Search

Multi-hazard risk assessments for building portfolios exposed to earthquake shaking followed by a tsunami are usually based on empirical vulnerability models calibrated on post-event surveys of damaged buildings. The applicability of these models cannot easily be extrapolated to other regions of larger/smaller events. Moreover, the quantitative evaluation of the damages related to each of the hazard types (disaggregation) is impossible. To investigate cumulative damage on extended building portfolios, this study proposes an alternative and modular method to probabilistically integrate sets of single-hazard vulnerability models that are constantly being developed and calibrated by experts from various research fields to be used within a multi-risk context. This method is based on the proposal of state-dependent fragility functions for the triggered hazard to account for the pre-existing damage and the harmonisation of building classes and damage states through their taxonomic characterisation, which is transversal to any hazard-dependent vulnerability. This modular assemblage also allows us to separate the economic losses expected for each scenario on building portfolios subjected to cascading hazards. We demonstrate its application by assessing the economic losses expected for the residential building stock of Lima, Peru, a megacity commonly exposed to consecutive earthquake and tsunami scenarios. We show the importance of accounting for damage accumulation on extended building portfolios while observing a dependency between the earthquake magnitude and the direct economic losses derived for each hazard scenario. For the commonly exposed residential building stock of Lima exposed to both perils, we find that classical tsunami empirical fragility functions lead to underestimations of predicted losses for lower magnitudes (Mw) and large overestimations for larger Mw events in comparison to our state-dependent models and cumulative-damage method.

The death toll and monetary damages from landslides continue to rise despite advancements in predictive modeling. The predictive capability of these models is limited as landslide databases used in training and assessing the models often have crucial information missing, such as underlying failure types. Here, we present an approach for identifying failure types based on their movements, e.g., slides and flows by leveraging 3D landslide topology. We observe topological proxies reveal prevalent signatures of mass movement mechanics embedded in the landslide's morphology or shape, such as detecting coupled movement styles within complex landslides. We find identical failure types exhibit similar topological properties, and by using them as predictors, we can identify failure types in historic and event-specific landslide databases (including multi-temporal) from various geomorphological and climatic contexts such as Italy, the US Pacific Northwest region, Denmark, Turkey, and China with 80 to 94 % accuracy. To demonstrate the real-world application of the method, we implement it in two undocumented datasets from China and publicly release the datasets. These new insights can considerably improve the performance of landslide predictive models and impact assessments. Moreover, our work introduces a new paradigm for studying landslide shapes to understand underlying processes through the lens of landslide topology., Comment: 23 pages, 11 figures

Extreme climatic and geophysical events pose a threat to societies and have the capacity to cause significant damage and losses whenever they occur, both in their immediate aftermath and in the medium- to long-term. Their consequences can be amplified even further when more than one event affects the same geographical areas within a short time. Be it cascading hazards, in which one event triggers the next, or simply hazards that happen to occur simultaneously (“compounding” hazards), estimation of their cumulative consequences is challenging because the action of one event affects the exposure and vulnerability to the next one. While the efforts from the research community to develop multi-hazard perspectives have increased considerably in recent years, multiple remaining challenges require strongly-coordinated efforts across different disciplines and areas of expertise to tackle them with the most appropriate tools. With a multidisciplinary team of scientists from four different Helmholtz research centres in Germany, we have started working on the CASCO project (2022-2024), in which we will develop an integrated risk workflow for CAScading and COmpounding hazards in COastal urban areas by focusing on a series of events occurring around Mount Etna (Italy). The case-scenario starts with a strong earthquake that triggers a submarine collapse at the eastern flank of Mount Etna, an area already known to be unstable, and both the earthquake and the landslide trigger a tsunami that hits the coasts of Sicily and Calabria. Almost concomitantly, a heatwave or heavy rainfall happens to affect the same regions, further stressing the population that had been affected by the combined effects of the earthquake and tsunami. The project will be directed towards the modelling of the cascading earthquake, landslide and tsunami events, the compounding heatwave and rainfall, as well as their immediate impacts in terms of cumulative damage and casualties. Moreover, the medium- to long-t

