ag afps 2015 keynote-dolce seismic risk management - … · seismic risk management: roles and...

Seismic Risk Management: Roles and Responsibilities

in the Decision Making Process

Mauro DolceDipartimento della Protezione Civile

Assemblée Générale AFPS 2015 Paris 11 juin 2015 Amphithéâtre Auguste Brulé de laFédération Nationale de Travaux Publics, 3 rue de Berri 75008 Paris

www.protezionecivile.gov.it

Civil Protection vs. ScienceThe National

CP system

Contributions of Contributions of

Science to Civil

Protection

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works

Centres of Competence

INGV EUCENTRE ReLUIS

Risk management: roles and

responsibilities in the decision-making

process

02


Within the Risk Cycle , Decision Makers and Scientists provide different contributions to the risk management, with frequent and intricate interactions that can cause distortions in their roles , and thus of the responsibilities .

Scientists and Decision Makersin the risk management

Other subjects play important roles, and thus indirectly condition decisions:

• Mass media• Citizens• Judiciary


4

Scientists vs. decision makers 1

Two different points of view have to be reconciled.

Scientists Scientists often model

events that occurred in the

past in order to understand

their dynamics

Decision makers Decision makers need well

tested and complete

models, able to describe

events possibly occurring in

the future

Scientific approach Scientific approach to risks is

often probabilistic, always

affected by uncertainties

DecisionsDecisions require a yes/no

answer


5

Scientists vs. decision makers 2

ScientistsScientists need a relatively

long time, in order to acquire

more data to reduce

uncertainties, preferring to

wait rather than to be wrong

Decision makers Decision makers must often

give an immediate

response, often balancing

low probabilities vs.

catastrophic consequences


6

To clarify specific roles and responsibilities, decision makers should be distinguished into:

– Political Decision Makers (PDMs)

– Technical Decision Makers (TDMs)

Political vs. TecnicalDecision Makers

Additional distinctions could be made, e.g. PDMs operating:

• at national or local level,

• on general risk management policies or specific scenarios.


7

Steps of an ideal civil protection decision-making process:

Decision -Making processin Civil Protection

• Scientists should deal with steps 2 and 4;• PDMs should deal with step 1;• TDMs typically manage steps 3, 5 and 6 .

1) definition of the acceptable level of risk according to established policy;

2) quantitative evaluation of risk (H*V*E);

3) identification of specific actions capable of red ucing the risk to the acceptable level;

4) cost-benefit evaluation of possible risk-mitigating actions;

5) adoption of the most suitable technical solution ;

6) implementation of risk-mitigating actions.


8

Distortions of the roles imply some confusion and undue responsibilities in the decision.

This occurs especially if some of the participants in the decisional process:


• Do not / cannot accomplish their tasks

• go beyond their role.


9

• Scientists could either:� not provide fully quantitative evaluations,� not supply scientific support in cost-benefit analyses , � give undue advice concerning civil protection actions;

• PDMs could decide not to establish “acceptable risk” levels ;

• TDMs could tend (or be forced, in emergency conditions) making and implementing decisions they are not in charge for, because of the lack of: � scientific quantitative evaluations, � “acceptable risk” statements (or impossibility to get).



In peace time:

Every citizen should reduce the risks affecting his life and goods:

• being aware of the risks he is exposed

• adopting personal//family precautionary measures

• inducing political representatives to carry prevention policies

• verifying that CP authorities prepare civil protection plans to contrast catastrophic events and knowing them

Civil protection and citizens


In case (or in the imminence) of an event :

Citizens should undertake different actions , depending on the kind of risk and its related forecasting probabilities:

• In case of an alert , citizens should follow and implement the civil protection plan and the correct individual behaviours

• In case of very low occurrence probabilities , citizensshould adopt individual behaviours , calibrated on their ownrisk acceptability

Civil protection and citizens

www.protezionecivile.gov.itCivil Protection and Media

Traps• Information distorsion• Accreditation of a-scientific

ideas and opinions• Political exploitation• False alarms

Advantages• Dissemination of knowledge

about risks and prevention to increase people awareness

• Immediate spread of usefulinformation during emergency

We have the duty of communicating with citizens, but we are voiceless and invisible if we don’t pass through the «cultural mediation» of the information channels and their managers. Maybe we have neither analyzed deeply enough the consequences of such mediation, nor we have learned wellenough to avoid traps and to take the possible advantages . (F. Gabrielli , Head of DPC, 2011)


