Modeling Downward Counterfactual Events: Unrealized Disasters and why they Matter

Abstract

Disaster risk research's reliance on past events has proved inadequate when it comes to extreme events. This shortcoming stems from limited records (for example, due to the vast differences in timescales between geological processes and human records) and the dynamic nature of all three components of risk-drivers of change in hazard (e.g., climate change), exposure (e.g., urban growth), and vulnerability (e.g., aging infrastructure). This paper provides a framework for modeling key unrealized events through downward counterfactual changes for consideration in future risk modeling and assessment. Past disasters are typically viewed as fixed events, and the resulting lessons-learned are inherently limited by this definition; downward counterfactual thought provides a means to harvest additional insights and capture a larger consequence space. As such, we have identified a need for a guiding framework in order to incorporate downward counterfactual thought in the context of disaster risk modeling applied to both natural and anthropogenic hazards. The downward counterfactual framework relies first on identifying a past event, which may or may not have been considered a major disaster. After an event has been identified, historical parameters from the past event are relaxed in order to identify small changes that result in downward, worsening consequences. This can be continued for multiple changes until an end-of-search criteria is reached. The framework is especially relevant for regions that may have a sparse past catalog, either due to limited data or limited occurrences of natural hazards. As such, the framework is demonstrated in the context of Singapore, a city-nation that has historically had limited recorded natural hazards events, through five case studies on past anthropogenic, environmental, seismic, volcanic, and storm hazard events. This framework can help harness lessonslearned from unrealized disasters to support a more resilient future through informed policies and plans.

How rainfall influences tephra fall loading — an experimental approach

“…When these samples were later saturated with water in the laboratory, density was found to increase by 25% to 1500-2000 kg m −3 . This load increase suggests if heavy typhoon rains had not coincided with the eruption, that the total number of roof collapses, and the 189 deaths attributed to these collapses, would likely have both been reduced (Paladio-Melasantos et al 1996;Lin et al 2020). Similarly, following the 1990 eruption of Kelud volcano, Indonesia, all 34 recorded casualties were caused by roof collapse at a single evacuation centre, under the weight of tephra that had been made heavier -by an unmeasured amount -by rain (Bourdier et al 1997;Hidayati et al 2019).…”

The challenges of dynamic vulnerability and how to assess it

“…Next, several recent studies point out the need to quantify the dynamics between the three components of risk over time and space (Alves et al, 2020;Bevacqua et al, 2021;de Ruiter et al, 2020;Hagenlocher et al, 2019;Kuhla et al, 2021;Lin et al, 2020). A large part of recently published studies has focused on the dynamics of hazards and hazard drivers, both within science as well as in disaster risk management (Cutter, 2018;Raymond et al, 2020a;Scolobig et al, 2017).…”

Risk Management and Adaptation for Extremes and Abrupt Changes in Climate and Oceans: Current Knowledge Gaps

“…Multiple drivers of compound events have to be investigated, some combinations of events may not have historical analogues, which requires more research into the probability and hazards of these events (Zscheischler et al, 2018;Gruber et al, 2021). Understanding risks from hazards and risks that have not (yet) materialised in the real world are also important to consider, given their importance for the actual risk, including possible cascade and compound impacts, as well as consequent adaptation needs (Lin et al, 2020). There is also a lack of the understanding of the socioeconomic impacts of compound risks and cascading effects, compared to single risks.…”