Report: Technical Glossary of a Multi Hazard Related ... · 3/23/2007 · ARMONIA project, expressed the need for a harmonized version of a glossary on hazards and risk assessment

ARMONIA PROJECT (Contract n° 511208)

APPLIED MULTI-RISK MAPPING OF NATURAL HAZARDSFOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT

DELIVERABLE 4.1.2

Report: Technical Glossary of a Multi Hazard Related Vulnerability andRisk Assessment Language – Final version

Philipp Schmidt-Thomé, Johannes Klein, Raili Aumo, Jani HurstinenGeological Survey of Finland (GTK)

Espoo, 23 March 2007

Project funded by the European Community under the:

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, GLOBAL CHANGE AND ECOSYSTEMS

ARMONIA - Applied multi Risk Mapping of Natural Hazards for Impact Assessment

Report: Technical Glossary of a Multi HazardRelated Vulnerability and Risk Assessment

Language - Final version (Del. 4.1.2)OverviewThe technical glossary of risk assessment language was carried out to uniformand upgrade the scientific language through the application of recenttechniques and methodologies with special attention to GIS development andcapabilities. Recent research activities on the terminology for spatial planning,risk and vulnerability assessment were the basis for the glossary, and particularattention was devoted to the research experience of ARMONIA partners.The glossary concentrates on multi-hazard and -risk with special focus onspatial planning relevance, thus addressing a key issue of the current hazarddiscussions in Europe. The glossary provides a concise overview on the mostimportant terms used in multi-hazard and -risk assessment relevant for spatialplanning.

Summary of Deliverable 4.1.2The European Commission, while outlining the structure and purpose of theARMONIA project, expressed the need for a harmonized version of a glossaryon hazards and risk assessment. So far, scientific disciplines, projects and/ororganisations define own hazard glossaries, according to the terms that aremost used and required for appropriate communication.During the compilation and revision process it has proven simply too ambitiousto find definitions of terms that are accepted by all of the involved researchers.For many terms, it is not possible to find or define one universally validdefinition, because too many people, many of them long-term experts in theirfield of research, use different definitions.The research work carried out to compile this glossary has emphasised that anyresearch is question related and/or target oriented. Therefore definitionsnaturally differ from each other. The idea of a harmonised glossary is ambitious,but only possible if one precondition is fulfilled: a harmonised scientificapproach/methodology regarding the issues in question. This is currentlyimpossible, due to the specific nature of the different risks.The main reason that precludes the development of a harmonized glossary isthat most involved researchers and planners have specific scientificbackgrounds. The combination of multi-hazard and -risk research related toplanning is an innovative concept, and multi-hazard or-risk experts withexperience in planning related issues are still a minority. The initial aim of thisglossary was to define risk related terms in the multi risk/planning perspective,and most appropriately using only one definition per term. This provedimpossible, as most involved experts requested specific definitions, whichmostly came from their precise field of research.The compromise that was consequently made was to try to select definitions ofterms that are most suitable to all involved research groups and that are mostuseful for the multi hazard/risk and planning focus. In cases where this proved

ARMONIA - Applied multi Risk Mapping of Natural Hazards for Impact Assessment

too challenging due to strong differences in the definitions, the definitionperceived as most appropriate by a majority was put first, listing other, divergingdefinitions of the same term beneath it, without the intention of ranking thedefinitions qualitatively.

Scientific approachThe aim of the glossary was to remain concise and focus especially on multi-hazard and -risk issues. Single hazards are not being defined, as theperspective on multi-hazard phenomena. Multi-hazard is a broad perspectivethat integrates many possible hazard combinations. The approach is to assessmulti-hazards (ranging from 2 to endless) threatening a single place or region,and not single hazards threatening more than one place or region.The glossary cooperates with other hazard glossary approaches in Europe,mainly the extensive glossaries developed by the EU-Mediterranean DisasterI n fo rma t i on ne two rk (EU-MEDIN - h t t p : / / w w w . e u -medin.org/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=18) anda multilingual approach being developed by the ORCHESTRA project(http://www.eu-orchestra.org/).

