Search results

The overall objective of this study is envisaged to provide decision makers with actionable insights and access to multi-risk maps for the most in-danger stave churches (SCs) among the existing 28 churches at high spatial resolution to better understand, reduce and mitigate single- and multi-risk. In addition, the present contribution aims to provide decision makers with some information to face the exacerbation of the risk caused by the expected climate change.

Material and data collection started with the consultation of the available literature related to: (1) SCs' conservation status, (2) available methodologies suitable in multi-hazard approach and (3) vulnerability leading indicators to consider when dealing with the impact of natural hazards specifically on immovable cultural heritage.

The paper contributes to a better understanding of place-based vulnerability with local mapping dimension also considering future threats posed by climate change. The results highlight the danger at which the SCs of Røldal, in case of floods, and of Ringebu, Torpo and Øye, in case of landslide, may face and stress the urgency of increasing awareness and preparedness on these potential hazards.

The contribution for the first time aims to homogeneously collect and report all together existing spread information on architectural features, conservation status and geographical attributes for the whole group of SCs by accompanying this information with as much as possible complete 2D sections collection from existing drawings and novel 3D drawn sketches created for this contribution. Then the paper contributes to a better understanding of place-based vulnerability with local mapping dimension also considering future threats posed by climate change. Then it highlights the danger of floods and landslides at which the 28 SCs are subjected. Finally it reports how these risks will change under the ongoing impact of climate change.

This paper aims to identify key factors for a contextualised Systemic Risk Governance (SRG) framework and subsequently explore how systemic risks can be managed and how local institutional mechanisms can be tweaked to deal with the complex Indonesian risk landscape.

Using a case study from Palu triple-disasters in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, the authors demonstrate how inland earthquakes in 2018 created cascading secondary hazards, namely tsunamis, liquefactions and landslides, caused unprecedented disasters for the communities and the nation. A qualitative analysis was conducted using the data collected through a long-term observation since 2002.

The authors argue that Indonesia has yet to incorporate an SRG approach in its responses to the Palu triple-disasters. Political will is required to adopt more appropriate risk governance modes that promote the systemic risk paradigm. Change needs to occur incrementally through hybrid governance arrangements ranging from formal/informal methods to self- and horizontal and vertical modes of governance deemed more realistic and feasible. The authors recommend that this be done by focusing on productive transition and local transformation.

There is growing awareness and recognition of the importance of systemic and cascading risks in disaster risk studies. However, there are still gaps between research, policy and practice. The current progress of disaster risk governance is not sufficient to achieve the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030) unless there is an effective governing system in place at the local level that allow actors and institutions to simultaneously manage the interplays of multi-hazards, multi-temporal, multi-dimensions of vulnerabilities and residual risks. This paper contributes to these knowledge gaps.

Construction industry and the built environment professions play an important role in contributing to society’s improved resilience. It is therefore important to improve their knowledgebase to strengthen their capacities. This paper aims to identify gaps in the knowledgebase of construction professionals that are undermining their ability to contribute to the development of a more disaster resilient society. The paper also provides a series of recommendations to key actors in the built environment on how to more effectively mainstream disaster resilience in the construction process.

The paper reports the findings of 87 stakeholder interviews with: national and local government organisations; the community; non-governmental organisations, international non-governmental organisation and other international agencies; academia and research organisations; and the private sector, which were supplemented by a comprehensive analysis of key policies related to disaster resilience and management. The findings were validated using focus group discussions that were conducted as part of six organised stakeholder workshops.

The primary and secondary data generated a long list of needs and skills. Finally, the identified needs and skills were combined “like-for-like” to produce broader knowledge gaps. Some of the key knowledge gaps identified are: governance, legal frameworks and compliance; business continuity management; disaster response; contracts and procurement; resilience technologies, engineering and infrastructure; knowledge management; social and cultural awareness; sustainability and resilience; ethics and human rights; innovative financing mechanisms; multi stakeholder approach, inclusion and empowerment; post disaster project management; and multi hazard risk assessment. The study also identifies a series of recommendations to key actors in the built environment on how to more effectively mainstream disaster resilience in the construction process. The recommendations are set out in five key themes: education, policy, practice, research and cross-cutting.

This study is part of an EU funded research project that is seeking to develop innovative and timely professional education that will update the knowledge and skills of construction professionals in the industry and enable them to contribute more effectively to disaster resilience building efforts.

The paper provides an extensive analysis of the gaps in the knowledgebase of construction professionals that are undermining their ability to contribute to the development of a more disaster resilient society. Accordingly, the paper recommends major changes in construction education, research, policy and practice with respect to mainstreaming disaster resilience within the construction process.

