Chapter 3-20: From multi-risk assessment to multi-risk governance: Recommendations for future directions

11093 10 13757 1 24850 document 13757 XC-14-039.pdf application/pdf 622e17b339e4ef80f8f181c2a4375be9 MD5 319488 2016-01-15 08:51:21 https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/11093/1/XC-14-039.pdf 11093 1 1 text en public

XC-14-039.pdf

13758 2 24874 document 13758 lightbox.jpg image/png dfd07427b488ab4ff9097453aec4d689 MD5 20096 2016-01-15 08:51:28 https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/11093/2/lightbox.jpg 11093 2 2 image/png other Thumbnails conversion from text to thumbnail_lightbox en public

lightbox.jpg

preview.jpg

medium.jpg

small.jpg

indexcodes.txt

http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/document/13757 http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/document/13757 http://eprints.org/relation/isIndexCodesVersionOf https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/document/13757 archive 351 disk0/00/01/10/93 2016-01-15 08:51:21 2021-08-27 17:24:28 2016-01-15 08:51:21 book_section show 2 Scolobig A. 1919 Garcia-Aristizabal A. Komendantova N. 1880 0000-0003-2568-6179 Patt A. 7617 Chapter 3-20: From multi-risk assessment to multi-risk governance: Recommendations for future directions pub iis_ecn iis_rsk iis_rsp prog_risk prog_rpv Disasters caused by natural hazards can trigger chains of multiple natural and man-made hazardous events over different spatial and temporal scales. Multi-hazard and multi-risk assessments make it possible to take into account interactions between different risks. Classes of interactions include triggered events, cascade effects, and the rapid increase of vulnerability during successive hazards. Recent research has greatly increased the risk assessment community's understanding of interactions between risks. Several international sets of guidelines and other documents now advocate adopting an all-hazard approach to risk assessments. Nevertheless, barriers to the application of multirisk assessment remain. The challenges for the development of multi-risk approaches are related not only to the applicability of results, but also to the link between risk assessment and decision making, the interactions between science and practice in terms of knowledge transfer, and more generally to the development of capacities at the local level. So far, research has focused on the scientific aspects of risk assessment. But the institutional aspects, such as the issues arising when multi-risk assessment results need to be implemented within existing risk management regimes, are also important, though they have received less attention. The project described here focused on the institutional context of disasters, which includes a variety of elements ranging from sociopolitical to governance components. It looked at how to maximize the benefits arising from, and overcome the barriers to, the implementation of a multihazard and multi-risk assessment approach within current risk management regimes. Working at two test sites, one in Naples and one in Guadeloupe, the research team engaged with local authorities and practitioners to better understand how to effectively implement the results of multi-risk assessment. Among the hazards considered were earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, floods, tsunamis, wildfires, cyclones, and marine inundation. Beside the practitioners working in the two test sites, risk and emergency managers from 11 countries also provided feedback. In total, more than 70 practitioners took part in the research. 2014 published International Bank for Reconstruction and Development http://www.gfdrr.org/RAReferenceGuide XC-14-039 In: GFDRR; Understanding Risk: The Evolution of Disaster Risk Assessment; International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington, DC pp.163-167 Available at <www.gfdrr.org/RAReferenceGuide> 2607 161 227 public Washington TRUE Understanding Risk: The Evolution of Disaster Risk Assessment GFDRR FALSE info:eu-repo/semantics/bookPart