Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators
In a cross-disciplinary study, we carried out an extensive literature review to increase understanding of vulnerability indicators used in the disciplines of earthquake- and flood vulnerability assessments. We provide insights into potential improvements in both fields by identifying and compari...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2017-07-01
|
| Series: | Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences |
| Online Access: | https://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/1231/2017/nhess-17-1231-2017.pdf |
| _version_ | 1819064168127397888 |
|---|---|
| author | M. C. de Ruiter P. J. Ward J. E. Daniell J. C. J. H. Aerts |
| author_facet | M. C. de Ruiter P. J. Ward J. E. Daniell J. C. J. H. Aerts |
| author_sort | M. C. de Ruiter |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In a cross-disciplinary study, we carried out an extensive
literature review to increase understanding of vulnerability indicators used
in the disciplines of earthquake- and flood vulnerability assessments. We
provide insights into potential improvements in both fields by identifying
and comparing quantitative vulnerability indicators grouped into physical
and social categories. Next, a selection of index- and curve-based
vulnerability models that use these indicators are described, comparing
several characteristics such as temporal and spatial aspects. Earthquake
vulnerability methods traditionally have a strong focus on object-based
physical attributes used in vulnerability curve-based models, while flood
vulnerability studies focus more on indicators applied to aggregated land-use
classes in curve-based models. In assessing the differences and similarities
between indicators used in earthquake and flood vulnerability models, we only
include models that separately assess either of the two hazard types. Flood
vulnerability studies could be improved using approaches from earthquake
studies, such as developing object-based physical vulnerability curve
assessments and incorporating time-of-the-day-based building occupation
patterns. Likewise, earthquake assessments could learn from flood studies by
refining their selection of social vulnerability indicators. Based on the
lessons obtained in this study, we recommend future studies for exploring
risk assessment methodologies across different hazard types. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-21T15:26:17Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-3d137c5b77fe43eba1374dff9fd2a239 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1561-8633 1684-9981 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-21T15:26:17Z |
| publishDate | 2017-07-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-3d137c5b77fe43eba1374dff9fd2a2392022-12-21T18:58:54ZengCopernicus PublicationsNatural Hazards and Earth System Sciences1561-86331684-99812017-07-01171231125110.5194/nhess-17-1231-2017Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicatorsM. C. de Ruiter0P. J. Ward1J. E. Daniell2J. C. J. H. Aerts3Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1081HV, the NetherlandsInstitute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1081HV, the NetherlandsGeophysical Institute and Center for Disaster Management and Risk Reduction Technology, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, 76344, GermanyInstitute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1081HV, the NetherlandsIn a cross-disciplinary study, we carried out an extensive literature review to increase understanding of vulnerability indicators used in the disciplines of earthquake- and flood vulnerability assessments. We provide insights into potential improvements in both fields by identifying and comparing quantitative vulnerability indicators grouped into physical and social categories. Next, a selection of index- and curve-based vulnerability models that use these indicators are described, comparing several characteristics such as temporal and spatial aspects. Earthquake vulnerability methods traditionally have a strong focus on object-based physical attributes used in vulnerability curve-based models, while flood vulnerability studies focus more on indicators applied to aggregated land-use classes in curve-based models. In assessing the differences and similarities between indicators used in earthquake and flood vulnerability models, we only include models that separately assess either of the two hazard types. Flood vulnerability studies could be improved using approaches from earthquake studies, such as developing object-based physical vulnerability curve assessments and incorporating time-of-the-day-based building occupation patterns. Likewise, earthquake assessments could learn from flood studies by refining their selection of social vulnerability indicators. Based on the lessons obtained in this study, we recommend future studies for exploring risk assessment methodologies across different hazard types.https://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/1231/2017/nhess-17-1231-2017.pdf |
| spellingShingle | M. C. de Ruiter P. J. Ward J. E. Daniell J. C. J. H. Aerts Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences |
| title | Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators |
| title_full | Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators |
| title_fullStr | Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators |
| title_full_unstemmed | Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators |
| title_short | Review Article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators |
| title_sort | review article a comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators |
| url | https://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/1231/2017/nhess-17-1231-2017.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mcderuiter reviewarticleacomparisonoffloodandearthquakevulnerabilityassessmentindicators AT pjward reviewarticleacomparisonoffloodandearthquakevulnerabilityassessmentindicators AT jedaniell reviewarticleacomparisonoffloodandearthquakevulnerabilityassessmentindicators AT jcjhaerts reviewarticleacomparisonoffloodandearthquakevulnerabilityassessmentindicators |