM,
Chapman BD, McDonald KC (2013) Monitoring flood extent in
the lower Amazon River floodplain using ALOS/PALSAR
ScanSAR images. Remote Sens Environ 130:51–61. doi:10.
1016/j.rse.2012.10.035
5. Baatz M, Schäpe A (2000) Multiresolution segmentation: an
optimization approach for high quality multi-scale image seg-
mentation. Angew Geogr informationsverarbeitung 12:12–23
6. Barredo J (2007) Major flood disasters in Europe: 1950–2005.
Nat Hazards 42:125–148. doi:10.1007/s11069-006-9065-2
7. Bates PD, Wilson MD, Horritt MS, Mason DC, Holden N,
Currie A (2006) Reach scale floodplain inundation dynamics
observed using airborne synthetic aperture radar imagery: data
analysis and modelling. J Hydrol 328:306–318. doi:10.1016/j.
jhydrol.2005.12.028
Springer Science Reviews
8. Blaschke T (2010) Object based image analysis for remote
sensing. ISPRS J Photogramm 65:2–16. doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.
2009.06.004
9. Brennan R, Webster TL (2006) Object-oriented land cover
classification of lidar-derived surfaces. Can J Remote Sens
32:162–172. doi:10.5589/m06-015
10. Bretar F (2009) Feature extraction from LiDAR data in urban
areas. In: Shan J, Toth CK (eds) Topographic laser ranging and
scanning: principles and processing. CRC Press Taylor and
Francis Group, Boca Raton, pp 403–419
11. Brivio PA, Colombo R, Maggi M, Tomasoni R (2002) Inte-
gration of remote sensing data and GIS for accurate mapping of
flooded areas. Int J Remote Sens 23:429–441
12. Brzank A, Heipke C, Goepfert J, Soergel U (2008) Aspects of
generating precise digital terrain models in the Wadden Sea
from lidar–water classification and structure line extraction.
ISPRS J Photogramm 63:510–528. doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2008.
02.002
13. Burnett C, Aaviksoo K, Lang S, Langanke T, Blaschke T (2003)
An object-based methodology for mapping mires using high
resolution imagery. In: Ecohydrological processes in Northern
Wetlands, Tallinn. pp 239–244
14. Chesnaud C, Refregier P, Boulet V (1999) Statistical region
snake-based segmentation adapted to different physical noise
models. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 21:1145–1157.
doi:10.1109/34.809108
15. Chormanski J, Okruszko T, Ignar S, Batelaan O, Rebel KT,
Wassen MJ (2011) Flood mapping with remote sensing and
hydrochemistry: a new method to distinguish the origin of flood
water during floods. Ecol Eng 37:1334–1349. doi:10.1016/j.
ecoleng.2011.03.016
16. Collin A, Long B, Archambault P (2010) Salt-marsh charac-
terization, zonation assessment and mapping through a dual-
wavelength LiDAR. Remote Sens Environ 114:520–530. doi:10.
1016/j.rse.2009.10.011
17. Congalton RG, Green K (2009) Assessing the accuracy of
remotely sensed data: principles and practices. CRC Press, Boca
Raton
18. Copernicus (2016) Copernicus—The European Earth Observa-
tion Programme Website. European commission. http://ec.
europa.eu/growth/sectors/space/copernicus/index_en.htm.
Accessed 10 Feb 2016
19. Corr DG, Keyte GE, Whitehouse S (1995) Studies of decorre-
lation in multi-temporal SAR imagery. In: Geoscience and
Remote Sensing Symposium, 1995. IGARSS ‘95. ‘Quantitative
Remote Sensing for Science and Applications’, International,
10–14 Jul 1995. vol 1022, pp 1026–1028. doi:10.1109/igarss.
1995.521128
20. Crasto N, Hopkinson C, Forbes DL, Lesack L, Marsh P, Spooner
I, van der Sanden JJ (2015) A LiDAR-based decision-tree
classification of open water surfaces in an Arctic delta Remote
Sens Environ 164:90–102. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2015.04.011
21. Crist EP, Kauth RJ (1986) The Tassled Cap de-mystified. Pho-
togrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 52:81–86
22. Davranche A, Poulin B, Lefebvre G (2013) Mapping flooding
regimes in Camargue wetlands using seasonal multispectral data.
Remote Sens Environ 138:165–171. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2013.07.015
23. De Groeve T (2010) Flood monitoring and mapping using
passive microwave remote sensing in Namibia Geomatics.