The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) results from a community-based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment supported by the EU-FP7 project "Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe” (SHARE, 2009-2013). The ESHM13 is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties. It is the first completed regional effort contributing to the "Global Earthquake Model” initiative. It might serve as a reference model for various applications, from earthquake preparedness to earthquake risk mitigation strategies, including the update of the European seismic regulations for building design (Eurocode 8), and thus it is useful for future safety assessment and improvement of private and public buildings. Although its results constitute a reference for Europe, they do not replace the existing national design regulations that are in place for seismic design and construction of buildings. The ESHM13 represents a significant improvement compared to previous efforts as it is based on (1) the compilation of updated and harmonised versions of the databases required for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (2) the adoption of standard procedures and robust methods, especially for expert elicitation and consensus building among hundreds of European experts, (3) the multi-disciplinary input from all branches of earthquake science and engineering, (4) the direct involvement of the CEN/TC250/SC8 committee in defining output specifications relevant for Eurocode 8 and (5) the accounting for epistemic uncertainties of model components and hazard results. Furthermore, enormous effort was devoted to transparently document and ensure open availability of all data, results and methods through the European Facility for Earthquake Hazard and Risk ( www.efehr.org ).

The Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE) project, which began in June 2009, aims at establishing new standards for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in the Euro-Mediterranean region. In this context, a logic tree for ground-motion prediction in Europe has been constructed. Ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and weights have been determined so that the logic tree captures epistemic uncertainty in ground-motion prediction for six different tectonic regimes in Europe. Here we present the strategy that we adopted to build such a logic tree. This strategy has the particularity of combining two complementary and independent approaches: expert judgment and data testing. A set of six experts was asked to weight pre-selected GMPEs while the ability of these GMPEs to predict available data was evaluated with the method of Scherbaum et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:3234-3247, 2009). Results of both approaches were taken into account to commonly select the smallest set of GMPEs to capture the uncertainty in ground-motion prediction in Europe. For stable continental regions, two models, both from eastern North America, have been selected for shields, and three GMPEs from active shallow crustal regions have been added for continental crust. For subduction zones, four models, all non-European, have been chosen. Finally, for active shallow crustal regions, we selected four models, each of them from a different host region but only two of them were kept for long periods. In most cases, a common agreement has been also reached for the weights. In case of divergence, a sensitivity analysis of the weights on the seismic hazard has been conducted, showing that once the GMPEs have been selected, the associated set of weights has a smaller influence on the hazard

The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) results from a community-based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment supported by the EU-FP7 project “Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe” (SHARE, 2009–2013). The ESHM13 is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties. It is the first completed regional effort contributing to the “Global Earthquake Model” initiative. It might serve as a reference model for various applications, from earthquake preparedness to earthquake risk mitigation strategies, including the update of the European seismic regulations for building design (Eurocode 8), and thus it is useful for future safety assessment and improvement of private and public buildings. Although its results constitute a reference for Europe, they do not replace the existing national design regulations that are in place for seismic design and construction of buildings. The ESHM13 represents a significant improvement compared to previous efforts as it is based on (1) the compilation of updated and harmonised versions of the databases required for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (2) the adoption of standard procedures and robust methods, especially for expert elicitation and consensus building among hundreds of European experts, (3) the multi-disciplinary input from all branches of earthquake science and engineering, (4) the direct involvement of the CEN/TC250/SC8 committee in defining output specifications relevant for Eurocode 8 and (5) the accounting for epistemic uncertainties of model components and hazard results. Furthermore, enormous effort was devoted to transparently document and ensure open availability of all data, results and methods through the European Facility for Earthquake Hazard and Risk (www.​efehr.​org).

The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) results from a community-based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment supported by the EU-FP7 project “Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe” (SHARE, 2009–2013). The ESHM13 is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties. It is the first completed regional effort contributing to the “Global Earthquake Model” initiative. It might serve as a reference model for various applications, from earthquake preparedness to earthquake risk mitigation strategies, including the update of the European seismic regulations for building design (Eurocode 8), and thus it is useful for future safety assessment and improvement of private and public buildings. Although its results constitute a reference for Europe, they do not replace the existing national design regulations that are in place for seismic design and construction of buildings. The ESHM13 represents a significant improvement compared to previous efforts as it is based on (1) the compilation of updated and harmonised versions of the databases required for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (2) the adoption of standard procedures and robust methods, especially for expert elicitation and consensus building among hundreds of European experts, (3) the multi-disciplinary input from all branches of earthquake science and engineering, (4) the direct involvement of the CEN/TC250/SC8 committee in defining output specifications relevant for Eurocode 8 and (5) the accounting for epistemic uncertainties of model components and hazard results. Furthermore, enormous effort was devoted to transparently document and ensure open availability of all data, results and methods through the European Facility for Earthquake Hazard and Risk (www.​efehr.​org).

