Abstract

Decision making to mitigate the effects of natural hazards, such as earthquakes, has always been a challenging subject. This is particularly the case in periods of increased seismicity (e.g. in a foreshock or aftershock period of a major earthquake) when the population is anxious and would like advice but when the chance of potentially damaging earthquake ground motions in the coming days remains low. In this study, a decision-making method based on multiple criteria is combined with cost-benefit analyses to create a hybrid decision-making framework to help decide amongst potential loss mitigation actions (or even to take no action). The proposed framework is demonstrated for three hypothetical case studies using Patras (Greece) as an example of a high seismicity location. The results show that the proposed approach is flexible enough to adapt to new problems, end-users and stakeholders. Additionally, it is revealed that reasonable mitigation actions are viable and financially beneficial during periods of increased seismic hazard in order to reduce the potential consequences of earthquakes. Finally, the case studies show that the results can be highly sensitive to the inputs to the framework and hence it is vital to involve end users to help constrain these inputs when making such calculations.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.