13

Wilbur Schramm (1954): "It is misleading to think of the communication process as starting somewhere and ending somewhere . It is really endless . We are little switchboard centers handling and rerouting the great endless current of information.... "

Civil Protection and Media

"Cause and effects" in theories of mass communicati on

Berelson (1949): "Some kinds of communication , on some kinds of issues , brought to the attention of some kinds of people , under some kinds of conditions , have some kinds of effects .“


14

Civil Protection and Judiciary

… a significant increase of the judiciary actions after a disaster has occured, to find the guilt in the behaviour of the catastrophe management actors. The investigation area isenlarged to the phase of prevision and of "previsioninformation management " … (F. Gabrielli , Head of DPC, 2011)

The question is very complex and also dependson the legal framework of each country .

It is interesting to look at the considerations of magistrates and experts made during a dedicatedmeeting “Civil Protection and Responsibilities in the Risk Society ”, 2011.


• “I realize … that most of the people feel the need to find a responsible,

… to know who has to be blamed for what happened. … And the mass

media world amplifies this request of justice” (*)

• “Accusatory approach to the error: a scheme of analysis for which, …,

the main effort is made to find who is the possible responsible for the

occurred event, in order to punish him”…(**)

• "... progressive and regular adoption of behaviours not aimed at better

managing the risk, but rather at attempting to minimize the possibility

to be personally involved in a future legal controversy”(**)

• “The idea of allowed risk …: it is difficult to establish the equilibrium

point … the referee who establishes the boundary between licit and

illicit is just the judge”(***).

Civil Protection and Judiciary

(*) Renato Bricchetti, President of the Court of Lecco

(**) Francesco D’Alessandro, Professor of Criminal Law, Università Cattolica di Milano

(***) Rocco Blaiotta, Judge of the Supreme Court of Cassation

(From “Protezione Civile e responsabilità nella società del rischio”, 2011 )


The National

CP system

Risk management: roles and


process

Civil Protection vs. Science


Science to Civil

Protection

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Consultancies on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works



12


17

Two main aspects of the relationships between Science and Civil Protection from the CP point of view:

• Scientific advances can allow for more effective CP decisions and actions concerning the entire risk cycle .

• CP has to suitably shape its activities and operational procedures without delay , to take into account these advances.

Civil Protection vs. Science


18

Civil Protection vs. ScienceCP procedures

CP needs procedures to:• improve efficiency in CP actions

• avoid legal controversies

CP procedures must be:

• consistent

• flexible

• clear (application, responsibility)

• sustainable

Incorporating, in the CP procedures, new scientific advancements that increase or do notquantify uncertainty is "uncomfortable "


19

• CP organisations are different in different countries , therefore a technical-scientific product/tool/study which issuitable for one can turn out to be inadequate for another.

• Each CP organization has its own procedures , that are derived from the distillation of practical experiences and successive adjustments .

• The procedures are “digested” by the CP personnel and officials, the CP system and, sometimes, media and population , thus creating complex interrelationships which are hard and sometimes dangerous to change abruptly .

Civil Protection vs. ScienceCP procedures

Changing procedures can be much more difficult than improving scientific tools


20

• Scientific products, i.e. any scientific result, tool, finding ,are often not derived from an overall view of the reality

• They tend to emphasize some aspects , whileoversimplifying others

• Results can turn out to be unreliable for practicalapplications , sometimes falsely precise .

To be useful to decision makers, CP finalized researchshould proceed in close cooperation when definingobjectives and products to achieve, as well as whenvalidating results and/or tools .

Civil Protection vs. ScienceScientific products for CP


21

Science can contribute to CP in the following two ways:


2. Scientific products specifically requested by CP

1. Scientific products made available spontaneously :

a. multitude of information on the same subject, inconsistent or conflicting

b. totally new information "standing out from the cro wd" , proposed as innovative/revolutionary/fundamental , often conveyed to the public through media

c. totally new (valuable) information , which needsadaptation for CP operability


22

Case 2 (requested products):

The product can be:

• not suitably shaped for direct translation into CP actions

• not provided at all

Case 1 (spontaneous products):

Immediate full operability of new scientific findings for CP actions is expected, without caring for their reliability.

