Earthquake Risk Analysis and Management

The utilization of Geographic Information System (GIS) technology in spatial planning for disaster mitigation is a novel approach to developing regional spatial planning documents in Indonesia, particularly in the Pidie Jaya district. This district is situated along the fault line on the island of Sumatra, a tectonically active zone highly susceptible to seismic activity. This research employs a methodology that integrates spatial data analysis, and GIS modeling to comprehensively understand the potential and impact of earthquakes in the area. Initial data used for analysis was sourced from the 2016 earthquake in Pidie Jaya district. The analysis results were incorporated into GIS to create precise and detailed maps depicting earthquake vulnerability and hazard. Subsequently, a meticulous spatial planning strategy is formulated, encompassing recommendations for land use, building standards, and disaster mitigation infrastructure. This strategy is designed to offer practical and effective guidance for local governments in reducing earthquake disaster risks and significantly contribute to formulating sustainable disaster mitigation policies. The findings of this paper are expected to provide a substantial contribution to earthquake disaster mitigation efforts, not only in Indonesia but also globally.

Seismic risk model for regional buildings that considers the influence of temperature and intensity measures

Risk assessment and management is an important step towards resilient and sustainable cities. Among many other perils, both natural and manmade, seismic risk is a major threat for resilience and sustainability. In recent decades, several methods for seismic risk assessment have been proposed, including the well-known Vulnerability Index Method (VIM). In this study, a probabilistic version of the VIM, which we call the Vulnerability Index Method-Probabilistic (VIM_P), is proposed. The VIM_P requires essential information on the seismic hazard and on the vulnerability of the building stock. Seismic hazard is determined using the exceedance rates of macroseismic intensities, as defined in the European Macroseismic Scale (EMS). Seismic vulnerability is defined by means of vulnerability probability density functions (pdf) that describe the probability distribution of the corresponding vulnerability index. Beta-like functions are used for these pdfs. VIM_P quantifies seismic vulnerability by means of three vulnerability curves, Lower, Best and Upper, according to the quantity and quality of available information, thus allowing three estimates of seismic vulnerability and risk. Then, seismic risk is computed via the convolution of seismic hazard and seismic vulnerability, considering semi-empirical damage functions. Seismic risk is given through the exceedance frequencies of the damage grades. To highlight the capabilities of the VIM_P, the seismic risk of about 70,000 residential buildings in Barcelona was assessed. According to the results, the exceedance frequency of the collapse damage state for more than the 50% of the buildings in the Eixample district would be greater than 1 × 10−5. This confirms the relatively high seismic risk in the city, mainly due to the high vulnerability of the built environment. Specific software, USERISK20015, has been developed for routine applications of VIM_P. It is hoped that VIM_P and this new tool for seismic risk assessment will be useful to stakeholders and civil protection authorities for risk management and prioritizing actions that can help to create more resilient, sustainable cities.

We know more about earthquake processes, vulnerability modelling and characterization of the built environment than ever before. Yet, earthquake losses and casualties continue to increase, even in countries where modern seismic design regulations have been introduced decades ago. In this study we investigate the drivers of earthquake damage and losses using the global seismic hazard and risk model developed by the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Foundation and its partners, as well as data from fatal earthquakes since 1950. We isolate specific parameters that can influence the severity of the ground shaking, the vulnerability of the building stock, and the spatial distribution of the population. These include the prevalence of soft soils, the average seismic hazard in each country, the likelihood of experiencing extreme ground shaking, the occurrence of earthquake-triggered hazards (i.e., liquefaction, landslides and tsunamis), the time of the event, the proximity of megacities to active faults, the percentage of specific types of construction, and some socio-economic factors. We compare these underlying parameters and the estimated or observed seismic risk between different countries and identify specific patterns that systematically exacerbate the overall impact. We observe that high economic losses are frequent in countries with well-established seismic regulations not only due to the high replacement/repair costs, but also due to the high prevalence of commercial and industrial facilities and complex infrastructure. On the other hand, high fatality risk is frequent in countries whose building stock is comprised of non-engineered buildings with heavy roofs and floors. Another relevant observation is that although ground shaking is overwhelmingly the main cause of damages and losses, under specific geological and demographic conditions, the impact of tsunamis, landslides and liquefaction phenomena can be devastating. Lessons drawn from these observations and patterns can be useful to understand how the impact of earthquakes can be better assessed, reduced, and managed.