Natural Hazards Risk 1:19–35. doi:10.1080/
19475701003648085
24. De Groeve T, Riva P (2009) Global real-time detection of major
floods using passive microwave remote sensing. pp 1–4
25. De Moel H, Van Alphen J, Aerts JCJH (2009) Flood maps in
Europe—methods, availability and use. Nat Hazards Earth Syst
Sci 9:289–301. doi:10.5194/nhess-9-289-2009
26. De Roo A, Van Der Knijff J, Horritt M, Schmuck G, De Jong S
(1999) Assessing flood damages of the 1997 Oder flood and the
1995 Meuse flood. In: Proceedings of the second international
ITC symposium on operationalization of remote sensing,
Enschede, The Netherlands, 16–20 Aug 1999
27. Dissanska M, Bernier M, Payette S (2009) Object-based clas-
sification of very high resolution panchromatic images for
evaluating recent change in the structure of patterned peatlands.
Can J Remote Sens 35:189–215. doi:10.5589/m09-002
28. EC (2007) Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and
management of flood risks. Official Journal of the European
Communities 288/27
29. EM-DAT (2015) EM-DAT: the OFDA/CRED international
disaster database. Université Catholique de Louvain. http://
www.emdat.be/. Accessed 25 Feb 2015
30. EXCIMAP (2007) Handbook on good practices for flood map-
ping in Europe, European exchange circle on flood mapping
31. Feyisa GL, Meilby H, Fensholt R, Proud SR (2014) Automated
water extraction index: a new technique for surface water
mapping using Landsat imagery. Remote Sens Environ
140:23–35. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2013.08.029
32. Frazier PS, Page KJ (2000) Water body detection and delin-
eation with Landsat TM data. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens
66:1461–1467
33. Grenier M, Demers A-M, Labrecque S, Benoit M, Fournier RA,
Drolet B (2007) An object-based method to map wetland using
RADARSAT-1 and Landsat ETM images: test case on two sites
in Quebec, Canada. Can J Remote Sens 33:S28–S45. doi:10.
5589/m07-048
34. Grenier M, Demers AM, Labrecque S, Benoit M, Fournier RA,
Drolet B (2007) An object-based method to map wetland using
RADARSAT-1 and Landsat ETM images: test case on two sites
in Quebec. Canada Can J Remote Sens 33:S28–S45
35. Hagg W, Sties M (1998) Monitoring the Oder/Germany flood
with ERS, RADARSAT and optical data. In: Geoscience and
remote sensing symposium proceedings, 1998. IGARSS ‘98.
1998 IEEE International, 6–10 Jul 1998. vol 1613,
pp 1614–1616. doi:10.1109/igarss.1998.691641
36. Hakala T, Suomalainen J, Kaasalainen S, Chen Y (2012) Full
waveform hyperspectral LiDAR for terrestrial laser scanning.
Opt Express 20:7119–7127
37. Hengl T (2006) Finding the right pixel size. Comput Geosci-UK
32:1283–1298. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2005.11.008
38. Henry JB, Chastanet P, Fellah K, Desnos YL (2006) Envisat
multi-polarized ASAR data for flood mapping. Int J Remote
Sens 27:1921–1929. doi:10.1080/01431160500486724
39. Heremans R, Willekens A, Borghys D, Verbeeck B, Valcken-
borgh J, Acheroy M, Perneel C (2003) Automatic detection of
flooded areas on ENVISAT/ASAR images using an object-ori-
ented classification technique and an active contour algorithm.
In: Proceedings of international conference on recent advances
in space technologies, 2003. RAST ‘03., 20–22 Nov 2003.
pp 311–316. doi:10.1109/rast.2003.1303926
40. Herrera-Cruz V, Koudogbo F, Herrera V (2009) TerraSAR-X
rapid mapping for flood events. In: Proceedings of the interna-
tional society for photogrammetry and remote sensing (earth
imaging for geospatial information), Hannover, Germany.
pp 170–175
41. Hirschboeck KK (1988) Flood hydroclimatology. In: Baker VR,
Kochel RC, Patton PC (eds) Flood geomorphology. Wiley, New
York, pp 27–49
42. Höfle B, Hollaus M, Hagenauer J (2012) Urban vegetation
detection using radiometrically calibrated small-footprint full-
waveform airborne LiDAR data. ISPRS J Photogramm
67:134–147. doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2011.12.003
123

43. Höfle B, Pfeifer N (2007) Correction of laser scanning intensity
data: Data and model-driven approaches. ISPRS J Photogramm
62:415–433. doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2007.05.008
44. Höfle B, Vetter M, Pfeifer N, Mandlburger G, Stötter J (2009)
Water surface mapping from airborne laser scanning using
signal intensity and elevation data. Earth Surf Proc Land
34:1635–1649. doi:10.1002/esp.1853
45. Horritt M (1999) A statistical active contour model for SAR
image segmentation. Image Vis Comput 17:213–224. doi:10.