On the contrary, it is necessary to:• verify the scientific correctness and reliability as well as the

consensus of the scientific community

• select the best or the right product among the many avalable


www.protezionecivile.gov.itRisk management: roles and


process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works



20


The National Service of Civil Protection of Italy (Law 225/1992) aims at safeguarding human life and health, properties, national heritage, human settlements an d the environment from all natural or man-made disasters .

It deals with:Forecasting and Warning

Prevention and Mitigation

Rescue and Assistance

Emergency overcoming

Mandate ofNational System of Civil Protection in Italy


National Fire-fightersPolicePrefectures

INGVCNRNational ResearchInstitutes

118

Financial Police

ArmyNavyAir ForceCarabinieri

TERNA

Costal GuardANASNational Highway National Railway

State Forest Corps

ISPRA

Interior

Economy and Finance

Foreign Affairs

Environment

University and Research

Infrastructures

Defence

Agricultural Policy and Forestry

Communications

Economic Development

Health

Cultural Heritage

Regions

Provinces

Municipalities

Transportation

Public Education

National Service of Civil Protection of Italy

PRESIDENCY

OF THE

COUNCIL

OF

MINISTERS

Department of Civil Protection

volunteersvolunteers

High Risk Commission


NATIONAL LEVELNATIONAL LEVELNATIONAL LEVELNATIONAL LEVEL

REGIONALLEVELREGIONALLEVEL

a

c

b

PROVINCIALLEVELPROVINCIALLEVEL

MUNICIPALITYMUNICIPALITYLEVELLEVEL

Regional Functional Centre

Regional Operational Room

Operational Committee

Major risks Commission

Direction of Command and Control

DPC Operational Room

State-Regions Committee

National conference of civil protection volunteers

Central Functional Centre


state of emergency(governmental declaration)

MunicipalityMayor, first authority of civil protection C.O.C.

Province

C.O.M./C.I.

Com. Montana

C.O.M./C.I.

Com. MontanaC.O.M./C.I.

Com. Montana

Regional Volunteers(L. 112/98)

Civil Protection Regional Fund (L. 388/2000)

C.C.S.

Head of the DPC / Governmental Commissioner (L. 286/2002)

Region

DIS

AS

TE

RS

ERCC


� seismic

� hydrogeological

� floods

� volcanic

� tsunamis

� forest fire

� industrial and nuclear

� technological

� transports

� supply networks

� environmental

CP vs. Hazards and risks (in Italy)

www.protezionecivile.gov.itNational Warning System

The national warning system is provided by national DPC and Regions by means of:

� “Functional Centres ” (Centres for Forecasting and Surveillance of Effects - CFSE), which collect, elaborate and exchange every kind of data to provide a multiple support system for decisions .

� “Competence Centres ” (Centres for Technological and Scientific services, development and transfer - CTS), scientific institutions which provide services, information, data, elaborations, technical and scientific contributions for specific topics, to share the best practices in risk assessment and management .


• INGV(Seismic surveillance, Seismological researchprojects, Emergency scientific-technical support)

• ReLUIS(Earthquake engineering research projects, Emergency scientific-technical support)

• EUCENTRE(Earthquake engineering research projects, Emergency scientific-technical support)

Main Centres of Competencefor seismic risk



process


CP system

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works




Science to Civil

Protection

23


31

i. scientific activities permanently made by scientificinstitutions (e.g. seismic monitoring) on behalf of CP

ii. finalised research funded by CP ,

iii. permanent commissions (e.g. CGR) or consultants of CP,

iv. commissions for CP on specific subjects ,

v. research activities funded by other subjects to produce results of interest for CP (e.g. EU project),

vi. spontaneous research works producing results of potentialinterest for CP, without any involvement of CP.

Contributions of Science to CivilProtection - Classification



process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP



24


33


(DPC)

CompetenceCentre(CC)

DPC-CCJoint committee

DPCproject/activity

Representatives

CCproject/activityResponsibles

Competence centresManagement of activities for DPC



process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP


EUCENTRE ReLUISINGV

25


35

DPC-INGV 2012-21 Agreement

Three types of activities are envisaged:

a) Operational service activities• Seismic (and volcanic) monitoring and 24/7

surveillance (CNT-National Earthquake Centre) • Implementation/maintenance of data banks of CP use• Scientific support in emergency

b) Pre-operational service activitiesValidated research products derived from c-activities or other INGV research are translated into products for a CP pre-operational experimental phase

c) Finalized research activitiesSeismological-geological projects are funded, involving all the scientific community


The velocimetric National Seismic Network (333 stations) is managed 7/24 by INGV–CNT(National Earthquake Centre).

quasi-real-time information on location and magnitude of Italian earthquakes.