GlossaryThe glossary defined the following terms:

- Adaptation- Adaptive capacity- Consequence- Coping capacity- Damage- Damage potential- Disaster- Exposure- Hazard- Impacts- Intensity- Land-use planning- Losses- Magnitude- Mitigation or disaster

mitigation

- Natural hazard- Natural hazard

mitigation- Preparedness- Prevention- Probability- Reaction- Recovery- Regional plan- Regional planning- Resilience- Response- Risk- Risk analysis- Risk assessment

- Risk evaluation- Risk management- Risk perception- Risk reduction- Sectoral planning- Sensitivity- Severity- Spatial planning- Susceptibility- Technological hazard- Typology- Uncertainty- Vulnerability- Zoning

Final remarkScientists and planners interested in using this glossary should take intoaccount that some of the definitions provided here might not be applicable tothe project that they are doing.

If you would like to receive the complete deliverable, pleasedownload it from: www.armoniaproject.net or contact: [email protected].

ARMONIA PROJECTContract n° 511208

WP4:

Development of a Harmonized Knowledge Baseof Terminology

Del. 4.1.2Report: Technical Glossary of a Multi Hazard Related

Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Language- Final version -

Project funded by the European Community under the:

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, GLOBAL CHANGE AND ECOSYSTEMS

ARMONIA PROJECT (Contract n° 511208) Deliverable 4.1.2

– 2 –

Contract Number: 511208

Project Acronym: ARMONIA

Title:Applied multi Risk Mapping of Natural Hazards for Impact Assessment

Deliverable N°: 4.1.2: Note: The title of the deliverable was changed from"Technical Glossary of Risk Assessment Language" to "Technical Glossary of aMulti-Hazard Related Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Language" in order toreflect the multi-hazard approach and the importance of the discussion onvulnerability and risk concepts.

Due date: 31.03.2007

Delivery date: 31.03.2007

Short Description:The technical glossary of risk assessment language was carried out with thepurpose to uniform and upgrade the scientific language through the applicationof recent techniques and methodologies with special attention to GISdevelopment and capabilities. Recent research activities on the terminology forspatial planning, risk and vulnerability assessment were the basis for theglossary, with particular attention to experiences developed by ARMONIApartners. The final version integrated some small changes at the end of theARMONIA research activities.

Partners owning: CR6 (GTK)Partner contributed: Al project partnersMade available to: All project partners and EC

VersioningVersion Date Name, organization0.1 20.12.2005 Philipp Schmidt-Thomé, Johannes Klein, Raili Aumo,

Jani Hurstinen (all GTK)0.2 10.01.2006 Philipp Schmidt-Thomé, Johannes Klein, Raili Aumo,



Jani Hurstinen (all GTK)

Quality check

Internal Reviewers – version 4.1.1:1st Internal Reviewer: Juergen Kropp, PIK2nd Internal Reviewer: Peter Bobrowsky, GSC-NRCAN

Internal Reviewers – version 4.1.2:1st Internal Reviewer: George Eftichidis, ALGO2nd Internal Reviewer: Fiona Tweed, IESR


– 3 –

Table of contents

1 Introduction............................................................. 4

2 Scientific approach................................................... 4

3 Risk and its context.................................................. 5

4 Glossary ................................................................... 7

References.................................................................. 22


– 4 –

1 IntroductionThe European Commission, while outlining the structure and purpose of theARMONIA project, expressed the need for a harmonized version of a glossary onhazards and risk assessment. So far, scientific disciplines, projects and/ororganisations define own hazard glossaries, according to the terms that are mostused and required for appropriate communication. For many terms it is simplynot possible to find or define one universally valid definition, because too manypeople, many of them long-term experts in their field of research, use differentdefinitions. Since many single hazard glossaries exist already, this glossaryconcentrates on multi-hazard and -risk with a special focus on spatial planningrelevance, thus addressing a key issue of the current hazard discussion inEurope. The glossary provides a concise overview on the most important termsused in multi-hazard and -risk assessment relevant for spatial planning.