The determination of near-surface attenuation for hard rock sites is an important issue in a wide range of seismological applications, particularly seismic hazard analysis. In this article we choose six hard to very-hard rock sites (Vs30 1030-3000 m s-1) and apply a range of analysis methods to measure the observed attenuation at distance based on a simple exponential decay model with whole-path attenuation operator κr. The κr values are subsequently decoupled from path attenuation (Q) so as to obtain estimates of near-surface attenuation (κ0). Five methods are employed to measure κr which can be split into two groups: broad-band methods and high-frequency methods. Each of the applied methods has advantages and disadvantages, which are explored and discussed through the comparison of results from common data sets. In our first step we examine the variability of the individual measured κr values. Some variation between methods is expected due to simplifications of source, path, and site effects. However, we find that significant differences arise between attenuation measured on individual recordings, depending on the method employed or the modelling decisions made during a particular approach. Some of the differences can be explained through site amplification effects: although usually weak at rock sites, amplification may still lead to bias of the measured κr due to the chosen fitting frequency bandwidth, which often varies between methods. At some sites the observed high-frequency spectral shape was clearly different to the typical κr attenuation model, with curved or bi-linear rather than linear decay at high frequencies. In addition to amplification effects this could be related to frequency-dependent attenuation effects [e.g. Q( f )]: since the κr model is implicitly frequency independent, κr will in this case be dependent on the selected analysis bandwidth. In our second step, using the whole-path κr data sets from the five approaches, we investigate the robust

With the aim of improving seismic ground-motion models in Europe and reducing associated uncertainties, the compilation of a high-quality database of seismic-motion recordings and associated metadata is of primary importance. SIGMA research and development project, devoted to the improvement of seismic hazard estimates, methods and data for France and nearby regions, has been funding the implementation of RESORCE (Reference databaSe fOR seismiC ground-motion in Europe, Akkar et al., 2014).

The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) results from a community-based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment supported by the EU-FP7 project "Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe” (SHARE, 2009-2013). The ESHM13 is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties. It is the first completed regional effort contributing to the "Global Earthquake Model” initiative. It might serve as a reference model for various applications, from earthquake preparedness to earthquake risk mitigation strategies, including the update of the European seismic regulations for building design (Eurocode 8), and thus it is useful for future safety assessment and improvement of private and public buildings. Although its results constitute a reference for Europe, they do not replace the existing national design regulations that are in place for seismic design and construction of buildings. The ESHM13 represents a significant improvement compared to previous efforts as it is based on (1) the compilation of updated and harmonised versions of the databases required for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (2) the adoption of standard procedures and robust methods, especially for expert elicitation and consensus building among hundreds of European experts, (3) the multi-disciplinary input from all branches of earthquake science and engineering, (4) the direct involvement of the CEN/TC250/SC8 committee in defining output specifications relevant for Eurocode 8 and (5) the accounting for epistemic uncertainties of model components and hazard results. Furthermore, enormous effort was devoted to transparently document and ensure open availability of all data, results and methods through the European Facility for Earthquake Hazard and Risk ( www.efehr.org ).

The Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE) project, which began in June 2009, aims at establishing new standards for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in the Euro-Mediterranean region. In this context, a logic tree for ground-motion prediction in Europe has been constructed. Ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and weights have been determined so that the logic tree captures epistemic uncertainty in ground-motion prediction for six different tectonic regimes in Europe. Here we present the strategy that we adopted to build such a logic tree. This strategy has the particularity of combining two complementary and independent approaches: expert judgment and data testing. A set of six experts was asked to weight pre-selected GMPEs while the ability of these GMPEs to predict available data was evaluated with the method of Scherbaum et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:3234-3247, 2009). Results of both approaches were taken into account to commonly select the smallest set of GMPEs to capture the uncertainty in ground-motion prediction in Europe. For stable continental regions, two models, both from eastern North America, have been selected for shields, and three GMPEs from active shallow crustal regions have been added for continental crust. For subduction zones, four models, all non-European, have been chosen. Finally, for active shallow crustal regions, we selected four models, each of them from a different host region but only two of them were kept for long periods. In most cases, a common agreement has been also reached for the weights. In case of divergence, a sensitivity analysis of the weights on the seismic hazard has been conducted, showing that once the GMPEs have been selected, the associated set of weights has a smaller influence on the hazard