DPC-INGV "a-type" activitiesSeismic monitoring and surveillance

MultisensorMultisensor Station: Station: BB BB SeismometerSeismometer + + AccelerometerAccelerometer + GPS+ GPS

WorkingWorking StationsStations20142014--0606--30 7.3030 7.30

MagMag. . DetectionDetection 20142014--0606--30 7.3030 7.30


37

t Ml ≤ 2.4 2.5 ≤ Ml ≤ 2.9 3.0 ≤ Ml < 4.0 Ml ≥ 4.02’ - - Call to DPC-SSI Call to DPC-SSI

5’

- Call to DPC-SSI Call to DPC-SSI Call to DPC-SSIAutomatically sent to a restricted-access DPC

website if Q ≠ DD

Automatically sent to a restricted-access DPC

website if Q ≠ DD

Automatically sent to a restricted-access DPC

website if Q ≠ DD

Automatically sent to a restricted-access DPC website if

Q ≠ DDe-mail to DPC-SSI

(1st autom. communication)e-mail to DPC-SSI

(1st automatic communicate)Automatic SMS to selected

DPC functionariesAutomatic SMS to selected DPC

functionaries

30’

- Call to DPC-SSI Call to DPC-SSI Call to DPC-SSIIf needed, revised

parameters sent to a restricted-access DPC

website

Revised parameters sent to a restricted-access DPC website

Revised parameters sent to a restricted-access DPC

website

Revised parameters sent to a restricted-access DPC website

Moment tensor solutions released on the restricted-access

DPC websitee-mail to DPC-SSI

(2nd automatic communicate)

e-mail to DPC-SSI(2nd automatic communicate)

e-mail to DPC-SSI(2nd automatic communicate)

Automatic SMS to DPC functionaries



Maps on INGV website Maps on INGV website Maps on INGV websiteShake Map on INGV website

1h - - -Report e-mailed to DPC-SSI

and released on the restricted-access DPC website

n.h - - -Detailed report e-mailed to DPC-

SSI and released on the restricted-access DPC website

www.protezionecivile.gov.itDPC-INGV "a-type" activitiesImplementation /Maintenance of Data Banks

DISS – Database of Individual Seismogenic Sources


ISIDE– Italian Seismological Instrumental and parametric Data- basE

DPC-INGV "a-type" activitiesImplementation /Maintenance of Data Banks


ITACA (ITalian ACcelerometric Archive)

DPC-INGV "a-type" activitiesImplementation /Maintenance of Data Banks


The Italian Department of Civil Protection is also promoting and funding the Centre of Seismic Hazard (INGV-CPS).

CPS works on three different time scales of seismic hazard:

• long-term (time independent)

• mid-term (time dependent)

• short-term (time dependent)

DPC-INGV b-type activitiesCPS - Centre of Seismic Hazard


Long-term seismic hazard ��

Time-window: typically fifty yearsTime-independent process

Used for building code and seismic classification

Mid-term seismic hazard ��

Time-window: years to tens of yearsTime-dependent processPossibly used to set up risk mitigation strategies

Short-term seismic hazard ��

Time-window: days to monthsTime-dependent process

Possibly used to improve decision-makingduring swarms or aftershock sequences(and maybe improve people awareness)

DPC-INGV b-type activitiesCPS - Centre of Seismic Hazard


Pre-operational phase for PC purposes

DPC-INGV "b -type" activitiesCAT - Tsunami Alert Centre


DPC

SSI

ISPRA

RMN

TWPs

TWFPs

NTWC

National & local

authorities

Data & MessagesSea level data

Messages

CAT@INGV

TWFP

Seismic Data

Italian National Tsunami Warning Centre

Messages

Alert dissemination

DPC-INGV "b -type" activitiesCAT - Tsunami Alert Centre


45

• Project S1 - Base-knowledge improvement for assessing the seismogenic potential of Italy

• Project S2 - Constraining observations intoseismic hazard

• Project S3 - Short term earthquake forecasting

The 2012-2014 seismological research program funded by DPC is organized into three main projects, involving some tens of research units.