Scientists and planners interested in using this glossary should take into accountthat some of the definitions provided here might not fit perfectly to an envisagedproject focus.

The research work carried out to compile this glossary has underlined that anyresearch is question related/target oriented, therefore definitions naturally differfrom each other. The idea of a harmonised glossary is ambitious, but onlypossible if one precondition is fulfilled: a harmonised scientificapproach/methodology regarding the issues in question. This is rather impossibleup to now, due to the specific nature of the different risks.

During the compilation and revision process it has proven simply too ambitiousto find definitions of terms that are accepted by the involved researchers. WorkPackage 2 of the ARMONIA project has analysed terms used in the varying fieldsof hazard research, with the result that some experts employ similar definitionsof terms, e.g. for vulnerability. Nevertheless, varying definitions of terms tend toprevail. The main reason for this is that most involved researchers and plannershave specific scientific backgrounds, and traditions in the definitions of terms arechallenging, for example in the case of developing multi-hazard approaches. Thecombination of multi-hazard and -risk research related to planning is aninnovative concept, and multi-hazard or-risk experts with experience in planning-related issues are still a minority. The initial aim of this glossary was to definerisk related terms in the multi risk/planning perspective, and most appropriatelyusing only one definition per term. This proved impossible, as most involvedexperts requested specific definitions, which mostly came from their precise fieldof research.

The compromise that was consequently made was to try to select definitions ofterms that are most suitable to all involved research groups and that are mostuseful for the multi hazard/risk and planning focus. In cases where this provedtoo challenging due to strong differences in the definitions, the one perceived asmost appropriate by a majority was put first, listing other, diverging definitionsof the same term under it, without the intention to rank the definitionsqualitatively.

2 Scientific approachMulti-hazard and-risk mapping is an interdisciplinary approach on several topics,reaching from single hazard mapping over diverse vulnerability concepts,towards aggregation of risks. In the scope of such a cross-thematic approach it is


– 5 –

important to use terms that are defined according to the integrative perspectiveof the task. Often, disciplines define terms according to their specific needs,which is a vital issue for precise communication. The approach of the glossarypresented here mainly addresses the needs of the ARMONIA project, but theintended goal is to define relevant terms for multi-hazard and -risk mapping withspatial planning relevance in such a way that they can be applied in severalscales in Europe; i.e. in further approaches of multi-risk mapping. For thispurpose most of the terms used in this glossary are based on, or modified after,existing international definitions, thus trying to present an integrated harmonizedapproach.

Certain hazard and risk related terms are used with many different definitions ininternational literature, most importantly vulnerability (see respectivereferences). In many cases the definitions are similar to each other, but thescope, the scale and the amount of variables vary significantly. Therefore theARMONIA project took the approach to let several definitions stand along witheach other, since critical issues such as, e.g. vulnerability and risk are oftenassessed for different purposes and under different strategic goals, depending ona defined scope of research or assessment. Consequently, the definition used bythe ARMONIA project is put as the heading one under a term, but in cases thatthis definition would not be feasible for other purposes than the one used inARMONIA, the most important alternative definitions are given. The difference inthe terms used mainly depends on the scale and concept implemented in multihazard and risk assessment, for example the definitions of vulnerability andexposure,

The aim of the glossary was to remain concise and focus especially on multi-hazard and -risk issues. Single hazards are not being defined, as the perspectiveis the multi-hazard phenomena. Multi-hazard is a broad perspective thatintegrates many possible hazard combinations. The approach is to assess multi-hazards (ranging from 2 to endless) threatening a single place or region, and nota single hazard threatening more than one place or region.

The glossary cooperates with other hazard glossary approaches in Europe,mainly the extensive glossaries developed by the EU-Mediterranean DisasterI n f o r m a t i o n n e t w o r k ( E U - M E D I N - h t t p : / / w w w . e u -medin.org/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=18)

and a multilingual approach being develop by the ORCHESTRA project(http://www.eu-orchestra.org/).