The management of seismic risk is an important aspect of social development. However, urbanization has led to an increase in disaster-bearing bodies, making it more difficult to reduce seismic risk. To understand the changes in seismic risk associated with urbanization and then adjust the risk management strategy, remote-sensing technology is necessary. By identifying the types of earthquake-bearing bodies, it is possible to estimate the seismic risk and then determine the changes. For this purpose, this study proposes a set of algorithms that combine deep-learning models with object-oriented image classification and extract building information using multisource remote sensing data. Following this, the area of the building is estimated, the vulnerability is determined, and, lastly, the economic and social impacts of an earthquake are determined based on the corresponding ground motion level and fragility function. Our study contributes to the understanding of changes in seismic risk caused by urbanization processes and offers a practical reference for updating seismic risk management, as well as a methodological framework to evaluate the effectiveness of seismic policies. Experimental results indicate that the proposed model is capable of effectively capturing buildings’ information. Through verification, the overall accuracy of the classification of vulnerability types reaches 86.77%. Furthermore, this study calculates social and economic losses of the core area of Tianjin Baodi District in 2011, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2021, obtaining changes in seismic risk in the study area. The result shows that for rare earthquakes at night, although the death rate decreased from 2.29% to 0.66%, the possible death toll seems unchanged, due to the increase in population.

Real-time seismic activity monitoring and earthquake risk assessment have long been critical aspects of disaster mitigation and urban resilience planning. Traditional models based on statistical or geophysical methods often fail to capture the complexity and dynamic nature of seismic phenomena. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI), particularly machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), has revolutionized predictive modeling by enabling data-driven approaches for seismic signal analysis, ground motion prediction, and structural vulnerability assessment. This review paper presents a comprehensive synthesis of recent advancements in AI-driven seismic risk models, emphasizing their capacity for real-time forecasting and rapid decision-making. We examine state-of-the-art frameworks that integrate heterogeneous datasets—including geospatial, sensor-based, and historical seismic data—for enhanced situational awareness. The review also identifies the methodological strengths, comparative efficiencies, and current limitations of various AI techniques in earthquake risk analysis. Moreover, we highlight significant research gaps, such as model interpretability and integration with IoT-based monitoring systems, while discussing challenges like data sparsity, model generalization, and real-time computational constraints. A detailed comparative study and summary of recent works provide clarity on prevailing trends. We conclude by outlining future research directions involving hybrid AI models, high-resolution sensing, and multi-hazard frameworks. This paper serves as a valuable resource for researchers and policymakers focused on advancing earthquake preparations using cutting-edge AI innovations.

The global scene for foreign investment has changed significantly in the past decade. Along with a resumption of high rates of growth, there have been shifts in flows, destinations, determinants and policies. It is within this context that foreign direct investment (FDI) in South Asia will have to be considered in order to have a realistic picture of the prospects for future FDI in the region. The main features of the global FDI scene may be summarized as follows: FDI flows are rising faster than almost all other indicators of economic activity worldwide. FDI has grown at around 25 per cent per annum in the latter 1980s, while trade has grown at under 10 per cent and gross domestic product (GDP) and manufacturing output at around 2–3 per cent. Thus, the share of international production under the control of multinational corporations (MNCs) is increasing rapidly. This reflects the growing economic strength of MNCs in innovation, services and finance, apart from trade. Traditional MNCs remain powerful, but there are many new sources of FDI from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries as well as from developing countries. While the recent recession in leading investor countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom has led to declines in the rate of growth of FDI by these countries, the rate of growth of FDI still exceeds the rate of growth of their domestic activity. Other major capital-exporting countries, with the exception of Japan, have continued to invest increasing amounts abroad in 1991. This investment behavior shows growing independence of international investors from national economic conditions. The business cycle clearly affects FDI through its effect on demand conditions and business confidence more generally. However, the effects are not as direct and immediate as they are on domestic investment and activity. Thus, recipients of FDI, to the extent that their business cycles move differently from those in capital-exporting countries, may expect to be able to attract FDI flows that depend on their domestic economic conditions rather than conditions in capital-exporting countries. The share of global FDI going to developing countries, currently about 17 per cent, has declined from the early 1980s (25 per cent) and the 1970s (33 per cent). However, the value of such FDI (in current dollars) has risen sharply in the late 1980s by 22 per cent per annum. It amounted to $32 billion in 1990. This rise has been accompanied by a growing differentiation in the destination of investments in the developing world. East and Southeast Asian countries have become the largest recipients, accounting for about 60 per cent of all flows to developing countries. There is a sharp revival in FDI in Latin America (especially Mexico) in the past two years, after a long period in which the region lost its pre-eminent place as the recipient of FDI in the developing world. However, Asia seems set to retain its new role as the leading destination because of its economic dynamism. Africa is losing its (already small) share and shows no signs of reversing this trend despite considerable liberalization of policies. The policy context for international investment has changed dramatically in the last decade. Due to a constellation of factors, i.e., the debt crisis, the evident success of outward-oriented policies in East Asia, and disillusionment with traditional interventionist strategies, there has been widespread liberalization of economic policies towards greater trade orientation, private ownership and reliance on market forces in almost all developing countries. However, since most developing countries are opening up at the same time, only those that offer real economic advantages to the operations of international firms can hope to attract increased FDI on a sustained basis. The ability to attract FDI varies by the nature of activities undertaken. In most simple manufacturing activities, the host country does not need to possess much apart from a conducive policy regime, cheap trainable labor and good infrastructure: However, the location of production facilities for more complex activities increasingly reflects current technological trends and the need for investments to be competitive in world markets. The growing technological sophistication of manufacturing and services mean that investors, faced with an increasingly open trading environment, demand the complementary inputs that make their facilities efficient by world standards. These complementary inputs are rising levels of operator, technical and managerial skills, relatively free access to world-priced inputs, a good domestic base of suppliers and services, and excellent infrastructure. Large markets do remain a major attraction, even in liberalized environments, but in every country the need for local inputs of technology and skills is much more significant than in the days of inward-oriented FDI. MNCs from advanced OECD countries are moving up-market to sophisticated activities, while the more mature, less demanding activities are being increasingly taken over by investors from developing countries, especially in Asia. The East Asian newly industrializing economies (NIEs) are now leading investors in several labor-intensive export activities, and some are moving into more complex capital-intensive and technology-intensive areas. Their dynamism and specialization make them an important source of finance and technology for other developing countries in the region seeking FDI. This is clearly an important consideration for South Asia. With these background features of FDI, we can now turn to South Asia.

