A three-level framework for multi-risk assessment

Liu, Zhongqiang; Nadim, Farrokh; García, Alexander; Mignan, Arnaud; Fleming, Kevin; Luna, B. Quan

doi:10.1080/17499518.2015.1041989

Cited by 64 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Initial steps in this direction include the development of the hazard correlation and risk migration matrices for the development, analysis, and selection of quantitative multi-risk scenarios [8]. Moreover, the development of a virtual city for example, can be a useful tool to simulate multi-risk urban scenarios and help practitioners understand the decision-making processes surrounding interrelated risks [5,62,63].…”

Section: Phase 3: Multi-risk Knowledge Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, the concept of a virtual city [5,62,63] can be defined as a template for simplified multi-risk analyses where generic data and interaction processes are predefined. It allows a better understanding of complex multi-risk processes by by-passing the cumbersome data models and algorithm black boxes and focusing on the main aspects of the multi-risk approach.…”

Section: Phase 3: Multi-risk Knowledge Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To bridge knowledge generation and stakeholder processes, Liu and colleagues [63] propose a multi-level, multi-risk approach that complements the tools presented in this section and proposes a roadmap to understand if and when a multi-risk approach is necessary. Their first level is a flow chart that guides the user in deciding whether a multi-hazard and -risk approach is required.…”

Section: Phase 3: Multi-risk Knowledge Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mainstreaming Multi-Risk Approaches into Policy

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multi-risk environments are characterized by domino effects that often amplify the overall risk. Those include chains of hazardous events and increasing vulnerability, among other types of correlations within the risk process. The recently developed methods for multi-hazard and risk assessment integrate interactions between different risks by using harmonized procedures based on common metrics. While the products of these assessments, such as multi-hazard and -risk indexes, maps, cascade scenarios, or warning systems provide innovative and effective information, they also pose specific challenges to policy makers and practitioners due to their novel cross-disciplinary aspects. In this paper we discuss the institutional barriers to the adoption of multi-risk approaches, summarizing the results of the fieldwork conducted in Italy and Guadeloupe and of workshops with disaster risk reduction practitioners from eleven European countries. Results show the need for a clear identification of responsibilities for the implementation of multi-risk approaches, as institutional frameworks for risk reduction remain to this day primarily single-risk centered. Authorities are rarely officially responsible for the management of domino effects between e.g., tsunamis and industrial accidents, earthquake and landslides, floods and electricity network failures. Other barriers for the implementation of multi-risk approaches include the limited measures to reduce exposure at the household level, inadequate financial capacities at the local level and limited public-private partnerships, especially in case of interactions between natural and industrial risks. Adapting the scale of institutions to that of multi-risk environments remains a major challenge to better mainstream multi-risk approaches into policy. To address it, we propose a multi-risk governance framework, which includes the phases of observation, social and institutional context analysis, generation of multi-risk knowledge and stakeholder engagement processes. Yet, more research is needed in order to test the framework and to identify the hallmark characteristics of effective multi-risk governance.

show abstract

Section: Phase 3: Multi-risk Knowledge Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phase 3: Multi-risk Knowledge Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phase 3: Multi-risk Knowledge Generationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mainstreaming Multi-Risk Approaches into Policy

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The multi-risk assessment may be understood as the process to determine the whole risk from several hazards, taking into account possible hazards and vulnerability interactions (e.g., Garcia-Aristizabal et al, 2015). Within this context, cascading effects are a consequence of interactions generated by causeeffect relationships among different phenomena.…”

Section: Multi-risk Assessment In Network Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The physical phenomena that can be grouped under this class are those cases in which an initial event produces a perturbation that, when acting on a given system, may bring it to an unstable state, forcing it to find a new equilibrium matching the changing conditions (e.g., a new morphological equilibrium after a debris flow event). Reaching this new equilibrium may imply the occurrence of an event that, in this case, may be said to be triggered by the initial one (Gasparini and Garcia-Aristizabal 2014; Liu et al 2015).…”

Section: Multi-risk Assessment In Network Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%