3 Risk and its contextThere is a common understanding in hazard and risk research that risk describesthe combination of the probability of an event and damage (economic,ecological, social, etc.). In most cases related to risk a negative effect on thevalues is expected (damage, loss). However, in economic science risk includesgains and losses.

It has to be kept in mind that risk remains a perception and is often perceiveddifferently in social and cultural contexts. Also, in public usage of language, theterm "risk" is often used in contexts that go beyond the formula given above.This also applies to many other terms used in hazard and risk research languageand contributes to the difficulty in defining universally acceptable definitions.


– 6 –

Often mathematical equations are used to illustrate the relation of the differentvariables that determine risk, although in general the term "risk" is used toodiversely to be exhaustively described in purely mathematical terms. Thussymbols, such as "x" or "+" have to be understood in a wider sense than strictlymathematically. The same method is used in this glossary to highlightdifferences or similarities in risk definitions.

Figure 1: Risk Governance Framework(Renn, O.:IRGC White Paper on Risk Governance – Towardsan integrative approach. Geneva 2005)

The term "vulnerability" plays a crucial role in understanding hazard impact.Vulnerability is the corrective variable adjusting the relationship of the probabilityof occurrence (the (multi) hazard) and the damage (the resulting risk). There areconsiderable differences in the understanding of vulnerability, especially when itcomes to questions about the concept on which vulnerability depends and theincorporated factors.

How far does vulnerability depend on the specificities of an event? Are theaffected values included in vulnerability or taken into account separately? Doesrisk perception influence vulnerability? These questions lead directly to theframework comprising risk assessment, risk analysis, risk estimation and riskevaluation. Figure 1 displays a possible framework for the relationship of theseterms. It completes the risk related part of the glossary in addition to thedefinitions of the terms, as it shows an entire risk governance framework. Riskassessment is shown as one element in a complex system, including manyfactors that contribute to the way in which risk is handled.


– 7 –

4 GlossaryAdaptation

Adaptation: Adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual orexpected natural hazards or their effects, which moderates harm or exploitsbeneficial opportunities. Various types of adaptation can be distinguished,including anticipatory and reactive adaptation, private and public adaptation, aswell as autonomous and planned adaptation.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Adaptive capacity

Adaptive capacity: The ability of a system to adjust to natural hazards and tomoderate potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope withthe consequences.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Consequence

Consequence: An impact such as economic, social or environmentaldamage/improvement that may result from a hazard. It may be expressedquantitatively (e.g. monetary value), by category (e.g. high, medium, low) ordescriptively.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Coping capacity

Coping capacity: The manner in which organisations and/or societies are able towithstand and/or cope with unusual, abnormal, and adverse conditions of anatural hazard or potentially harmful natural process.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Coping capacity: The means by which people or organisations use availableresources and abilities to face adequately, but in extremis, adverseconsequences following a disaster.IRIN 2005

Coping capacity: The means by which people or organizations use availableresources and abilities to face adverse consequences that could lead to adisaster.UN/ISDR 2004

FLOODsite (2005)

Damage

Damage: The amount of destruction or damage, either in health, financial,environmental functional and/or other terms as a consequence of an occurredhazard.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -projectDamage: Damage means a measurable adverse change in a natural resource ormeasurable impairment of a natural resource service which may occur directly orindirectly.EEA 2006

Damage potential

Damage potential: A description of the value of the social, economic andecological impact that would be caused in the event of a natural hazard.


– 8 –

FLOODsite (2005)

Damage potential: The amount of potential destruction of property assets in adefined area.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Disaster

Disaster: A serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a societycausing widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses whichexceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope with, using itsown resources. A disaster is a function of the risk process. It results from thecombination of hazards, conditions of vulnerability and insufficient capacity ormeasures to reduce the potential negative consequences of risk.WHO 2004