The impact of earthquakes in urban centers prone to disastrous earthquakes necessitates the analysis of associated risk for rational formulation of contingency plans and mitigation strategies. In urban centers, the seismic risk is best quantified and portrayed through the preparation of “Earthquake Damage and Loss Scenarios.” The components of such scenarios are the assessment of the hazard, inventories and the vulnerabilities of elements at risk. For the development of the earthquake risk scenario in Istanbul, two independent approaches, one based on intensities and the second on spectral displacements, are utilized. This paper will present the important features of a comprehensive study, highlight the methodology, discuss the results and provide insights to future developments.

Modeling of the interaction between destructive inland earthquakes and large off coast earthquakes in central and south-west Japan

The experience of a multidisciplinary group of professionals during the emergency following the damaging Lorca 2011 earthquake shows that a more thorough preparation of the population prior to the event would have reduced the effects on the population in general and even possibly reduced the number of victims. our aim here is to present a realistic and applicable educational project (EsLorca) based on the knowledge and experience obtained in Lorca in order to fill this educational gap. EsLorca is designed as a training project to help students/citizens to achieve the minimum skills necessary to react appropriately during and after a destructive earthquake on the basis of their understanding of earthquake phenomena, from its geological origins to its effects on buildings. In addition to state education, the project intends in its objectives to reach adult and senior citizens. The educational plan consists of a series of activities designed to last 50 minutes, which can be taken part in during academic tutoring sessions and are easy to organise in neighbourhood associations, senior citizens centres, and the work place and so on. Planning for adults and older citizens would be adapted to the specific conditions and needs of each centre or association. The structure of the plan is sequential. Its initial content is related directly to the emergency before passing on to a suitable knowledge and understanding of the geological phenomenon and its consequences.

Seismicity is widely recognized to represent the most severe natural hazard in Romania. The record of the current century ascertains this belief. Romania underwent in this century two destructive earthquakes, both of them generated by the Vrancea intermediate depth seismogenic zone, on 1940.1.10 (M = 7.4) and on 1977.03.04 (M = 7.2) (where M represents Gutenberg - Richter magnitudes) respectively. The toll taken by the 1977 event, which was the most destructive earthquake of modem history of Romania, was represented, according to official data published at the end of 1977 [1], by: • 1,570 lives lost and 11,300 persons injured; • 32,900 apartments destroyed or heavily damaged; • 53,000 homeless families; • 763 economic units heavily affected; • total economic losses exceeding US$ 2 billion.

