2012
DOI: 10.1007/s10518-012-9373-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimating shaking-induced casualties and building damage for global earthquake events: a proposed modelling approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
48
0
3

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
48
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The vulnerability module evaluates the probability of building collapse for a given seismic intensity. The assessment is based on a set of applicable vulnerability models for global building typologies [e.g., Jaiswal et al (2011), So and Spence (2013), and Spence and Foulser-Piggott (2013)]. The seismic vulnerability classes of Malawian buildings are assigned based on the PAGER building typologies (Jaiswal and Wald, 2008) and EMS-98 (Grünthal, 1998).…”
Section: Methodology Analytical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The vulnerability module evaluates the probability of building collapse for a given seismic intensity. The assessment is based on a set of applicable vulnerability models for global building typologies [e.g., Jaiswal et al (2011), So and Spence (2013), and Spence and Foulser-Piggott (2013)]. The seismic vulnerability classes of Malawian buildings are assigned based on the PAGER building typologies (Jaiswal and Wald, 2008) and EMS-98 (Grünthal, 1998).…”
Section: Methodology Analytical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The vulnerability module is based on empirical prediction models of building collapse that are applicable to global building stock. Specifically, collapse prediction models by Jaiswal et al (2011), So and Spence (2013), and Spence and Foulser-Piggott (2013) are adopted. Details of the models differ, particularly in definitions of vulnerability classes for building typologies and methods for the model development.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Extensive studies have been carried out using building damage as a predictor variable for loss assessment (D'Ayala et al 1997;Bommer et al 2002;Goretti and Di Kappos et al 2006;So and Spence 2013;FEMA 2016), on the premise that damage to structures produces direct and indirect economic losses and fatalities. Damage can indeed be considered as a proxy of intensity, as macroseismic surveys completed after earthquakes are mainly derived from the observed damage for the strongest shaking ([ VII).…”
Section: Human Losses Considering Building Damagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on the observation that economic and social losses are generally related to physical damage caused to buildings (D'Ayala et al 1997;Bommer et al 2002;Coburn and Spence 2002;So and Spence 2013), models require a detailed inventory of buildings. Several such models have been developed to forecast socioeconomic losses; for example, the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) methodology (HAZUS) for the estimation of potential losses from disasters (FEMA 2016), and the Norwegian Seismic Array (NORSAR) methodology of seismic loss estimation (SELENA) that uses a logic tree approach (Molina et al 2010).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, updated casualty and injury ratios were produced based on a greater set of earthquakes. So and Spence (2009) explored further the relationship of building.…”
Section: Casualties As Direct Social Lossesmentioning
confidence: 99%