DPC-INGV "c-type" activitiesSeismological Research Projects

Total funding is 2 M €, 60% of which for the participation of universities and other scientific institutions



process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP


ReLUISINGV EUCENTRE

30


47

Technical-scientific support and divulgation

EUCENTRE (European Centre for Training and Research on Earthquake Engineering) supports DPC in:

• Training and divulgation

• Experimental Laboratory

• Implementation/Management of a seismic risk platform

• Planning, preparing and managing technical-scientificactivities in emergency

DPC-EUCENTRE 2014-16 Agreement


48

Seismic risk WEB -GIS platformS.3.0) Tool for System IntegrationS.3.1) Seismic risk of the Italian dwelling buildingsS.3.2) Seismic risk of the Italian schoolsS.3.3) Management system of the post-event dwelling needsS.3.4) Seismic Risk of the Italian road systemS.3.5) Seismic Risk of the Italian sea harborsS.3.6) Seismic Risk of the Italian earth damsS.3.7) Seismic Risk of the Italian airportsS.3.8) Data base of past earthquake damage to buildingsS.3.9) Seismic vulnerability of the Italian tunnelsS.3.10) WebGIS for private buildings upgrade funded by the

State with L.77/09-Art. 11.



49

DPC-EUCENTRE 2014-16 AgreementImplementation/management of seismic risk platform

S.3.5

S.3.2S.3.6

S.3.0

S.3.1 S.3.2 S.3.3 S.3.4 S.3.5 S.3.6 S.3.*


50

Development of knowledge

C.1) Maps of seismic design actions at uniform risk

C.2) Fragility curves and probability of damage state attainmentof buildings designed according to national codes .

C.2.1) Seismic safety of masonry buildings :C.2.1.1) limited knowledge of the structure and of the

uncertainty sourcesC.2.1.2) Improvement of procedures of analysis and

verification of structuresC.2.1.3) Fragility curves of masonry buildings

C.2.2) Displacement Based Design in low hazard zonesand relevant software implementation DBDsoft

C.2.3) Fragility curves of precast building structures




process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP



27


52

DPC-ReLUIS 2014-18 Agreement

Technical-scientific support and divulgation

ReLUIS (Consortium-Network of University Laboratories of Earthquake Engineering) supports DPC in:

1) Post-earthquake technical emergency management .

2) Training and popularization activities in engineering and seismic risk (teacher’s availability, high-level courseorganisation, meetings and seminars, technical-scientificdivulgation, conferences).

3) Training of professionals on the post-earthquakeevaluations.

4) Divulgation and spreading campaigns for the civilprotection culture.


53

Development of knowledge

Themes of CP interest are developed according to the followingactivity lines:

1) Finalized research programs on earthquake engineeringand seismic risk mitigation .

2) Coordination with the other centres of competence of DPC and other technical-scientific subjects.

3) Implementation, revision and publication of manuals, guidelines, pre-normative documents

4) Assistance to the drafting/revision of technical norms



54


Finalized research programs on earthquakeengineering and seismic risk mitigation

i. General Themes , relevant to design, safety and vulnerability assessment of buildings and engineeringmanufacts (e.g., R/C and masonry buildings, bridges, tanks, geotechnical works, dams, etc.)

ii. Territorial Themes , aimed at improving the knowledge of the actual territorial distributions of types of buildings , to define their vulnerability, in order to set up tools for the vulnerability and risk assessment at national/local scale

iii. Special Projects on themes different from the general ones, or transverse themes


55

ReLUISCentre of Seismic Vulnerability and Risk

DistanceDistance TotalTotal N.N.

buildgsbuildgs

Total N. Total N.

peoplepeople

N. N.

collapsescollapses

N. N.

homelesshomeless

N. N.

injuredinjured

N. N.

fatalitiesfatalities

% %

collapsescollapses

% %

homelesshomeless

% %

injuredinjured

% %

fatalitiesfatalities

Estimate of the seismic risk soon after the «Matese» event (Ml 4.9) of 29.12.2013

Table 1. Seismic risk in the week starting at 6.30 pm of 29.12.13

CVRS elaborates long-term , mid-term and short term seismic risk assessment from INGV-CPS hazard maps.

