IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v23y2003i6p1323-1335.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Modeling, Assessment, and Management of Lahar Flow Threat

Author

Listed:
  • M. F. Leung
  • J. R. Santos
  • Y. Y. Haimes

Abstract

The 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines is considered one of the most violent and destructive volcanic activities in the 20th century. Lahar is the Indonesian term for volcanic ash, and lahar flows resulting from the massive amount of volcanic materials deposited on the mountain's slope posed continued post‐eruption threats to the surrounding areas, destroying lives, homes, agricultural products, and infrastructures. Risks of lahar flows were identified immediately after the eruption, with scientific data provided by the Philippine Institute of Volcanology, the U.S. Geological Survey, and other research institutions. However, competing political, economic, and social agendas subordinated the importance of scientific information to policy making. Using systemic risk analysis and management, this article addresses the issues of multiple objectives and the effective integration of scientific techniques into the decision‐making process. It provides a modeling framework for identifying, prioritizing, and evaluating policies for managing risk. The major considerations are: (1) applying a holistic approach to risk analysis through hierarchical holographic modeling, (2) applying statistical methods to gain insight into the problem of uncertainty in risk assessment, (3) using multiobjective trade‐off analysis to address the issue of multiple decisionmakers and stakeholders in the decision‐making process, (4) using the conditional expected value of extreme events to complement and supplement the expected value in quantifying risk, and (5) assessing the impacts of multistage decisions. Numerical examples based on ex post data are formulated to illustrate applications to various problems. The resulting framework from this study can serve as a general baseline model for assessing and managing risks of natural disasters, which the Philippines' lead agency—the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC)—and other related organizations can use for their decision‐making processes.

Suggested Citation

  • M. F. Leung & J. R. Santos & Y. Y. Haimes, 2003. "Risk Modeling, Assessment, and Management of Lahar Flow Threat," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1323-1335, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:6:p:1323-1335
    DOI: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00404.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00404.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00404.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    2. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    3. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, September.
    4. Yacov Y. Haimes & Stan Kaplan & James H. Lambert, 2002. "Risk Filtering, Ranking, and Management Framework Using Hierarchical Holographic Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 383-397, April.
    5. Yacov Y. Haimes, 1991. "Total Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), pages 169-171, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kenneth G. Crowther & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2005. "Application of the inoperability input—output model (IIM) for systemic risk assessment and management of interdependent infrastructures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 323-341.
    2. Altay, Nezih & Green III, Walter G., 2006. "OR/MS research in disaster operations management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 475-493, November.
    3. Brett D. Dickey & Joost R. Santos, 2011. "Risk Analysis of Safety Service Patrol (SSP) Systems in Virginia," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(12), pages 1859-1871, December.
    4. Joanna Resurreccion & Joost R. Santos, 2012. "Multiobjective Prioritization Methodology and Decision Support System for Evaluating Inventory Enhancement Strategies for Disrupted Interdependent Sectors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1673-1692, October.
    5. Hairui Wei & Ming Dong & Shuyu Sun, 2010. "Inoperability input‐output modeling (IIM) of disruptions to supply chain networks," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 324-339, December.

    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. Matthew H. Henry & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2009. "A Comprehensive Network Security Risk Model for Process Control Networks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 223-248, February.
    2. Yacov Y. Haimes & Alfred Anderegg, 2015. "Sequential Pareto‐Optimal Decisions Made During Emergent Complex Systems of Systems: An Application to the FAA NextGen," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 28-44, January.
    3. Jalal Ali & Joost R. Santos, 2015. "Modeling the Ripple Effects of IT‐Based Incidents on Interdependent Economic Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 146-161, March.
    4. Maria Leung & James H. Lambert & Alexander Mosenthal, 2004. "A Risk‐Based Approach to Setting Priorities in Protecting Bridges Against Terrorist Attacks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 963-984, August.
    5. Barry Charles Ezell, 2007. "Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Model (I‐VAM)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 571-583, June.
    6. Michael J. Pennock & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2002. "Principles and guidelines for project risk management," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 89-108.
    7. Jesus Palomo & David Rios Insua & Fabrizio Ruggeri, 2007. "Modeling External Risks in Project Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 961-978, August.
    8. Joost R. Santos & Lucia Castro Herrera & Krista Danielle S. Yu & Sheree Ann T. Pagsuyoin & Raymond R. Tan, 2014. "State of the Art in Risk Analysis of Workforce Criticality Influencing Disaster Preparedness for Interdependent Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 1056-1068, June.
    9. Sean S. Baggott & Joost R. Santos, 2020. "A Risk Analysis Framework for Cyber Security and Critical Infrastructure Protection of the U.S. Electric Power Grid," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(9), pages 1744-1761, September.
    10. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    11. Karasakal, Esra & Aker, Pınar, 2017. "A multicriteria sorting approach based on data envelopment analysis for R&D project selection problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 79-92.
    12. Rogerson, Ellen C. & Lambert, James H., 2012. "Prioritizing risks via several expert perspectives with application to runway safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 22-34.
    13. Figueira, Jose & Roy, Bernard, 2002. "Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos' procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 317-326, June.
    14. Yacov Y. Haimes, 2012. "Systems‐Based Guiding Principles for Risk Modeling, Planning, Assessment, Management, and Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1451-1467, September.
    15. James H. Lambert & Benjamin L. Schulte & Priya Sarda, 2005. "Tracking the complexity of interactions between risk incidents and engineering systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 262-277, September.
    16. Yacov Y. Haimes, 2006. "On the Definition of Vulnerabilities in Measuring Risks to Infrastructures," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 293-296, April.
    17. Shiau, Tzay-An, 2013. "Evaluating sustainable transport strategies for the counties of Taiwan based on their degree of urbanization," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 101-108.
    18. Hong Sun & Fangquan Yang & Peiwen Zhang & Yunxiang Zhao, 2023. "Flight Training Risk Identification and Assessment Based on the HHM-RFRM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-20, January.
    19. Ioanna Ioannou & Jaime E. Cadena & Willy Aspinall & David Lange & Daniel Honfi & Tiziana Rossetto, 2022. "Prioritization of hazards for risk and resilience management through elicitation of expert judgement," 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. 112(3), pages 2773-2795, July.
    20. Carlos José Miranda Victório & Helder Gomes Costa & Cristina Gomes de Souza, 2016. "Modeling selection criteria of R&D projects for awarding direct subsidies to the private sector," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 275-287.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:6:p:1323-1335. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.