Advertisement

Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 547–565 | Cite as

New methodology for urban seismic risk assessment from a holistic perspective

  • Martha L. Carreño
  • Omar D. Cardona
  • Alex H. Barbat
Original Research Paper

Abstract

The seismic risk evaluation usually works with a fragmented concept of risk, which depends on the scientific discipline in charge of the assessment. To achieve an effective performance of the risk management, it is necessary to define risk as the potential economic, social and environmental consequences due to a hazardous phenomenon in a period of time. This article presents a methodology which evaluates the seismic risk from a holistic perspective, which means, it takes into account the expected physical damage and also the conditions related to social fragility and lack of resilience, which favour the second order effects when a hazard event strikes an urban centre. This seeks to obtain results which are useful in the decision making process for risk reduction. The proposed method for urban seismic risk evaluation uses the fuzzy sets theory in order to handle qualitative concepts and variables involved in the assessment, the physical risk level and aggravation level, related to the social fragility and the lack of resilience, are evaluated and finally a total risk level is determinate.

Keywords

Holistic approach Risk evaluation Seismic risk Urban risk Socio-economic vulnerability Fuzzy sets 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barbat AH, Cardona OD (2003) Vulnerability and disaster risk indices from engineering perspective and holistic approach to consider hard and soft variables at urban level. IDB/IDEA Program on Indicators for Disaster Risk Management, http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Manizales
  2. Barbat AH, Mena U, Yépez F (1998) Evaluación probabilista del riesgo sísmico en zonas urbanas. Revista internacional de métodos numéricos para cálculo y diseño en ingeniería 14(2): 247–268Google Scholar
  3. Barbat AH, Pujades LG, Lantada N, Moreno R (2006) Performance of buildings under earthquakes in Barcelona Spain. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 21: 573–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbat AH, Pujades LG, Lantada N, Moreno R (2008) Seismic damage evaluation in urban areas using the capacity spectrum method: application to Barcelona. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 28: 851–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barbat AH, Carreño ML, Pujades LG, Lantada N, Cardona OD, Marulanda MC (2010) Seismic vulnerability and risk evaluation methods for urban areas. A review with application to a pilot area. Struct Infrastruct Eng 6(1–2): 17–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barbat AH, Carreño ML, Cardona OD, Marulanda MC (2011) Evaluación holística del riesgo sísmico en zonas urbanas, Revista Internacional de Métodos Numéricos para Cálculo y Diseño en Ingeniería 27:3–27Google Scholar
  7. Cardona OD (2001) Holistic evaluation of the seismic risk using complex dynamic systems (in Spanish). PhD Thesis, Technical University of Catalonia, Barcelona, SpainGoogle Scholar
  8. Cardona OD (2004) The need for rethinking the concepts of vulnerability and risk from a holistic perspective: a necessary review and criticism for effective risk management. In: Bankoff G, Frerks G, Hilhorst D (eds) Mapping vulnerability: disasters, development and people. Earthscan Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Cardona OD (2009) Disaster risk and vulnerability: notions and measurement of human and environmental insecurity. In: Brauch HG, Oswald Spring U, Mesjasz C, Grin J, Kameri-Mbote P, Chourou B, Dunay P, Birkmann J (eds) Coping with global environmental change, disasters and security—threats, challenges, vulnerabilities and risks. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  10. Cardona OD, Hurtado JE (2000) Holistic seismic risk estimation of a metropolitan center. In: Proceedings of 12th world conference of earthquake engineering, Auckland, New ZelandGoogle Scholar
  11. Cardona OD, Barbat AH (2000) El Riesgo Sísmico y su Prevención, Cuaderno Técnico 5, Calidad Siderúrgica, MadridGoogle Scholar
  12. Cardona OD, Hurtado JE, Duque G, Moreno A, Chardon AC, Velásquez LS, Prieto SD (2003) Indicators for risk measurement: methodological fundamentals, BID/IDEA Programa de Indicadores para la Gestión de Riesgos, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Manizales. http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co.
  13. Carreño ML (2006) Técnicas innovadoras para la evaluación del riego sísmico y su gestión en centros urbanos: Acciones ex ante y ex post. PhD Thesis, Technical University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain, Departamento de Ingeniería del Terreno, cartografía y geofísicaGoogle Scholar
  14. Carreño ML, Cardona OD, Barbat AH (2007) Urban seismic risk evaluation: a holistic approach. Nat Hazards 40(1): 132–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carreño ML, Cardona OD, Barbat AH (2007) Disaster risk management performance index. Nat Hazards 41: 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ICC/CIMNE (2004) An advanced approach to earthquake risk scenarios with applications to different european towns, WP08, Application to Barcelona, RISK-UE ProjectGoogle Scholar
  17. IDEA (2005) System of indicators for disaster risk management: main technical report. IDB/IDEA Programme of Indicators for Disaster Risk Management, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, ManizalesGoogle Scholar
  18. Lantada N, Pujades LG, Barbat AH (2009) Vulnerability index and capacity spectrum based methods for urban seismic risk evaluation. A comparison. Nat Hazards 51: 501–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marulanda MC, Cardona OD, Barbat AH (2009) Robustness of the holistic seismic risk evaluation in urban centers using the USRi. Nat Hazards 49: 501–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Masure P (2003) Variables and indicators of vulnerability and disaster risk for land-use and urban or territorial planning. IDB/IDEA Programa de Indicadores para la Gestión de Riesgos, http://idea.unalmzl.edu.co, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Manizales
  21. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1991) Prediction, projection, and forecasting: applications of the analytical hierarchy process in economics, finance, politics, games, and sports. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  22. UNDRO (1980) Natural disasters and vulnerability analysis. Report of Experts Group Meeting, UNDRO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  23. Universidad de los Andes (2005) Escenarios de riesgo y pérdidas por terremoto para Bogota, D.C, Centro de Estudios sobre Desastres y Riesgos CEDERI, Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá, Dirección de Prevención y Atención de Emergencias, DPAE, Bogota, Colombia, 2005Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martha L. Carreño
    • 1
    • 3
  • Omar D. Cardona
    • 2
  • Alex H. Barbat
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre Internacional de Mètodes Numèrics en Enginyeria (CIMNE)BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Universidad Nacional de ColombiaManizalesColombia
  3. 3.Technical University of CataloniaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations