Earthquake induced crises: game tree approached risk communication and lessons learnt

Name of the provider (company name or main contact name), or FIRE IN ID ? Vasiliki Kouskouna, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens – vkouskouna@geol.uoa.gr

CCC addressed

Scope, rationale, context: general description. Precise here if this technology is currently use (eg. company name or contact info) Earthquakes, large or even moderate, are often followed by secondary phenomena, such as landslides, tsunamis, fires and technological disasters, leading to cascading effects that may, in turn, cause severe damage. Before, during and after the occurrence of these events, risk communication, currently evolved to codified legislation, is a crucial factor. Policy selection in this study is approached by the application of the game, or decision tree, with the earthquake being the “attacker who moves first”. The studied events in view of policy making have occurred both in the past and recently, to account for different level of exposure and anthropogenic hazards, in Greece, Italy, Japan and Slovenia. In all case studies the whole disaster management cycle is examined, i.e. mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. The 1894 Atalanti earthquakes were followed by tsunami, rockfalls, landslides, surface faulting, liquefaction and land subsidence. News that the first shock was predicted had a negative impact to the reliability of Greek geoscientists. The management of the 1917 Brežice earthquake by the defenders had to deal with the very low temperatures and the fact that it occurred during the First World War, related to poverty and lack of food supplies. One fatality was caused by the attacker itself, whereas the second by seismo-geological secondary effects. Extensive rockfalls and fires followed the destructive 1953 Kefallinia earthquake series, consisting of three large events. More than 450 fatalities and 2,500 injuries were cumulatively caused, with difficulty to distinguish the number of fatalities corresponding to each event. The 1976 Friuli earthquake sequence caused more than 1,000 fatalities mainly due to the high vulnerability of buildings. This event initiated the procedure for the protection of Italian cultural heritage buildings and contributed to the detailed seismic hazard and risk assessment of the area. The 2003 Lefkas earthquake was followed by landslides, rockfalls, liquefaction and damage to the road network. However, no fatalities occurred, despite the high PGA values. The 2015 Lefkas event caused two fatalities, one of which due to the earthquake. The preparedness of the local community against the earthquake effects proved to be in a good level, which was not the case for the 2003 event, especially regarding landslides. The Tōhoku 2011 earthquake was accompanied by both secondary, i.e. tsunami, major aftershock, landslides, fires and land deformation, as well as tertiary, i.e. technological disaster due to tsunami, as well as additional tsunamis due to the major foreshock and aftershock, as fellow attackers. Even though Japan is considered as a highly prepared country against both earthquake and tsunami effects, it failed to deal with the consequences of a mega event. This earthquake is considered a lesson for the future. Disaggregation of earthquake-related crises and risk communication are taken into account in the present study and ethical challenges are posed both to scientists and policy makers. For further details contact: Vassiliki Kouskouna: vkouskouna@geol.uoa.gr , Georgios Sakkas: g.sakkas@kemea-research.gr

If applicable, choose the relevant working group (Ctrl touch to select more than one) Natural Hazard Mitigation

Please select the relevant item 289

Short description of the solution. Technical details if relevant. Keywords.

Earthquake risk communication, which was extremely poor in historical times, has improved in an extraordinary way during the last decade. EEW and TW systems are, or are in the process of being, established, and platforms operated by seismological centres provide real-time earthquake information, aided by the social media and the electronic press. The platforms developed by geoscientists are extremely useful tools for emergency managers to collect in situ information on an earthquake’s effects within a few minutes of its occurrence, a time critical for evaluation of effects and decision-making.

The need to deaggregate earthquake effects, associated economic loss and preparedness level due to the earthquake itself and its secondary and tertiary phenomena is nowadays apparent. Fatalities and economic losses due to secondary phenomena have been reported in past earthquakes, when the level of preparedness was low, or practically inexistent. However, in recent earthquakes, their percentage seems to follow an increasing trend. There is, therefore, a need for improved models for associated effects of recent earthquakes.

Key words: Earthquake induced disasters, disaggregation, risk communication, geoethics, game theory, attacker, defender, Greece, Slovenia, Italy, Japan, emergency management, natural and technological disasters

TRL of the proposed solution - Innovation stage (if applicable) Not applicable

Attachment (file) Kouskouna_etal_Geoethics_poster_ESC2018_final.pdf (1 MB)

Attachment (file) kouskouna_game_theory.pdf (379 kB)

Expected/scheduled future developments

The policy selection for earthquake risk mitigation needs a thorough study of past earthquakes in retrospect and an analysis of the development of the positive aspects of risk evaluation and communication tools, on a scenario-based approach. This will entail a mathematical solution in the quantification of the preparedness level of public and private stakeholders and communities against future earthquakes and their cascading effects management.

Generic comments

Authors of the paper:
Vassiliki Kouskouna: vkouskouna@geol.uoa.gr
Georgios Sakkas: g.sakkas@kemea-research.gr
Ina Cecic: ina.cecic@gov.si
Vasileios­Ioannis Tsimpidaros: bill@campaign-lab.eu
Stylianos Sakkas: sakkasst@gmail.com
Georgios Kaviris: gkaviris@geol.uoa.gr
Andrea Tertulliani: andrea.tertulliani@ingv.it