1016/s0262-8856(98)00101-2
46. Horritt MS, Mason DC, Luckman AJ (2001) Flood boundary
delineation from Synthetic Aperture Radar imagery using a
statistical active contour model. Int J Remote Sens
22:2489–2507. doi:10.1080/01431160116902
47. Hudson PF, Colditz RR (2003) Flood delineation in a large and
complex alluvial valley, lower Pánuco basin. Mexico J Hydrol
280:229–245. doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00227-0
48. Hyyppa J, Hyyppa H, Leckie D, Gougeon F, Yu X, Maltamo M
(2008) Review of methods of small-footprint airborne laser
scanning for extracting forest inventory data in boreal forests.
Int J Remote Sens 29:1339–1366. doi:10.1080/
01431160701736489
49. Jain SK, Singh RD, Jain MK, Lohani AK (2005) Delineation of
flood-prone areas using remote sensing techniques. Water
Resour Manage 19:333–347
50. Jansen LJM, Groom G, Carrai G (2008) Land-cover harmoni-
sation and semantic similarity: some methodological issues.
J Land Use Sci 3:131–160. doi:10.1080/17474230802332076
51. Jensen JR (2007) Remote sensing of the environment: an earth
resource perspective. Prentice Hall series in geographic infor-
mation science, 2nd edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle
River
52. Jiang Z, Qi J, Su S, Zhang Z, Wu J (2011) Water body delin-
eation using index composition and HIS transformation. Int J
Remote Sens 33:3402–3421. doi:10.1080/01431161.2011.
614967
53. Kaartinen H et al (2012) An international comparison of indi-
vidual tree detection and extraction using airborne laser scan-
ning. Remote Sens-Basel 4:950–974
54. Kaasalainen S, Pyysalo U, Krooks A, Vain A, Kukko A, Hyyppa
J, Kaasalainen M (2011) Absolute radiometric calibration of
ALS intensity data: effects on accuracy and target classification.
Sensors-Basel 11:10586–10602. doi:10.3390/S111110586
55. Kankaku Y, Osawa Y, Suzuki S, Watanabe T (2009) The
overview of the L-band SAR onboard ALOS-2. In: Progress in
electromagnetics research symposium, Moscow, Russia, 18–21
Aug 2009
56. Keshava N, Mustard JF (2002) Spectral unmixing. IEEE Signal
Process Mag 19:44–57
57. Kraus K, Pfeifer N (1998) Determination of terrain models in
wooded areas with airborne laser scanner data. ISPRS J Pho-
togramm 53:193–203
58. Lang MW, McCarty GW (2009) Lidar intensity for improved
detection of inundation below the forest canopy. Wetlands
29:1166–1178
59. LDCM (2015) Landsat Data Continuity Mission (LDCM)—
Landsat 8. United States Geological Survey. http://landsat.usgs.
gov/landsat8.php. Accessed 20 Mar 2015
60. Li W et al (2013) A Comparison of land surface water mapping
using the normalized difference water index from TM,
ETM ? and ALI. Remote Sens-Basel 5:5530
61. Lu SL, Wu BF, Yan NN, Wang H (2011) Water body mapping
method with HJ-1A/B satellite imagery. Int J Appl Earth Obs
13:428–434. doi:10.1016/j.jag.2010.09.006
62. Malinowski R, Groom G, Schwanghart W, Heckrath G (2015)
Detection and delineation of localized flooding from
123
Springer Science Reviews
WorldView-2 multispectral data. Remote Sens-Basel
7:14853–14875. doi:10.3390/rs71114853
63. Malinowski R, Höfle B, Koenig K, Groom G, Schwanghart W,
Heckrath G (2016) Local-scale flood mapping on vegetated
floodplains from radiometrically calibrated airborne LiDAR
data. ISPRS J Photogramm 119:267–279. doi:10.1016/j.
isprsjprs.2016.06.009
64. Mallinis G, Gitas IZ, Giannakopoulos V, Maris F, Tsakiri-Strati
M (2011) An object-based approach for flood area delineation in
a transboundary area using ENVISAT ASAR and LANDSAT
TM data. Int J Digital Earth. doi:10.1080/17538947.2011.
