2006
DOI: 10.1080/09640560500372800
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Methodology for an integrated risk assessment of spatially relevant hazards

Abstract: Natural and technological disasters of the past have shown that such incidences significantly affect local and regional development. Faced with the task of ensuring economic, human and environmental development as well as insuring physical structures, planning authorities, insurance companies and emergency managers are looking for methodologies to identify highly sensitive areas in terms of their overall risk. Existing methodologies like the Natural Hazard Index for Megacities or the Total Place Vulnerability … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
89
0
3

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 134 publications
(92 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
89
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In our approach, expressed by the above equation, Hazard is a potential threat that is likely to cause damage to the character of the landscape in cases where it occurs, and Landscape Value (LV) is the value of the assets in each Landscape Descriptive Unit (LDU), mainly being ecological, natural, and historical/archeological assets. The equation was portrayed through a two-dimensional matrix that we drew based on a study Greiving et al performed on Integrated Risk Assessment of Spatially Relevant Hazards [50]. The same authors, having in mind the cost-benefit analysis in relation to the economic and physical risk, developed a similar matrix during the ARMONIA project.…”
Section: The Judgment/risk Evaluation Phasementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our approach, expressed by the above equation, Hazard is a potential threat that is likely to cause damage to the character of the landscape in cases where it occurs, and Landscape Value (LV) is the value of the assets in each Landscape Descriptive Unit (LDU), mainly being ecological, natural, and historical/archeological assets. The equation was portrayed through a two-dimensional matrix that we drew based on a study Greiving et al performed on Integrated Risk Assessment of Spatially Relevant Hazards [50]. The same authors, having in mind the cost-benefit analysis in relation to the economic and physical risk, developed a similar matrix during the ARMONIA project.…”
Section: The Judgment/risk Evaluation Phasementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since this method of classification depends on the distribution of the data, the study of any index evolution over time must maintain the ranges established in the initial analysis. As conducted by Greiving et al (2006) and Jelínek et al (2009), the risk is calculated through a risk matrix by combining the classes obtained for the hazard and the vulnerability indices, or hazard and sensitivity indices in the case of partial results. The sensitivity and vulnerability are calculated on the exposed elements; therefore, the exposure is implicitly incorporated into the matrix.…”
Section: Integration Of Risk Conceptsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), thereby proving the complexity associated to risk assessment and management. Regarding the existing literature on tsunami risk, several authors centre their work on the tsunami hazard itself, trying to understand its evolution from the generation and propagation phases until its arrival at the coastal area with the aim of predicting the tsunami location, magnitude, duration and probability (Gosenberg and Schlurmann, 2009;Harbitz et al, 2012;, while others propose a methodology for the integration of various hazards (Greiving et al, 2006). On the other hand, some authors' analyses are oriented towards the calculation of vulnerability and/or impacts at a specific location (UNDP, 2011;UNU-EHS, 2009;Villagrán de León, 2008) or on specific elements at that location such as the population (Sugimoto et al, 2003;Sato et al, 2003;Koshimura et al, 2006;Jonkman et al, 2008;Strunz et al, 2011), the exposed buildings and infrastructures (Tinti et al, 2011;Dall'Osso et al, 2009;Cruz et al, 2009;Grezio et Koeri et al, 2009;Jelínek et al, 2009), the environmental resources (Fundación-Terram, 2012;ECLAC, 2003) or the socioeconomic system (ECLAC, 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Cutter, Boruff, and Shirley (2003), Greiving, Fleischhauer, and Lückenkötter (2006), and several other authors, a comprehensive vulnerability assessment needs to combine information on an area's physical exposure with its demographic and socioeconomic conditions. Our study is a contribution to this growing body of literature on integrated approaches to vulnerability assessment.…”
Section: Exposure and Vulnerabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%