DPC is also promoting and funding ReLUIS for the Centre of Seismic Vulnerability and Risk (CVRS) .



process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works



iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

30


57

Permanent commissions of CP“Commissione Grandi Rischi”

• The National commission for forecasting and prevention of great risks is the highest-level connecting structure between the CP and the Scientific Community

• It provides advice on technical-scientific matters required by the Head of the Department of Civil Protection and may provide directions on how to improve capabilities for evaluation, prediction and prevention of the various risks

The Commission was established with law no. 225 of 1992

Organization and functions have been re-defined on 2011 (DPCM 7 October 2011)


58

The Commission is structured in a Presidency Office and five sectors relevant to:

� seismic risk ,

� volcanic risk,

� weather-hydrogeological, hydraulic and landslide risk,

� chemical, nuclear and industrial and transport risk,

� environmental and fire risk.

Each sector has a coordinator and 10-12 members , including experts of the Competence Centres and other experts from the scientific community.

The term of the office is five years .



59

• The Commission meets for each risk sector or for the analysis of inter-disciplinary matters with joint m eetings

• It usually meets once a year in plenary session.

• It normally gathers in the premises of the Civil Protection Dept .• In order to get further scientific contributions, the President can

invite also external experts without voting right

Meetings

Presidency office : • President L. Maiani (in the picture) • Emeritus President G. Zamberletti , • Vice-President G. Scarascia Mugnozza

The responsible for the seismic risk sectoris D. Giardini .



60

According to the current rules:

• the results of each meeting have to be summarized in the minutes that are released to the Head of the Departmentof Civil Protection with the needed urgence (max 1 week )

• In case of specific communication needs , the same resultsare further summarized in a public statement , whichrepresents the only official way to provide the CGR opinions to the public

CGR formal communications




process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

v. Research funded

by other subjects

vi. Spontaneous

research works



iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

33


62

• Charged by DPC on 20 May 2009 to:

1. Report on the current state of knowledge

of short-term prediction and forecasting

of tectonic earthquakes

2. Indicate guidelines for utilization of possible

forerunners of large earthquakes to drive

CP actions

• ICEF report: “Operational Earthquake Forecasting: State of Knowledge and Guidelines for Utilization”

– Findings & recommendations released on

2 Oct 2009

– Final report published in Annals of

Geophysics on Aug 2011

ICEF - International Commission onEarthquake Forecasting

Members (9 countries):T. H. Jordan, Chair, USA

Y.-T. Chen, ChinaP. Gasparini, Secretary,

Italy

R. Madariaga, FranceI. Main, United Kingdom

W. Marzocchi, ItalyG. Papadopoulos,

Greece

G. Sobolev, RussiaK. Yamaoka, Japan

J. Zschau, Germany


63

Managing seismic sequences is a very complex question, due to the variety of situations and the difficulties of structuringwell defined procedures .

Main situations are:• Low probabilities of a strong event during swarms

� Communication to citizens (media) and to authorities �

requests for predictions or any action that can alleviate worries and fears of citizens caused by shakes;

• High probabilities of aftershocks following a major event

� Management after a strong earthquake in relation to civilprotections activities � S&R, population assistance, damage assessment, safety countermeasures, etc.

Seismic sequences

ICEF - International Commission onEarthquake Forecasting – Follow up in DPC


64

Recommendation A : DPC should continue to track the scientific evolution of probabilistic earthquake fo recastingand deploy the infrastructure and expertise needed to utilize probabilistic information for operational purposes.

Recommendation D : DPC should continue its directed research program on development of time-independent and time-dependent forecasting models with the objective of improving long-term seismic hazard maps that are operationally oriented.

Recommendation G2 : Quantitative and transparent protocols should be established for decision-making, that include mitigation actions with different impacts that would be implemented if given earthquake probability thresholdsare exceeded.

ICEF - International Commission onEarthquake Forecasting – Final Recommendations …


65

• Accuracy of OEF methods for operability

• Tasks and responsibilities of OEF providers and CP org.

• CP Managing high probabilities of strong aftershocks

• CP Managing (communicating) low probabilities of major event

• Delivering OEF infosto the public: �either in case of

swarms and major events or day-by-day

�either simplified or scientific infos

Questions on OEF applicability are about:



66

• Use of short term earthquake risk/loss - OELF (e.g.“Which is the probability of losing my life?”) rather than just hazard - OEF

• Influence - detrimental or favorable - of OEF infos on a mitigation policy based on structural strengthening

• Importance and time needed to “educate” citizens, media, administrators for a correct use OEF

• Use of OEF by scientist panels to make more skilled (higher probability) forecasts, using infos on geology, etc.