641601
65. Mandlburger G, Hauer C, Wieser M, Pfeifer N (2015) Topo-
bathymetric LiDAR for monitoring river morphodynamics and
instream habitats—a case study at the Pielach River. Remote
Sens-Basel 7:6160–6195. doi:10.3390/rs70506160
66. Marcus WA, Fonstad MA (2008) Optical remote mapping of
rivers at sub-meter resolutions and watershed extents. Earth Surf
Proc Land 33:4–24. doi:10.1002/esp.1637
67. Mason DC, Horritt MS, Dall’Amico JT, Scott TR, Bates PD
(2007) Improving river flood extent delineation from synthetic
aperture radar using airborne laser altimetry. IEEE Trans Geosci
Remote Sens 45:3932–3943. doi:10.1109/tgrs.2007.901032
68. Mason DC, Speck R, Devereux B, Schumann GJP, Neal JC,
Bates PD (2010) Flood detection in urban areas using Ter-
raSAR-X. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 48:882–894. doi:10.
1109/tgrs.2009.2029236
69. McCoy RM (2004) Field methods in remote sensing. Guilford
Press, New York
70. McFeeters SK (1996) The use of the normalized difference water
index (NDWI) in the delineation of open water features. Int J
Remote Sens 17:1425–1432. doi:10.1080/01431169608948714
71. Mercer B (2004) DEMs created from airborne IFSAR—an
update In: International Archives of Photogrammetry and
Remote Sensing, vol 35
72. Nico G, Pappalepore M, Pasquariello G, Refice A, Samarelli S
(2000) Comparison of SAR amplitude vs. coherence flood
detection methods—a GIS application. Int J Remote Sens
21:1619–1631. doi:10.1080/014311600209931
73. Otepka J, Ghuffar S, Waldhauser C, Hochreiter R, Pfeifer N
(2013) Georeferenced point clouds: a survey of features and
point cloud management. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 2:1038–1065
74. Otsu N (1979) A threshold selection method from gray-level
histograms systems. IEEE Trans Man Cybern 9:62–66. doi:10.
1109/tsmc.1979.4310076
75. Ouma YO, Tateishi R (2006) A water index for rapid mapping
of shoreline changes of five East African Rift Valley lakes: an
empirical analysis using Landsat TM and ETM ? data. Int J
Remote Sens 27:3153–3181. doi:10.1080/01431160500309934
76. Pajares G (2015) Overview and current status of remote sensing
applications based on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Pho-
togramm Eng Remote Sens 81:281–329. doi:10.14358/PERS.81.
4.281
77. Petrie G, Toth CK (2009) Introduction to laser ranging, profil-
ing, and scanning. In: Shan J, Toth CK (eds) Topographic laser
ranging and scanning: principles and processing. CRC Press
Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, pp 1–28
78. Pierdicca N, Chini M, Pulvirenti L, Macina F (2008) Integrating
physical and topographic information into a fuzzy scheme to
map flooded area by SAR. Sensors-Basel 8:4151–4164
79. Pierdicca N, Pulvirenti L, Chini M, Guerriero L, Candela L
(2013) Observing floods from space: experience gained from
COSMO-SkyMed observations. Acta Astronaut 84:122–133.
doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2012.10.034
80. Pulvirenti L, Chini M, Pierdicca N, Guerriero L, Ferrazzoli P
(2011) Flood monitoring using multi-temporal COSMO-
Springer Science Reviews
SkyMed data: Image segmentation and signature interpretation.
Remote Sens Environ 115:990–1002. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2010.12.
002
81. Pulvirenti L, Pierdicca N, Chini M, Guerriero L (2011) An
algorithm for operational flood mapping from Synthetic Aper-
ture Radar (SAR) data using fuzzy logic. Nat Hazards Earth Syst
Sci 11:529–540. doi:10.5194/nhess-11-529-2011
82. Robertson LD, Douglas JK, Davies C (2011) Spatial analysis of
wetlands at multiple scales in Eastern Ontario using remote
sensing and GIS. In: 32nd Canadian symposium on remote
sensing, Sherbrooke, Quebec, 13–16 June 2011
83. Rutzinger M, Hofle B, Hollaus M, Pfeifer N (2008) Object-
based point cloud analysis of full-waveform airborne laser
scanning data for urban vegetation classification. Sensors-Basel
8:4505–4528. doi:10.3390/S8084505
84. Sanyal J, Lu XX (2004) Application of remote sensing in flood
management with special reference to monsoon Asia: a review.
