A quantitative model for estimating risk from multiple interacting natural hazards: an application to northeast Zhejiang, China

20Citations
Citations of this article
96Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Multi-hazard risk assessment is a major concern in risk analysis, but most approaches do not consider all hazard interactions when calculating possible losses. We address this problem by developing an improved quantitative model—Model for multi-hazard Risk assessment with a consideration of Hazard Interaction (MmhRisk-HI). This model calculates the possible loss caused by multiple hazards, with an explicit consideration of interaction between those hazards. There are two main components to the model. In the first, based on the hazard-forming environment, relationships among hazards are classified into four types for calculation of the exceedance probability of multiple hazards occurrence. In the second, a Bayesian network is used to calculate possible loss caused by multiple hazards with different exceedance probabilities. A multi-hazard risk map can then be drawn addressing the probability of multi-hazard occurrence and corresponding loss. This model was applied in northeast Zhejiang, China and validated by comparison against an observed multi-hazard sequence. The validation results show that the model can more effectively represent the real world, and that the modelled outputs, possible loss caused by multiple hazards, are reliable. The outputs can additionally help to identify areas at greatest risk, and allows a determination of the factors that contribute to that risk, and hence the model can provide useful further information for planners and decision-makers concerned with risk mitigation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Liu, B., Siu, Y. L., & Mitchell, G. (2017). A quantitative model for estimating risk from multiple interacting natural hazards: an application to northeast Zhejiang, China. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 31(6), 1319–1340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-016-1250-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free