The need for an internationalcommission was expressed by the President of the Emilia Romagna Region after the 2012 Emilia seismic events

ICHESE International Commission on Hydrocarbon Exploration and Seismicity in the Emilia Region

• Peter Styles, Chair - Keele University, UK

• Paolo Gasparini, Secretary - University of Napoli “Federico II”, Italy

• Ernst Huenges, member - GFZ (Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum), Germany

• Paolo Scandone, member - University of Pisa, Italy

• Stanislaw Lasocki, member - Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland

• Franco Terlizzese, member - Ministry of Economic Development, Italy


68


The International Committee produced a report answering the following questions , on the basis of the technical-scientific knowledge available at the moment:

1. Is it possible that the seismic crisis in Emilia has been triggered by the recent research activities at the Rivara site, particularly in the case of invasive research activities, such as deep drilling, fluids injections, etc.;

2. Is it possible that the Emilia seismic crisis has been triggered by activities for the exploitation and ut ilization of reservoirs carried out in recent times in the close neighbourhood of the seismic sequence of 2012?


ICHESE - Main Conclusions

• The study does not indicate that there is evidence which can associate the Emilia 2012 seismic activity to the operation activities in Spilamberto, Recovato, Minerbio and Casagliafields

• it cannot be ruled out that the activities carried out in the Mirandola License area have had a triggering effect

• In any case, the whole Apennine orogen under the Po Plain is seismically active and therefore it is essential that the production activity are accompanied by appropriate actions , which will help to manage the seismic risk associated with these activities




process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

vi. Spontaneous

research works



iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects

36


71

• The participation of CP organizations to research projects isnow strongly encouraged by the research funding policy of EU

• While until some years ago only a generic endorsement waslooked for by the research consortia, now an activeparticipation of CP organisations , or more generallystakehoders , is required, as partners or end-user advisors

Contributions of Science to Civil Protection


72

SYNER–G – Systemic seismic vulnerability and risk analysi s for buildings, lifeline networks and infrastructure s safety gain

Final Comments by M. Dolce–22.03.13

Example of EU -Projects orientedto CP problem – SYNER-G

• The analysis of the systemic vulnerability and risk is very complex

• Considerable step ahead have been made both in questions not dealt with before or better finalized during the project

• Brilliant solutions have been proposed and sophisticated models have been utilized

• Of great value is the coordination with other projects, especially with GEM


73

• Large gaps still exist between many scientific approaches anddecision maker actions

• The use of very sophisticated approaches and models often has required to neglect some important factors affecting the real behavior of some systems

� All important affecting factors should be listed and their influence, even roughly, evaluated

• The representation of results is critical for a correct understanding by end-users

• Calibration of models and results should be referred to different event scale, due to the considerable differences in the system response and in the actions to be undertaken .

• Technological risk induced situations should be considered.

Example of EU -Projects orientedto CP problem – SYNER-G


74

Example of EU -Projects orientedto CP problem – REAKT

REAKT – Strategies and tools for Real time Earthquake risK reducTion

Among the objectives :• a detailed methodology for optimal

decision making associated withearthquake early warning system(EEWS), with operational earthquake forecasting (OEF) and with real time vulnerability and loss assessment in order to facilitate the selection of risk reduction measures by end users

• the study of the content and way of delivering public communication , recognizing the value of a degree of self organization in community decision making


75

Final reportfor Feasibility study on the implementation of hybrid EEW approaches on stations of RAN – Comments by DPC :

EEW systems are effective for real time risk mitigation if:

1. efficiency of all the scientific components is guaranteed,

2. efficiency of the technological components is guaranteed,

3. targets and mitigation actions to be carried out are defined,

4. time needed for the actions is to be added to the lead time ,

5. end-users (including population) are educated and trained ,

6. costs and benefits of the actions are evaluated,

7. infrastructures necessary for automatic actions are efficient

8. downtime is avoided in the links among elements of the chain

9. responsibilities and legal framework are well defined.



