Presentation made at the expert meeting organised jointly by the European Commission, the OECD and the project PLACARD, in Paris 26th -28th October 2016. For more information see www.oecd.org/gov/risk/joint-expert-meeting-on-disaster-loss-data.htm

1. The European Commission’s
science and knowledge service
Joint Research Centre
Outcomes of break-
out groups

2. 2
Earthquakes Italy, M5.4 and 5.9
Loss Data
Media
• 1 killed (heart
attach)
• Several injured
• Roads interrupted
because of rock fall
Official
• 1 killed
• 1 injured
Damage
Related to this or
earlier shocks?
19:10 First shock 5.4
21:!8 Second shock 6.0
23:36 Copernicus activated

3. 3
OIEWG: general approach
• UNISDR Non-Paper +
terminology
• Ok in principle; based on
technical discussions with
EU countries and EC
• Need to explain current
proposal, keep technical
• No need to open issues
• Complexity versus
Simplicity
• Keep in mind different
contexts of EU and DEV
countries
• National targets can be
more complex/complete
• Ambition versus
Feasibility
• Don’t focus on CURRENT
feasibility, look at future
• Accept progressive
approach: NODATA is
acceptable
• Unique opportunity to
collect data needed for
modeling (CCA, DRR…)
• Revision of indicators
• Process to revise indicators
after x years?

4. 4
Specific issues
• General
• Accept double counting
• Disaggregation @global
level: gender, age,
disabilities
• No global threshold on
disasters: possible
@national level
• Stable data: 42 days,
only for targets A+B and
for sudden onset
• Specific
• A3: missing
• B: accept double
counting
• B3: move to G; remove
B3b (=B4+B5)
• C2-C7: private sector
included
• C10: could be dropped

5. 5
Way forward
• Draft recommendations of meeting
• Ambitious, aspiring  link to risk assessment and future
losses (CCA)
• Realistic  progressive implementation (accept NODATA);
encourage role of private sector
• Keep technical, keep context
• Revision process
• Request slot in OIEWG informal meetings to
present
• EU Coordination meetings