Assessing seismic hazard of the East African Rift: a pilot study from GEM and AfricaArray

Poggi, Valerio; Durrheim, Raymond; Tuluka, Georges Mavonga; Weatherill, Graeme; Gee, Robin; Pagani, Marco; Nyblade, A.; Delvaux, Damien

doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0152-4

Cited by 63 publications

(132 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since then the ISC-GEM Catalogue has been used by many researchers investigating seismicity rates, patterns of seismicity and earthquake forecast (e.g. Cambiotti et al, 2016;Geist, 2014;Ikuta et al, 2015;Kagan, 2017;Kagan and Jackson, 2016;Katsumata, 2015;Pollitz et al, 2014;Quinteros Cartaya et al, 2016;Roth et al, 2017;Zaliapin and Kreemer, 2017;Zechar et al, 2016;Zhan and Shearer, 2015) as well as by groups working on earthquake catalogues for seismic hazard purposes (e.g. Alvarez et al, 2016;Deif et al, 2017;Ghasemi et al, 2016;Kadirioglu et al, 2016;Markušić et al, 2015;Mikhailova et al, 2015;Poggi et al, 2017;Weatherill et al, 2016) and other seismological studies (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ISC-GEM Earthquake Catalogue (1904–2014): status after the Extension Project

Giacomo¹,

Engdahl

Storchak³

2018

Earth Syst. Sci. Data

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We outline the work done to extend and improve the ISC-GEM Global Instrumental Earthquake Catalogue, a dataset which was first released in 2013 (Storchak et al., 2013, 2015). In its first version (V1) the catalogue included global earthquakes selected according to time-dependent cut-off magnitudes: 7.5 and above between 1900 and 1918 (plus significant continental earthquakes 6.5 and above); 6.25 between 1918 and 1959; 5.5 between 1960 and 2009. Such selection criteria were dictated by time and resource limitations. With the Extension Project we added both pre-1960 events below the original cut-off magnitudes (if enough station data were available to perform relocation and magnitude recomputation) and added events with magnitude 5.5 and above from 2010 to 2014. The project ran over a 4-year period during which a new version of the ISC-GEM Catalogue was released each year via the ISC website (http://http://www.isc.ac.uk/iscgem/, last access: 10 October 2018). For each year, not only have we added new events to the catalogue for a given time range but also revised events already in V1 if additional data became available or location and/or magnitude reassessments were required. Here we recall the general background behind the production of the ISC-GEM Catalogue and describe the features of the different periods in which the catalogue has been extended. Compared to the 2013 release, we eliminated earthquakes during the first 4 years (1900–1903) of the catalogue (due to lack of reliable station data), added approximately 12 000 and 2500 earthquakes before 1960 and between 2010 and 2014, respectively, and improved the solution for approximately 2000 earthquakes already listed in previous versions. We expect the ISC-GEM Catalogue to continue to be one of the most useful datasets for studies of the Earth's global seismicity and an important benchmark for seismic hazard analyses, and, ultimately, an asset for the seismological community as well as other geoscience fields, education and outreach activities. The ISC-GEM Catalogue is freely available at https://doi.org/10.31905/D808B825.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ISC-GEM Earthquake Catalogue (1904–2014): status after the Extension Project

Giacomo¹,

Engdahl

Storchak³

2018

Earth Syst. Sci. Data

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There may be one or more, even thousands, of realizations depending on how uncertainty is specified. See, for example, Poggi et al (2017) as an example of how uncertainty is estimated.…”

Section: Insert Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Data schemas for multiple hazards, exposure and vulnerability

Murnane

Allegri

Bushi³

et al. 2019

DPM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Using risk-related data often require a significant amount of upfront work to collect, extract and transform data. In addition, the lack of a consistent data structure hinders the development of tools that can be used with more than one set of data. The purpose of this paper is to report on an effort to solve these problems through the development of extensible, internally consistent schemas for risk-related data. Design/methodology/approach The consortia coordinated their efforts so the hazard, exposure and vulnerability schemas are compatible. Hazard data can be provided as either event footprints or stochastic catalogs. Exposure classes include buildings, infrastructure, agriculture, livestock, forestry and socio-economic data. The vulnerability component includes fragility and vulnerability functions and indicators for physical and social vulnerability. The schemas also provide the ability to define uncertainties and allow the scoring of vulnerability data for relevance and quality. Findings As a proof of concept, the schemas were populated with data for Tanzania and with exposure data for several other countries. Research limitations/implications The data schema and data exploration tool are open source and, if widely accepted, could become widely used by practitioners. Practical implications A single set of hazard, exposure and vulnerability schemas will not fit all purposes. Tools will be needed to transform the data into other formats. Originality/value This paper describes extensible, internally consistent, multi-hazard, exposure and vulnerability schemas that can be used to store disaster risk-related data and a data exploration tool that promotes data discovery and use.

show abstract

“…The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has granted financial support to develop earthquake risk models for Africa, South East Asia, Central America and the Caribbean. There has also been work in South America (Toquica et al 2017), Sub-Saharan Africa (Poggi et al 2017), Portugal (Burton and Silva 2016), Eastern USA (Schmidtlein et al 2011) and elsewhere. There are therefore clear signs of interest in the topic, but it remains to be seen how successful and influential this interesting and potentially ground-breaking part of GEM's work will turn out to be.…”

Section: Risk Quantificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with earthquakes: the practice of seismic engineering ‘as if people mattered’

Booth¹

2018

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper sets out to explore the different ways in which communities deal with earthquakes. As is well known, the ability to recover from a damaging earthquake varies greatly across the world. The events of 2010 were of course a striking reminder of this, when the death toll from the Haïti earthquake was at least 100,000; in the very different conditions of Chile, a much larger event the same year killed just 525 people. In a narrow sense, much of the difference can be explained in terms of the engineering properties of the physical infrastructure affected; the better it has been designed and constructed to withstand strong ground shaking, the greater the chance that the community affected has of recovering quickly. However, the central thesis of this paper is that the ability of a community to deal with earthquakes involves much more than just technical factors. Seismically resilient buildings and other infrastructure will only be in place when an earthquake strikes if there has been a willingness and ability to devote the necessary resources to building them. Moreover, taking prior steps to limit physical damage is only one part of the process for dealing with earthquakes; providing for immediate post-earthquake needs and for the longer term rebuilding of communities is also important. To pursue these issues further, and how they might affect engineers, I visited four widely differing regions of high seismicity. During this study tour, I examined the societal context in which seismic engineers operate and talked to many people involved in earthquake protection and response. The intention was to identify the ways in which the ability of communities to deal with earthquakes depend on societal factors such as economics, politics and more general cultural dimensions. Based on these investigations, I believe that seismic engineers can contribute more effectively to ensuring successful outcomes after an earthquake strikes if fully aware of these societal factors. We need to look beyond our narrow technical field of providing earthquake resistant facilities and widen our vision to consider the complex systems, both 'hard' and 'soft', in which those facilities will operate. E. F. Schumacher's famous book (Schumacher 1973) 'Small is beautiful' has the subtitle 'the study of economics as if people mattered'. I believe that seismic engineering should be practised 'as if people mattered'.

show abstract

Assessing seismic hazard of the East African Rift: a pilot study from GEM and AfricaArray

Cited by 63 publications

References 69 publications

The ISC-GEM Earthquake Catalogue (1904–2014): status after the Extension Project

The ISC-GEM Earthquake Catalogue (1904–2014): status after the Extension Project

Data schemas for multiple hazards, exposure and vulnerability

Dealing with earthquakes: the practice of seismic engineering ‘as if people mattered’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About