UN-ISDR 2003

EEA 2006

Also in accordance with:University of Wisconsin

Disaster: Situation or event, which overwhelms local capacity, necessitating arequest to national or international level for external assistance (definitionconsidered in EM-DAT); an unforeseen and often sudden event that causes greatdamage, destruction and human suffering. Though often caused by nature,disasters can have human origins. Wars and civil disturbances that destroyhomelands and displace people are included among the causes of disasters.Other causes can be: building collapse, blizzard, drought, epidemic, earthquake,explosion, fire, flood, hazardous material or transportation incident (such as achemical spill), hurricane, nuclear incident, tornado, or volcano.EM-DAT

UNEP (2002)

Exposure

Exposure: The degree to which a (natural or socio-economic) system or (naturalor socio-economic) community is exposed to potential natural hazards.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Exposure: The economic value or the set of units related to each of the elementsat risk for a given area. The exposed value is a function of the type of hazard.(UNESCO, 1972)UNINA Università Federico II, Italy

Exposure: The number, types, qualities, and monetary values of various types ofproperty or infrastructure and life that may be subject to an undesirable orinjurious hazard event.NOAA (2006)

Also in accordance with: FLOODsite (2005)

Hazard

Hazard: A potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon or human activity,which may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economicdisruption or environmental degradation. Hazards can be single, sequential orcombined in their origin and effects. Each hazard is characterised by its timing,location, intensity and probability.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project


– 9 –

Also in accordance with:UN/ISDR 2004

IRIN 2005

UN-ISDR 2003

FLOODsite (2005)

CENAT 2004

EEA 2006

Hazard: Hazard is the circumstance of an objective threat posed by a futuredamaging event that will occur under certain conditions.PIK – Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

Hazard: is defined as a physical event, phenomenon or human activity with acertain probability1 and the potential to result in harmElements of a Directive on Flood Risk management: Flood mapping and flood risk managementplans, Outcome of the Drafting Group meetings on 4 and 11 March 2005

Impacts

Impacts: Consequences on natural and human systems. Depending on theconsideration of adaptation, adaptive and coping capacity one can distinguishbetween potential and residual impacts.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Intensity

Intensity: A measure of the effects of a hazard event at a particular place.City of Downey, 2006

Intensity: Intensity refers to the severity, or damage-causing potential of anatural process. The hazard intensity is determined by the peak deviationbeyond the threshold.Rial et al 2003, Roger et al. 2003

Intensity: Intensity refers to the damage-generating attributes of a hazard.NOAA Coastal Services Center

Land-use planning

Land-use planning: Local land use planning is the creation of policies at alocal/municipal level that guide the land and resource use inside theadministrative borders of the municipality.Note: Municipalities are generally in charge of local land-use planning. Sometimes “urban planning”is used as a synonym. The term “land-use planning” comprises the entirety of instruments (land-use plans), tasks (planning on the local level) and actors/authorities that use these instruments(land-use planners) on the local level. The main instrument of land-use planning is zoning orzoning ordinances, respectively. Land-use planning is situated below the regional planning leveland consist normally of two stages: First a general or preparatory land-use plan (scale 1: 5,000 –1: 50,000) for the whole municipality and second a detailed land-use plan for small part of it,mostly legally binding (scale 1: 500 – 1: 5,000).

ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project

Land-use planning: The systematic assessment of land and water potential,alternative patterns of land use and other physical, social and economic

1 based on comments:UK: can see that some reference to probability may be justified here as the word hazard is only normally used forcircumstances that COULD reasonably be expected to happen e.g. are possible)IT: a physical event, phenomenon or human activity or the probability of their occurrence with the potential toresult in harm


– 10 –

conditions, for the purpose of selecting and adopting land-use options which aremost beneficial to land users without degrading the resources or theenvironment, together with the selection of measures most likely to encouragesuch land uses.EEA 2006

Land-use planning: Branch of physical and socio-economic planning thatdetermines the means and assesses the values or limitations of various optionsin which land is to be utilised, taking into account the corresponding effects ondifferent segments of the population or interests of a community.IRIN 2005

UN/ISDR 2004

Losses

Losses: The amount of realized damages as a consequence of an occurredhazard.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Losses: Range of adverse consequences impacting communities and individuals(e.g., damage, loss of economic value, loss of function, loss of natural resources,loss of ecological systems, environmental impact, health deterioration, mortality,morbidity).Pre-hospital and Disaster Medicine