A better seismic design for building and other structures is the most effective way to reduce seismic risk and avoid earthquake disaster. Adoption and implementation of new seismic safety regulations and design standards have caused serious problems in many communities in the New Madrid region, including western Kentucky, however. The main reasons for these problems are (1) misunderstanding of the national seismic hazard maps and (2) confusion between seismic hazard and seismic risk. Both are caused by probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). PSHA is a mathematical formulation derived from a probability analysis on the distribution of earthquake magnitudes, locations, and ground-motion attenuation. Some assumptions and distributions associated with PSHA have been found to be invalid in earth science, however. In addition, PSHA contains a mathematical error: equating a dimensionless quantity (the annual probability of exceedance – exceedance probability in one year) to a dimensional quantity (the annual frequency of exceedance with the unit of per year [1/yr]). Thus, PSHA is scientifically flawed and the resulting seismic hazard and seismic risk estimates are artifacts. The national seismic hazard curves and maps are artifacts because they were produced from PSHA, even though the inputs are scientifically sound. Although seismic hazard and seismic risk have often been used interchangeably, they are two fundamentally different concepts. Seismic hazard describes the natural phenomenon or property of an earthquake, whereas seismic risk describes the probability of loss or damage that could be caused by a seismic hazard. Seismic hazard and seismic risk play different roles in engineering design and other policy considerations. Furthermore, measures for seismic hazard mitigation are different from those for seismic risk reduction. The difficulties in the development of design ground motion for NEHRP provisions are caused by the use of the national seismic hazard maps which are neither seismic hazard nor seismic risk. The resulting design ground motions for building codes and other policy considerations are therefore problematic. California’s experience proves that deterministic/scenario seismic hazard analysis is an appropriate approach for seismic hazard assessment, seismic risk assessment, as well as *Kentucky Geological Survey, University of Kentucky, 504 Rose Street, Lexington, KY 40506; phone (859) 323-0564; fax (859)257-1147; e-mail: zmwang@uky.edu. 112 Seismic Hazard Design Issues in the Central United States engineering design and other policy considerations. Deterministic/scenario seismic hazard analysis is also appropriate for engineering design and other policy considerations in the New Madrid region, as well as other regions.

The effect of the number of subintervals upon the quantification of the seismic probabilistic safety assessment of a nuclear power plant

The mean seismic probability risk model has widely been used in seismic design and safety evaluation of critical infrastructures. In this paper, the confidence levels analysis and error equations derivation of the mean seismic probability risk model are conducted. It has been found that the confidence levels and error values of the mean seismic probability risk model are changed for different sites and that the confidence levels are low and the error values are large for most sites. Meanwhile, the confidence levels of ASCE/SEI 43-05 design parameters are analyzed and the error equation of achieved performance probabilities based on ASCE/SEI 43-05 is also obtained. It is found that the confidence levels for design results obtained using ASCE/SEI 43-05 criteria are not high, which are less than 95%, while the high confidence level of the uniform risk could not be achieved using ASCE/SEI 43-05 criteria and the error values between risk model with target confidence level and mean risk model using ASCE/SEI 43-05 criteria are large for some sites. It is suggested that the seismic risk model considering high confidence levels instead of the mean seismic probability risk model should be used in the future.

The seismic performance and safety of major European industrial facilities have a global interest for the whole of Europe and its citizens. However, the seismic design of these facilities is based on national, sometimes outdated seismic hazard analyses. The results of the commonly developed, fully harmonized newly released European Seismic Hazard Model ESHM20 provide a pertinent reference for seismic hazard at European scale and have been officially adopted as an “acceptable representation of the seismic hazard in Europe” in the ongoing revision of Eurocode 8. This study presents a large-scale investigation of the impact of the potential adoption of ESHM20 on the design of new industrial facilities as well as on the potential seismic risk of existing facilities at European level with respect to the current seismic codes. The horizontal elastic response spectra using ESHM20 in combination with the revised Eurocode 8 for selected industrial sites are compared with the respective response spectra of the national regulations for return periods of 475, 2500 and 5000 years. In addition, a single containment LNG tank is analysed for an industrial site in Germany using the design approach for liquid filled tanks according to the revised Eurocode 8. Furthermore, a deterministic and probabilistic seismic risk assessment of a vessel installed in a five-storey frame is performed for industrial sites in Greece and Germany. The examples show that a consistent procedure all over Europe would be desirable and a benefit for engineers in terms of comparability and achievement of the same safety targets. Based on the conducted illustrative studies, the consequences of a potential adoption of the revised Eurocode 8 and ESHM20 hazard maps are discussed and summarized with respect to the standard harmonisation process in Europe.