Hazard risk communication has arguably been a challenge, especially in communities which are susceptible to multiple hazards. Orewa was specially chosen for this research in order to provide a complete assessment of the effectiveness of communicating New Zealand's early warning strategy in a multi-hazard area. Two categories of surveys were undertaken; experts and academics in emergency management and disaster risk resilience and the Orewa community. A semi-qualitative indicator-based analysis was conducted with the normalization of index values which resulted in four (4) categories; risk perception, risk awareness, risk governance and uncertainty, trust and credibility. The resulting vulnerability index indicated that risk perception and uncertainty, trust and credibility ranked the highest, followed by risk awareness and risk governance. Risk perception had stark differences between what the community perceives as being most at risk from to what the experts deem to be the highest risk for Orewa. This has implications for policy directives as well as funding for risk reduction. Uncertainty, trust and credibility was another area which indicated conflicting sentiments between the community and experts. The community generally trusts decision-makers but the experts think they don't. This shows that the community is aware of their risks, but may not necessarily believe that the experts are providing enough efforts in what is of importance to them. Risk governance is not a vulnerable area to the experts as they have been actively engaging in hazards that they deem Orewa was most at risk from. Any breakdown in communication can have detrimental effects if multiple hazards were to occur at once in the case of Orewa.

The purpose of this paper is to present and validate a large-scale methodology for risk assessment and management in cultural heritage sites, taking into account their specific tangible or intangible values. Emphasis is given to historic centres that are key resources in building resilience to disasters but are also highly vulnerable due to several factors, such as the characteristics of the built environment, the community and social life, the lack of risk awareness and maintenance and finally the poor regulatory framework for their management and valorisation.

The multi-step procedure starts from the assessment of the attributes of cultural heritage in order to identify priorities and address the analysis. Then, it evaluates the primary and secondary hazards in the area, the vulnerabilities and threats of the site and the impacts of the chain of events. Finally, it allows for calibrating a site-specific set of mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery measures.

The application to two case studies in the Italian peninsula, the historic centres of San Gimignano and Reggio Calabria, allows for identifying research gaps and practical opportunities towards the adoption of common guidelines for the selection of safety measures.

By providing a qualitative assessment of risks, the research points out the potentialities of the methodology in the disaster risk management of cultural heritage due to its capacity to be comprehensive and inclusive towards disciplines and professionals.

Worldwide, natural hazards are affecting urban cultural heritage and World Heritage Sites, exacerbating other environmental and human-induced threats deriving from deterioration, uncontrolled urbanization and unsustainable tourism. This paper aims to develop a disaster risk analysis in Italian historic centers because they are complex large-scale systems that are cultural and economic resources for the country, as well as fragile areas.

A heritage-oriented qualitative methodology for risk assessment is proposed based upon the formalization of risk as a function of hazard, vulnerability and exposure, taking into account the values of cultural heritage assets.

This work provides a contribution to the body of knowledge in the Italian context of disaster risk mitigation on World Heritage Sites, opening for further research on the monitoring and maintenance of the tangible heritage assets. The application to the site of San Gimignano proves the effectiveness of the methodology for proposing preventive measures and actions that ensure the preservation of cultural values and a safer built environment.

The application of a value-based simplified approach to risk analysis is a novelty for historic centers that are listed as World Heritage Sites.

Aim of this paper is to evaluate the reliability of UNESCO Periodic Reports for the assessment of hazards affecting the UNESCO world heritage sites (WHSs) and to rank the most critical WHSs in Europe through multicriteria analysis.

The Periodic Reports represent the available continental-scale knowledge on hazards that threaten the WHSs in Europe and include 13 different natural threats. The information included in these reports has been first validated with high-quality data available in Italy for volcanoes, landslides, and earthquakes. Starting from the Periodic Reports, a multicriteria hazard analysis has been developed by using the analytical hierarchy procedure (AHP) approach. This analysis allows to identify and to rank the most critical WHSs at the European scale.

The data provided by Periodic Reports are demonstrated to be a good starting point for a continental-scale analysis of the actual distribution of natural threats affecting WHSs in Europe. The Periodic Reports appear to be reliable enough for a first-order assessment of hazards. The general overview of the hazard at the European scale shows high value of hazard index in the Eastern Mediterranean area and Balkans, due to a combination of earthquakes and landslides. The most at danger cultural site is in Bosnia and Herzegovina, while the most at danger natural site is Norway.

The paper gives a contribution to improve the continental-scale knowledge on hazards affecting the UNESCO heritage sites. The assessment of hazard inside the WHSs is an important task for the preservation of cultural and natural heritage, and it is important for UNESCO to achieve some of its goals. Through this research, European WHSs have been ranked according to their degree of hazard.