Magnitude

Magnitude: A measure of the strength of a hazard event. The magnitude (alsoreferred to as severity) of a given hazard event is usually determined usingtechnical measures specific to the hazard.City of Downey, 2006

Mitigation or disaster mitigation

Mitigation or disaster mitigation: A strategy on actions and/or interventionsfocusing on long-term goals and objectives to prevent adverse effects of naturalhazards and/or potentially harmful processes.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project

Also in accordance with:University of Wisconsin

Mitigation or disaster mitigation: Either activities directed towards eliminating orreducing the probability of occurrence of a disaster-producing event, or reducingthe effects of those events that are unavoidable.Environment Waikato

Mitigation or disaster mitigation: A proactive strategy to gear immediate actionsto long-term goals and objectives.PIK – Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

Mitigation or disaster mitigation: Range of policy, legislative mandates,professional practices, and social adjustments that are designed to reduce orminimize the effects of earthquakes and other natural hazards on a community.Note: Mitigation measures implemented over the last 20 years have included: 1) land-use planningand management, 2) engineering codes, standards and practices, 3) control and protection works,4) prediction, forecasts, warning, and planning, 5) recovery, reconstruction, and planning, and 6)insurance.

Prehospital and Disaster Medicine


– 11 –

Mitigation or disaster mitigation: Structural and non-structural measuresundertaken to limit the adverse impact of natural hazards, environmentaldegradation and technological hazards.IRIN 2005

UN-ISDR 2003

WHO (2004)

Natural hazard

Natural hazard: A potentially damaging natural event at a particular place andtime. Hazards can trigger succeeding hazards. Note: A natural hazard produces risk onlyif exposures create the possibility of adverse consequences. Natech hazards occur, when a naturalhazard triggers technological hazards .


Natural hazard: atural phenomenon that occurs in proximity to and poses athreat to people, structures or economic assets and may cause disaster. Naturalhazards are caused by biological, geological, seismic, hydrological, ormeteorological conditions or processes in natural environment.UNINA Università Federico II, Italy

Also in accordance with:Prehospital and Disaster Medicine

Natural hazard: A potential threat to humans and their welfare caused by rapidand slow onset of events having atmospheric, geologic, and hydrologic origins onsolar, global, regional, national, and local scales (e.g., floods, severe storms,earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, wild fires, tsunamis, droughts, winterstorms, coastal erosion, and space weather).Prehospital and Disaster Medicine

Natural hazard mitigation

Natural hazard mitigation: advance action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from natural hazards.Godschalk et al. (1999)

Preparedness

Preparedness: Readiness for response activities, such as evacuation andtemporary property protection, undertaken when a disaster warning is received(part of adaptive capacity).ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Preparedness: Activities and measures taken in advance to ensure an effectiveresponse to hazards, including the issuance of timely and effective earlywarnings and the temporary evacuation of people and property from threatenedlocations.IRIN 2005

UN/ISDR 2004

Also in accordance with:WHO (2005)

Preparedness: Arrangements to ensure that, should an emergency occur, allthose resources and services which are needed to cope with the effects can beefficiently mobilised and deployed.Australian Emergency Management Glossary (1998)


– 12 –

Preparedness: The general term for precautionary and preparatory measures ofall kind that are taken with a view to minimising the risk and reducing or evenpreventing the effects of natural catastrophes on people and their condition,including measures related to warning, evacuation, and emergency planning.They embrace, among other things, the development of forecasting models andsystems, the arrangement of shelters and emergency accommodation, thetraining of specialist teams and the public, the planning of food supplies, thetesting of disaster scenarios, the organisation of temporarily evacuation ofpeople, materials and assets from a threatened area as well as the preparation ofsalvage and rescue operations, disaster relief, and rehabilitation and not leastthe option of insurance protection. (Munich Re Group 2000)http://www.ika.ethz.ch/nathaz/glossary/ Swiss Virtual Campus - Dealing with Natural Hazards.

