Global exposure monitoring for multi-hazards risk assessments


Published on

Bureau for Seismic and Volcanic Risk, Italian Civil Protection Department

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Global exposure monitoring for multi-hazards risk assessments

  1. 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 -
  2. 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 -
  3. 3. Rationale2011 was the year with the highest catastrophe-related economiclosses, at US$ 363 billion , while in 2010 there was the largestnumber of fatalities, at 308000. US$ 363 billion 308152 fatalities
  4. 4. Rationale2011 economic losses were mainlydue to:•earthquakes in Japan and NewZealand•flooding in Thailand and Australia(above US$ 10 billion)•massive tornadoes in the UnitedStates (US$ 14 billion and the lossof more than 400 lives)•hurricane Irene (US$ 5 billion inindustry property damage).
  5. 5. RationaleIn 2010, the Haiti earthquake and flooding in Pakistan aloneaccounted for about 300.000 deaths and over a million of homelesspeople.The devastating effect that natural and man-made hazards isparticularly relevant in the developing regions, experiencing rapidpopulation growth and intense urbanisation, where often nohazard, vulnerability and exposure maps are available oraccessible.
  6. 6. Rationale Messina, Sicily, ITALY - 1908 Earthquake triggering tsunami90000 fatalities,most of them due tothe tsunami
  7. 7. RationaleVesuvio, Naples, ITALYSCENARIO: Volcanic eruption earthquake landslides1944 2006
  8. 8. RationaleThe need for better risk assessment data andtools remains high.Global disaster risk management has beenincluded in the 2012 G20 priorities,recognizing: “the value of Disaster Risk Management (DRM) tools andstrategies to better prevent disasters, protect populations andassets, and financially manage their economic impacts”as well as acknowledging “the need to expand its use”.
  9. 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. 10. Expert Group – Activities(Teleconferences, Survey, Physical meeting - Rome 5.10.11, WorkshopBrussels 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. 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. 12. Expert Group – ConclusionThe 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. 13. Expert Group – Conclusion4. 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 inaddressing poorly understood phenomena and providing betterinformation and data for the risk communities.
  14. 14. Expert Group – Recommendations1. 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. 15. Expert Group – RecommendationsProcess:To facilitate data and experience-sharing worldwide, furtherdiscussion should be developed between stakeholders inclose cooperation with UN structures such as the UN ISDR(International Strategy for Disaster Reduction).
  16. 16. Expert Group – Recommendations2. 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 risksDesirable 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. 17. Expert Group – RecommendationsProcess: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. 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 –