IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v78y2015i3p1545-1563.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards a cross-domain interoperable framework for natural hazards and disaster risk reduction information

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Tomas
  • Matthew Harrison
  • José Barredo
  • Florian Thomas
  • Miguel Llorente Isidro
  • Manuela Pfeiffer
  • Otakar Čerba

Abstract

According to the United Nations’ International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, “natural hazards are processes or phenomena that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social and economic disruption, or environmental damage”. They are at the interface between human and natural systems. From this perspective, natural hazards are a multidimensional domain including environmental issues, the private and public sector and citizens and governance ranging from local to supranational. The vast amount of information and data necessary for comprehensive hazard and risk assessment present many challenges regarding the lack of accessibility, comparability, quality, organisation and dissemination of natural hazards spatial data. In order to mitigate these limitations, an interoperability framework has been developed and published in the INSPIRE Data Specification on Natural Risk Zones—technical guidelines (DS) document. This framework provides means for facilitating access, integration, harmonisation and dissemination of natural hazard data from different domains and sources. The objective of this paper is twofold. Firstly, the paper highlights the key aspects of the interoperability to the various natural hazard communities and illustrates the applicability of the interoperability framework developed in the DS. And secondly, the paper “translates” into common language the main features and potentiality of the interoperability framework of the DS for a wider audience of scientists and practitioners in the natural hazard domain. In this paper, the four pillars of the interoperability framework will be presented. First, the adoption of a common terminology for the natural hazard domain will be addressed. A common data model to facilitate cross-domain data integration will then follow. Thirdly, the common methodology developed to express qualitative or quantitative assessments of natural hazards is presented. Fourthly, the extensible classification schema for natural hazards developed from a literature review and key reference documents from the contributing community of practice is discussed. Furthermore, the applicability of the interoperability framework for the various stakeholder groups is illustrated. This paper closes discussing main advantages, limitations and next steps regarding the sustainability and evolution of the interoperability framework. Copyright The Author(s) 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Tomas & Matthew Harrison & José Barredo & Florian Thomas & Miguel Llorente Isidro & Manuela Pfeiffer & Otakar Čerba, 2015. "Towards a cross-domain interoperable framework for natural hazards and disaster risk reduction information," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 78(3), pages 1545-1563, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:78:y:2015:i:3:p:1545-1563
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-015-1786-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-015-1786-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-015-1786-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2010. "Risk Management and Governance," Risk, Governance and Society, Springer, number 978-3-642-13926-0, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sisira S. Withanachchi & Ilia Kunchulia & Giorgi Ghambashidze & Rami Al Sidawi & Teo Urushadze & Angelika Ploeger, 2018. "Farmers’ Perception of Water Quality and Risks in the Mashavera River Basin, Georgia: Analyzing the Vulnerability of the Social-Ecological System through Community Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-26, August.
    2. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    3. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Natalia Vladimirovna Gryzunova & Victoria Ivanovna Pyatanova & Viktoriya Valeryevna Manuylenko & Konstantin Vasilievich Ordov, 2019. "Models of credit limit-setting for companies as means of encouraging competitiveness," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 7(1), pages 615-625, September.
    5. Grzegorz Drozdowski & Joanna Rogozińska-Mitrut & Jacek Stasiak, 2021. "The Empirical Analysis of the Core Competencies of the Company’s Resource Management Risk. Preliminary Study," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-12, June.
    6. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Practical implications of the new risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 136-145.
    7. Aven, Terje, 2018. "How the integration of System 1-System 2 thinking and recent risk perspectives can improve risk assessment and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 237-244.
    8. Aven, Terje & Krohn, Bodil S., 2014. "A new perspective on how to understand, assess and manage risk and the unforeseen," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Daniel J. Rozell, 2018. "The Ethical Foundations of Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(8), pages 1529-1533, August.
    10. Sander C. S. Clahsen & Irene van Kamp & Betty C. Hakkert & Theo G. Vermeire & Aldert H. Piersma & Erik Lebret, 2019. "Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 439-461, February.
    11. Juliana Aurora de Oliveira Lopes & Léo Heller, 2020. "Explanatory Matrices on the Causes of a Tailing Dam Collapse in Brazil: The (Dis)Articulation of Epistemes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(12), pages 2524-2538, December.
    12. Ayman Nagi & Meike Schroeder & Wolfgang Kersten, 2021. "Risk Management in Seaports: A Community Analysis at the Port of Hamburg," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    13. Reeko Watanabe & Tsunemi Watanabe, 2020. "Does Haze Drive Pro-Environmental and Energy Conservation Behaviors? Evidence from the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Area in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, November.
    14. Rio Yonson & Ilan Noy, 2020. "Disaster Risk Management Policies and the Measurement of Resilience for Philippine Regions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 254-275, February.
    15. Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås & Milazzo, Maria Francesca & Langdalen, Henrik & Dahl, Roy Endre & Bansal, Surbhi & Abrahamsen, Håkon Bjorheim, 2021. "On the use of the ‘Return Of Safety Investments’ (ROSI) measure for decision-making in the chemical processing industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    16. Wu, Zhongqun & Yang, Chan & Zheng, Ruijin, 2022. "Developing a holistic fuzzy hierarchy-cloud assessment model for the connection risk of renewable energy microgrid," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    17. Scarlett Tannous & Myriam Merad, 2022. "Have the risk policy shifts related to Seveso Upper Tier establishments in France led to an improvement in risk prevention? A focus on three risk prevention tools," Post-Print hal-03812138, HAL.
    18. Sheona A. K. Read & Gary S. Kass & Hilary R. Sutcliffe & Steven M. Hankin, 2016. "Foresight Study on the Risk Governance of New Technologies: The Case of Nanotechnology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(5), pages 1006-1024, May.
    19. Bartnes Line, Maria & Anne Tøndel, Inger & Jaatun, Martin G., 2016. "Current practices and challenges in industrial control organizations regarding information security incident management – Does size matter? Information security incident management in large and small ," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 12-26.
    20. Zhou, Lingyi & Dai, Yixin, 2020. "Which is more effective in China? How communication tools influence public acceptance of nuclear power energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:78:y:2015:i:3:p:1545-1563. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.