Mauro DOLCE Bureau for Seismic and Volcanic Risk, Italian Civil Protection Department

1. 1/28
Rationale and Feasibility of a
Global Risk Modelling Initiative
Expert Group
FINAL REPORT
Submitted by the Delegation of Italy
Presented by: Daniele Ehrlich, Joint Research Centre Mauro Dolce, Chair of the Expert Group
Italian Presidency of the Council of Ministers
National Department of Civil Protection
4° International Disaster and Risk Conference Director General – Office for Seismic and Volcanic Risk
Davos, August 27, 2012 www.protezionecivile.it - mauro.dolce@protezionecivile.it

2. 1/28
SUMMARY
1.Rationale
2.Scoping/Expert Group TOR and activities
3.Findings
4.Conclusion
5.Recommendations
Mauro Dolce, Chair of the Expert Group
Italian Presidency of the Council of Ministers
National Department of Civil Protection
4° International Disaster and Risk Conference Director General – Office for Seismic and Volcanic Risk
Davos, August 27, 2012 www.protezionecivile.it - mauro.dolce@protezionecivile.it

3. Rationale
2011 was the year with the highest catastrophe-related economic
losses, at US$ 363 billion , while in 2010 there was the largest
number of fatalities, at 308000.
US$ 363
billion
308152
fatalities

4. Rationale
2011 economic losses were mainly
due to:
•earthquakes in Japan and New
Zealand
•flooding in Thailand and Australia
(above US$ 10 billion)
•massive tornadoes in the United
States (US$ 14 billion and the loss
of more than 400 lives)
•hurricane Irene (US$ 5 billion in
industry property damage).

5. Rationale
In 2010, the Haiti earthquake and flooding in Pakistan alone
accounted for about 300.000 deaths and over a million of homeless
people.
The devastating effect that natural and man-made hazards is
particularly relevant in the developing regions, experiencing rapid
population growth and intense urbanisation, where often no
hazard, vulnerability and exposure maps are available or
accessible.

6. Rationale
Messina, Sicily, ITALY - 1908
Earthquake triggering tsunami
90000 fatalities,
most of them due to
the tsunami

7. Rationale
Vesuvio, Naples, ITALY
SCENARIO: Volcanic eruption earthquake landslides
1944
2006

8. Rationale
The need for better risk assessment data and
tools remains high.
Global disaster risk management has been
included in the 2012 G20 priorities,
recognizing:
“the value of Disaster Risk Management (DRM) tools and
strategies to better prevent disasters, protect populations and
assets, and financially manage their economic impacts”
as well as acknowledging
“the need to expand its use”.

9. Creation of the Scoping Group
• 24th meeting of the Global Science Forum, Lisbon, 7-8 April 2011
– Delegation of Italy proposed the creation of a Scoping Group to
explore the desirability and feasibility of a new international
collaborative undertaking for a “Global Risk Modelling”
 approved by the GSF
• July 2011
– Terms of Reference (rationale, scope, goals and time scale) for
the Scoping Group submitted and
 approved by the GSF Bureau
16

10. Expert Group – Activities
(Teleconferences, Survey, Physical meeting - Rome 5.10.11, Workshop
Brussels 9-10 .02.12)
• Review of the current landscape of existing national and
international risk assessment/risk modelling projects.
• Survey on existing work and initiatives related to global/multi-
risk assessment, with feedback from stakeholder communities
and institutions.
• Debate on the GEM initiative, analysing both its operative
model and the transferability of GEM tools to other risks.

11. Expert Group – Activities
(Teleconferences, Physical meeting - Rome 5.10.11, Workshop Brussels 9-
10 .02.12)
• Workshop hosted by the European Commission in Brussels on
9-10 February 2012, with 37 participants from 23 countries,
international organisations and private companies …
to review and agree on the existing gaps and demands in the
field of global multi-hazard/risk modelling

12. Expert Group – Conclusion
The findings of the Expert Group can be summarised as follows:
1. Natural hazard and multi-hazard risks are being addressed by a
number of institutions, creating a clear demand for global risk-
relevant datasets.
2. In the developing world governments often do not have
institutional structures to manage risks. Multilateral institutions
(e.g. UN ISDR), together with many aid programs are committed
to improving this situation.
3. Governments addressing risks most effectively agree on the
need to have a multi-hazard risk assessment, dealing with
cascading effects and interactions between different hazards.

13. Expert Group – Conclusion
4. Trans-boundary issues are becoming increasingly important but
have only recently started to be seriously addressed.
5. At the technical level, standards tools and methodologies – even
definitions - have yet to mature to be endorsed internationally.
6. Datasets used to measure risk are often not available;
The GEM initiative – centered on the earthquake community -
could be a model for building better standardized databases and
user-friendly assessment tools.
A new international initiative could bring considerable benefit in
addressing poorly understood phenomena and providing better
information and data for the risk communities.

14. Expert Group – Recommendations
1. To develop a new international platform using a community-
based mechanism, similar to GEM approach, to ensure a buy-in
from the user communities and avoid duplication.
It should develop international standards, methodologies and
tools for use at the local level, enabling consistency and
interoperability of data and models.
Desirable features:
• Address existing barriers of scales and format.
• Make available at the local, national and international level
hazard/Vulnerability/Risk models, maps, and other tools.
• Enable a transfer of state-of-the-art research and knowledge to
local user communities across the globe.

15. Expert Group – Recommendations
Process:
To facilitate data and experience-sharing worldwide, further
discussion should be developed between stakeholders in
close cooperation with UN structures such as the UN ISDR
(International Strategy for Disaster Reduction).

16. Expert Group – Recommendations
2. To initiate an international consultation between interested
stakeholders to set up an international platform/resource on risk
assessment of large-scale events that cannot be addressed by
single countries (or with an impact beyond a single country),
accounting for potential large scale domino/cascading effects
caused by natural hazards interacting with technological risks
Desirable features:
• Capability to tackle large-scale events with trans-boundary
consequences of natural or technological origin
• Capability to treat domino effects with a probabilistic approach
• Identifying main critical points able to trigger domino effects
• Collecting datasets of exposure and vulnerability

17. Expert Group – Recommendations
Process:
Further investigation on possible objectives, governance structure,
funding mechanism and programme of work should be conducted
by interested governments, together with other stakeholders,
such as international organisations, and public and private
institutions, under the auspices of the OECD Global Science
Forum.
A steering committee composed of representatives of interested
countries could elaborate, in cooperation with all stakeholders, a
detailed implementation strategy, in a process similar to that
which led to the creation of GEM.

18. 1/28
THANK YOU
Mauro Dolce, Chair of the Scoping Group
Italian Presidency of the Council of Ministers
National Department of Civil Protection
4° International Disaster and Risk Conference Director General – Office for Seismic and Volcanic Risk
Davos, August 27, 2012 www.protezionecivile.it – mauro.dolce@protezionecivile.it