Also in accordance with:http://dmc.engr.wisc.edu/courses/hazards/BB02-apx1.html (Gloss. Int. Disaster Assistance Terms)

http://www.cenat.ch/index.php CENAT Monte Verità Workshop2004 Glossary

http://pdm.medicine.wisc.edu/vocab.htm

Prevention

Prevention: Activities to provide outright avoidance of the adverse impact ofhazards and means to minimize related environmental, technological andbiological disasters.UN/ISDR 2004

Probability

Probability: The probability of an event has been defined as its long-run relativefrequency. It has also been thought of as a personal degree of belief that aparticular event will occur (subjective probability).

P(E) = number of outcomes corresponding to event E / total number ofoutcomesEaston, V.J. and McColl (1997)

Probability: A risk event represents a future event that may occur. Whenassessing the probability a risk may occur, it is technically assessing aconditional probability; that is, 0 < Prob (A|B) < 1 where, A is the AssociatedRisk Event and B is the Condition Present.Garvey (2001)

Reaction

Reaction: While mitigation is characterised by long-term actions, reaction aims atshort-term actions in case of an occurring disaster. Reaction comprisespreparedness, response and recovery.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Recovery

Recovery: The last step of post disaster actions, such as rebuilding or retrofittingof damaged structures.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Recovery: The process of restoring normal public or utility services following adisaster, perhaps starting during but extending beyond the emergency period tothat point when the vast majority of such services, including electricity, water,communications, and public transportation, have resumed normal operations.


– 13 –

NOAA (2006)

Recovery: The coordinated process of supporting disaster-affected communitiesin reconstructing their physical infrastructure and restoration of emotional,social, economic and physical well-being.WHO (2005)

Regional plan

Regional plan: A regional plan is an instrument of regional planning. It is thespatial plan of an administrative area (superior to the municipal level) that ispart of an official planning system. The regional plan makes statements and/ordeterminations referring to the spatial and/or physical structure anddevelopment of a region (spatial distribution of land use: infrastructure,settlement, nature conservation areas etc.). It has impacts on the subordinatelevels of planning hierarchy (local level, e.g. municipal land use plans etc.). Itstextual and cartographic determinations and information often range in thescales of 1:50 000 to 1:100 000.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Regional planning

Regional Planning: Regional planning is the task of settling the spatial or physicalstructure and development by drawing up regional plans as an integrated part ofa formalised planning system of a state. The term “regional planning” comprisesthe entirety of instruments (regional plans), tasks (planning on the regionallevel) and actors/authorities that use these instruments (regional planners) onthe regional level. Regional planning is required to specify aims of spatialplanning, which are drawn up for an upper, state, or federal statewide level. Theregional level represents the vital link between a statewide perspective fordevelopment and the concrete decisions on the land use taken at local levelwithin the land-use planning of the municipalities.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project

Resilience

Resilience: The capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposedto hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing in order to restore or maintain anacceptable level of functioning and structure.Modified after: UN/ISDR (2004)

Response

Response: The sum of long-term actions (mitigation in terms of planningresponses) and short-term actions (reaction) to prevent adverse effects ofnatural hazards or mitigate their impacts.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Response: Actions taken before, during and immediately after the occurrence ofa disaster, to ensure that disaster effects are minimized and people are givenimmediate relief and support.WHO (2005)

Response: The sum of all actions taken to adjust to hazards; more narrowlydefined to mean the appropriate actions taken during an emergency to protectpeople and the things they value from harm, rescue them, and facilitate thetransition to post-disaster recovery.Association of American Geographers


– 14 –

Response: Activities occurring during or immediately following a disasterdesigned to provide emergency assistance to the victims of the event, reduce thelikelihood of secondary damage and to expedite recovery operations.Disaster Central 2006

Risk

Risk: A combination of the probability (or frequency) of occurrence of a naturalhazard and the extent of the consequences of the impacts. A risk is a function ofthe exposure and the perception of potential impacts as perceived by acommunity or system.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Risk: Technical definition including two variables – the probability of occurrenceof a specific instance of damage, and the extent of that damage. Neverthelesssocial science perspective focuses on the aspects of societal and psychologicalrisk experience and risk perception, while socio-economic approaches focus onrisks to livelihood security and the satisfaction of basic needs.PIK – Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

Risk: Risk is a function of probability, exposure and vulnerability. Often, inpractice, exposure is incorporated in the assessment of consequences, thereforerisk can be considered as having two components — the probability that an eventwill occur and the impact (or consequence) associated with that.