76

Scientific vs. Operational Safe Zone

space

time

((ScientificScientific) ) BlindBlind zonezone

OperationalOperational BlindBlind zonezone

((ScientificScientific) ) SafeSafe zonezone

OperationalOperational

SafeSafe zonezone

OperationalOperational

SafeSafe zonezone

t P-a

rriv

al-t

o-ep

icen

tre

t P-a

rriv

al-t

o-st

aion

s

t tele

met

ry

t M-c

alcu

latio

n

t miti

gatin

g-ac

tions

t nuc

leat

ion

t S-a

rriv

al-t

o-si

te



77

SHARE's (Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe) main objective is to provide a community-based seismic hazard model for the Euro-Mediterranean region with update mechanisms.

The project aims to establish new standards in Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA) practice by a close cooperation of leading European geologists, seismologists and engineers.

Example of EU -Projects orientedto CP problem – SHARE


78Maps are taken from: C.Meletti et al. (2014) Seismic hazard models for the Italian area: “MPS04-S1” and “SHARE”

Official (seismic code) PGA hazard map of Italy.Max PGA ≅≅≅≅ 0.3g

SHARE - PGA hazard map of ItalyMax PGA ≅≅≅≅ 0.5g



79


Differences in PGATypically ∆∆∆∆PGA ≅≅≅≅ +0.1g

Differences in PSA (T=0.5s)Typically ∆∆∆∆PSA(0.5) ≅≅≅≅ ±0.05g


80

Examples of EU -Projects orientedto CP problem – SHARE

• Problems of communication with media related to the correctness of official hazard and classification maps arise aftereach earthquake

• The national official map (dated 2004) appears to be totallywrong , as only the 475yrs PGA SHARE map is publicized.

• From an engineering viewpoint spectral accelerations are much more important; differences are almost negligible and of opposite signs for T≥0.5 s

INGV-CPS has been urged to produce a new nationalseismic hazard model , to be finally approved by the "Commissione Grandi Rischi"



process


CP system


Science to Civil

Protection

i. Permanent

activities for

CP

ii. Finalised

research

funded by CP

iii. Permanent

commissions

of CP

iv. Commissions on

specific subjects

v. Research funded

by other subjects


INGV EUCENTRE ReLUISvi. Spontaneous

research works

40


82

Spontaneous Research Works

• Drafting new hazard maps• Making earhquake predictions (short and medium term)

• Discovering new active faults (in built environments)

• Inventing new instruments that "anticipate" earthquake s

• Conceiving new structural devices or building techniques• Inventing antiseismic cellules, antiseismic beds …• ………………………………………………….

No matter if the new findings are the outcome of valuableresearch or not, very often "Civil Protection" is , eveninappropriately, urged to promptly acknowledge or adoptthe new findings and take any useful action to mitigate risk, based on them

"Spontaneous" research can determine critical CP issues whenthey concern sensitive aspects of risk mitigation, e.g. related to:


83

The relationships between Science and CP are very complex .

• Scientific advances can allow for more effective civil protection decisions and actions , although critical issues can arise for the CP system, that has to suitably shape its activities and operational procedures according to these advances.

• The scientific community can benefit from the enlargement of the investigation perspectives , the clear finalisation of the research activities and their positive social implications

CONCLUSION

Stable and continuous relationships between science and civil protection are needed and are to be pursued, making every effort to overcome misunderstandings and reciprocal suspicion

42


84

The content of this presentation is taken from:

• M. Dolce, D. Di Bucci (2012). Probabilità e Protezione Civile, Ambiente Rischio Comunicazione, n. 4 ottobre 2012, ”Decidere nell’incertezza” , ISSN 2240-1520.

• M.Dolce, D. Di Bucci (2014). Risk Management: Roles And Responsibilities In The Decision-Making Process, in “Geoethics: Ethical Challenges and Case Studies in Earth Sciences”. M.Wiss & S. PeppoloniEd., ISBN-10: 0127999353, ISBN-13: 978-0127999357, Elsevier.

• M.Dolce, D. Di Bucci (2015). Civil Protection Achievements and Critical Issues in Seismology and Earthquake Engineering Research. A. AnsalEditor - Perspectives on European Earthquake Engineering and Seismology v. 2. Springer.

REFERENCES

Seismic Risk Management: Roles and Responsibilities

in the Decision Making Process

Mauro DolceDipartimento della Protezione Civile

'Assemblée Générale AFPS 2015 Paris 11 juin 2015 Amphithéâtre Auguste Brulé de laFédération Nationale de Travaux Publics, 3 rue de Berri 75008 Paris

ag afps 2015 keynote-dolce seismic risk management - … · seismic risk management: roles and...

Documents