Risk Management

Dolce, Mauro; Bucci, Daniela Di

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-799935-7.00018-6

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is a significant help for decisionmakers in undertaking urban requalification or disaster risk mitigation activities (e.g. Dolce and Di Bucci, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variable-resolution building exposure modelling for earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk assessment. An application case in Lima, Peru

Zapata¹,

Brinckmann²,

Harig³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We propose the use of variable resolution boundaries based on Central Voronoi Tessellations (CVT) to spatially aggregate building exposure models for risk assessment to various natural hazards. Such a framework is especially beneficial when the spatial distribution of the considered hazards present intensity measures with contrasting footprints and spatial correlations such as in coastal environments. This proposal avoids the incorrect assumption that a single intensity value from hazards with low spatial correlation (e.g. tsunami) are considered as representative within large sized geocells for physical vulnerability assessment, without, at the same time, increasing the complexity of the overall model. We present decoupled earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk estimates for the residential building stock of Lima (Peru). We observe that earthquake loss models for far-field subduction sources are practically insensitive to the exposure resolution. Conversely, tsunami loss models and associated uncertainties depend on the spatial correlations of the hazard intensities as well as on the resolution of the exposure models. We observe that for the portfolio located in the coastal area exposed to both perils in Lima, the ground-shaking dominates the losses for lower magnitudes whilst the tsunami does for the larger ones. For the latter, two sets of existing empirical flow-depth fragility models are used, finding large differences in the losses. This study arises awareness about the uncertainties in the selection of fragility models and aggregations entities for exposure modelling and loss mapping.

show abstract

“…That is a significant help for decisionmakers in undertaking urban requalification or disaster risk mitigation activities (e.g. Dolce and Di Bucci, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variable-resolution building exposure modelling for earthquake and tsunami scenario-based risk assessment. An application case in Lima, Peru

Zapata¹,

Brinckmann²,

Harig³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are some papers covering the ethics of different aspects of volcano science, including, decision making for public safety (e.g., Dolce & Di Bucci, 2014;Toulkeridis et al, 2018), policy and governance (Donovan & Oppenheimer, 2014), volcano research and communication (Kelman, 2005;Neuberg, 2014). However, ethical considerations about volcano geoengineering have yet to be studied.…”

Section: Ethical Considerations Of Volcano Geoengineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Geoethics, the ethics of Earth Sciences, aims at research and reflection on the values upon which to base appropriate behavior and practice where human activities intersect the geosphere (Peppoloni & Di Capua, 2022). There are some papers covering the ethics of different aspects of volcano science, including, decision making for public safety (e.g., Dolce & Di Bucci, 2014; Toulkeridis et al., 2018), policy and governance (Donovan & Oppenheimer, 2014), volcano research and communication (Kelman, 2005; Neuberg, 2014). However, ethical considerations about volcano geoengineering have yet to be studied.…”

Section: Ethical Considerations Of Volcano Geoengineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethics of Volcano Geoengineering

Cassidy,

Sandberg,

Mani

2023

Earth's Future

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volcano geoengineering is the practice of altering the state of volcanic systems and/or volcanic eruptions to exploit them or mitigate their risk. Although many in the field insist there is little that can be done to mitigate the hazard, past examples of both intentional and inadvertent volcano interventions demonstrate that it is technically feasible to reach volcano plumbing systems or alter atmospheric processes following eruptions. Furthermore, we suggest that economical, political, and environmental pressures may make such interventions more common in the future. If volcano geoengineering ever becomes a discipline, it will need to overcome many safety and ethical concerns, including dealing with uncertainty, deciding on philosophical approaches such as a consequentialism or precautionary principle, justice and inequality, military uses, cultural values, and communication. We highlight that while volcano geoengineering has significant potential benefits, the risks and uncertainties are too great to justify its use in the short term. Despite this, because of the potential large benefits to society, we believe there is a strong ethical case to support research into the efficacy and safety of volcano geoengineering for its potential future use. We propose that rigorous governance and regulation of any volcano geoengineering is required to protect against potential risks, to enable potentially valuable and publicly available research (e.g., quantification of efficacy and safety), to ensure that any future policy must be co‐created through community engagement, and that volcano geoengineering should only be considered as part of larger mitigation practices.

show abstract