Studies from Texas Technical University Provide New Data on Politics and Government (Modeling Nfip-insured Housing Losses From Texas and Florida Flood Disasters: a Comparative Analysis of Hurricane Harvey, the 2016 Tax Day Flood, and Hurricane …): Politics and Government

2026 AUG 12 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Politics, Law & Government Daily -- Fresh data on Politics and Government are presented in a new report. According to news reporting out of Lubbock, Texas, by NewsRx editors, research stated, “Reliable flood loss models can support rapid mitigation and recovery decisions, but their value depends on whether relationships learned from one disaster are useful in another. We evaluate tract-level National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)-insured housing losses across 6065 census tracts affected by the 2016 Tax Day Flood, Hurricane Harvey, and Hurricane Irma.”

Financial support for this research came from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Our news journalists obtained a quote from the research from Texas Technical University, “Mean normalized loss ratio (Mean_NLR) and the probability of observed NFIP-insured loss are modeled with a parsimonious hazard-exposure-vulnerability (HEV) specification driven by precipitation, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) share, insurance penetration, population density, social vulnerability, building age, and Community Rating System discounts. We used nested grouped spatial cross-validation to tune Random Forest, XGBoost, and logistic classification models while retaining OLS and spatial lag models as benchmarks. Tuned regression performance is modest, with out-of-fold R2 peaking at 0.34 for Harvey and lower values for Tax Day and Irma. Binary classification is stronger, with within-event AUC of 0.81-0.90 and Harvey PR-AUC up to 0.71. Transfer is high between the two Texas events, with XGBoost AUC of 0.92-0.95. Although population density and precipitation are consistently influential, AUC declines when Texas-trained models are applied to Irma because hazard mechanisms, exposure patterns, and predictor distributions differ across regions. Because the NFIP claims used to train these models capture insured and claimed building losses with capped payments, the models are appropriate for screening observed NFIP-insured losses.”

According to the news editors, the research concluded: “These models should not be used to estimate total physical damage or as universal flood loss transfer functions.”

This research has been peer-reviewed.

For more information on this research see: Modeling Nfip-insured Housing Losses From Texas and Florida Flood Disasters: a Comparative Analysis of Hurricane Harvey, the 2016 Tax Day Flood, and Hurricane Irma. Urban Climate, 2026;68. Urban Climate can be contacted at: Elsevier, Radarweg 29, 1043 Nx Amsterdam, Netherlands. (Elsevier - www.elsevier.com; Urban Climate - http://www.journals.elsevier.com/urban-climate/)

Our news journalists report that additional information may be obtained by contacting Temidayo Popoola, Texas Technical University, Dept. of Civil Environmental & Construction Engineering, Lubbock, TX 79409, United States. Additional authors for this research include Jesse Andrews, Kaifa Lu, Ali Nejat and Katharine Hayhoe.

The direct object identifier (DOI) for that additional information is: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2026.103029. This DOI is a link to an online electronic document that is either free or for purchase, and can be your direct source for a journal article and its citation.

(Our reports deliver fact-based news of research and discoveries from around the world.)