Nat Hazards 33:283–301
85. Schäfer ML, Lundström JO (2011) Detection of temporary
flooded areas with potential floodwater mosquito production
using imaging radar. Int J Remote Sens 33:1943–1953. doi:10.
1080/01431161.2011.604053
86. Schmidt A, Rottensteiner F, Sörgel U (2013) Water-land-clas-
sification in coastal areas with full waveform lidar data. Pho-
togramm Fernerkund Geoinf 2013:71–81
87. Schumann G, Bates PD, Horritt MS, Matgen P, Pappenberger F
(2009) Progress in integration of remote sensing-derived flood
extent and stage data and hydraulic models. Rev Geophys
47:RG4001. doi:10.1029/2008RG000274
88. Schumann G, Di Baldassarre G, Bates PD (2009) The utility of
spaceborne radar to render flood inundation maps based on
multialgorithm ensembles. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens
47:2801–2807. doi:10.1109/tgrs.2009.2017937
89. Schumann GJP, Neal JC, Mason DC, Bates PD (2011) The
accuracy of sequential aerial photography and SAR data for
observing urban flood dynamics, a case study of the UK summer
2007 floods. Remote Sens Environ 115:2536–2546. doi:10.
1016/j.rse.2011.04.039
90. Shahbazi M, Théau J, Ménard P (2014) Recent applications of
unmanned aerial imagery in natural resource management.
GISci Remote Sens 51:339–365. doi:10.1080/15481603.2014.
926650
91. Shan J, Toth CK (2008) Topographic laser ranging and scan-
ning: principles and processing. CRC Press, Boca Raton
92. Silva TF, Costa MF, Melack J, Novo ELM (2008) Remote
sensing of aquatic vegetation: theory and applications. Environ
Monit Assess 140:131–145. doi:10.1007/s10661-007-9855-3
93. Smeeckaert J, Mallet C, David N, Chehata N, Ferraz A (2013)
Large-scale classification of water areas using airborne topo-
graphic lidar data. Remote Sens Environ 138:134–148. doi:10.
1016/j.rse.2013.07.004
94. Smith LC (1997) Satellite remote sensing of river inundation
area, stage, and discharge: a review. Hydrol Process
11:1427–1439
95. Thomas RF, Kingsford RT, Lu Y, Hunter SJ (2011) Landsat
mapping of annual inundation (1979–2006) of the Macquarie
Marshes in semi-arid Australia. Int J Remote Sens
32:4545–4569. doi:10.1080/01431161.2010.489064
96. Tuxen K, Kelly M (2008) Multi-scale functional mapping of
tidal marsh vegetation using object-based image analysis. In:
Blaschke T, Lang S, Hay G (eds) Object-based image analysis.
Lecture Notes in geoinformation and cartography. Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 415–442. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-77058-
9_23
97. Verstraeten G, Poesen J (1999) The nature of small-scale
flooding, muddy floods and retention pond sedimentation in
central Belgium. Geomorphology 29:275–292. doi:10.1016/
S0169-555x(99)00020-3
98. Wagner W (2010) Radiometric calibration of small-footprint
full-waveform airborne laser scanner measurements: Basic
physical concepts. ISPRS J Photogramm 65:505–513. doi:10.
1016/j.isprsjprs.2010.06.007
99. Wang Y (2002) Mapping extent of floods: what we have learned
and how we can do better. Nat Hazards Rev 3:68–73. doi:10.
1061/(asce)1527-6988(2002)3:2(68)
100. Wang Y, Hess LL, Filoso S, Melack JM (1995) Understanding
the radar backscattering from flooded and nonflooded Amazo-
nian forests: results from canopy backscatter modeling. Remote
Sens Environ 54:324–332. doi:10.1016/0034-4257(95)00140-9
101. Xu HQ (2006) Modification of normalised difference water
index (NDWI) to enhance open water features in remotely
sensed imagery. Int J Remote Sens 27:3025–3033
102. Zwenzner H, Voigt S (2009) Improved estimation of flood
parameters by combining space based SAR data with very high
resolution digital elevation data. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci
13:567–576. doi:10.5194/hess-13-567-2009
123