Risk assessment: Group 1 discussion

1
Risk assessment Group 1 discussion
How clients / end users assess risk How
countries/communities assess risk Who pays?
2
Hazard information
Landslides - Provide information on where
risk is - Static with no information about
frequency - Use of susceptibility mapping (it
could happen here) - Triggered by a range of
causes - Other factors too hard to
evaluate Frequency can be estimated for floods
and droughts Planners need to know vulnerable
areas Insurers need to know frequency if they
insure the risk
3
Communication between scientists and Clients (1)
Clients dont want to know answer (eg water
reservoirs in susceptible areas) Need to
understand Client concern/needs Work with
clients Client will own results If you dont
Client might not accept result Some Clients
want to be involved, some dont In a close
relationship Client begins to understand issues
4
Communication between scientists and Clients (2)
Need to communicate so that everyone (incl.
public) knows what is happening Need time to
explain / accept so plan ahead Need good
visualisation. Figures/numbers not suitable for
general public Decisions belong to the Client,
not technical advisors We need to convince
people
5
Decision making and value of disasters (1)
Probability of disaster small compared with car
accidents, disease, etc High publicity if
acceptance level exceeded (eg number of deaths)
Economic value of disasters is large (eg Euro
15 billion on Po) In some countries insurers
contribute Safety net is Government
Disasters can lead to reconstruction boom
6
Decision making and value of disasters (2)

• Do we evaluate economic impact correctly?
• Droughts in Europe have economic implications but
  no lives lost
• Higher losses per event leads to longer recovery
  time. Problem of successive events
• Response is emotive investment where disaster
  happens but investment should be made elsewhere
  where similar disasters could happen

7
How to get people to prepare
Need to convince Governments to be prepared for
disasters. This will mitigate impacts to some
extent. Floods Droughts (Italian plan for
drought reservoirs) Landslides etc
8
Analysis of historical data

• Problem of historical data to predict future
  (climate change, human activity)
• Need to look at trends in historical data
• Include uncertainty in future estimates

9
Creation of risk

• Droughts created by over exploitation (eg in
  Spain)
• We build in risk areas
• Can we move development away from risk areas
  (as in USA)?
• Issues of cost, planning, etc

10
International co-operation in EC
Need for regional (ie several countries)
approach to drought management for several
countries (also floods on international rivers,
etc.) Problem of data from different
countries/regions - different types/formats of
data collected - data difficult to obtain from
different countries - need to pay for
data Different institutional arrangements
Possible common legislation via EC? (eg Water
Framework Directive?) Do we need centralised
EC Agency to guide on data collected, common
approaches, etc?
11
Who pays (1)
Insurance in some countries, not in
others Other countries rely on
Government Some people cant get/cant afford
insurance Insurance pays up quickly does
Government? If Government pays impact on
national budgets Should community pay for
hazard?
12
Who pays (2)
UK- Euro 5 billion damages per year and
rising - Euro 4 billion covered by flood
defence (and falling?) - Balance covered by
insurers (and rising) Norway - natural hazard
fund - everyone pays Public in UK and
Germany sympathetic to paying for flood victims
Planning authorities give permission for
development in some countries (ie government
problem) In some parts planning is weak In
Italy no public money available to rebuild houses
in hazard area (but OK for infrastructure) Gover
nment hazard fund seems a good idea