Risk = Probability x Consequence

FLOODsite (2005)

Risk: The relative degree of probability that a hazardous event will occur. Theprobability of harmful consequences or expected losses (deaths, injuries,property, livelihoods, disruption of economic activity or environmental damage)resulting from interactions between natural or human-induced hazards andvulnerable conditions. Based on mathematical calculations, risk is the product ofhazard and vulnerability. Conventionally, risk is expressed by the notation:

Risk = Hazards x Vulnerability

Some disciplines also include the concept of exposure to refer particularly to thephysical aspects of vulnerability.IRIN 2005

WHO (2005)

UN/ISDR 2004

Risk: Expected losses (of lives, persons injured, property damaged and economicactivity disrupted) due to a particular hazard for a given area and referenceperiod. Based on mathematical calculations, risk is the product of hazard andvulnerability:

Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability

EEA 2006

Risk: Expected losses (of lives, persons injured, property damaged and economicactivity disrupted) due to a particular hazard of a certain intensity for a givenarea and reference period.


– 15 –

Risk = Hazard x Expected Losses

Expected Losses = Vulnerability x ValueT6, Del. 3.1

Risk: The probability and severity of an adverse effect / event occurring to manor the environment following exposure, under defined conditions, to a risksource(s). [The probability of adverse effects caused under specifiedcircumstances by an agent in an organism, a population or an ecologicalsystem].

European Commission (2000)

Risk analysis

Risk analysis: The analysis of a hazard (frequency, magnitude) and itsconsequences (damage potential).ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Risk analysis: A methodology to objectively determine risk by combiningprobabilities and consequences or, in other words, combining hazards andvulnerabilities.FLOODsite (2005)

Risk analysis: The determination of the likelihood of an event occurring(probability) and the consequences of its occurrence (impact) for the purpose ofcomparing possible risks and making risk management decisions.Disaster Central (2006)

Risk analysis: Risk analysis is a process or method that is as value-free aspossible. Risk analysis systematically registers and describes risk within adefinite system by using definite quantities for the extent of damage (forexample the number of dead, property damage, etc.) and frequency. (FederalOffice for Civil Protection BZS 2002)Swiss Virtual Campus

Risk assessment

Risk assessment: A combination of risk analysis and risk evaluation to estimatethe risks posed by hazards.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Risk assessment: The process of judging risks which have been analysed.FLOODsite (2005)

Risk assessment: The process of determining the nature and scale of the losses(due to disasters) which can be anticipated in particular areas during a specifiedtime period. Risk assessment involves an analysis and combination of boththeoretical and empirical data concerning: the probabilities of known disasterhazards of particular force or intensities occurring in each area (“hazardmapping”); and the losses (both physical and functional) expected to result toeach element at risk in each area from the impact of each potential disasterhazard (“vulnerability analysis” and “expected loss estimation”) (UNDP, 1991).UNINA Università Federico II, Italy

Risk assessment: The combination of vulnerability analysis and risk analysis. Thedetermination and presentation (usually in quantitative form) of the potential


– 16 –

hazards, and the likelihood and the extent of harm that may result from thesehazards.http://www.disaster-central.com/glossary3-may3.pdf

Risk assessment: An objective scientific assessment of the chance of loss oradverse consequences when physical and social elements are exposed topotentially harmful natural and technological hazards. The endpoints orconsequences depend on the hazard and include: damage, loss of economicvalue, loss of function, loss of natural resources, loss of ecological systems,environmental impact, deterioration of health, mortality, and morbidity.http://pdm.medicine.wisc.edu/vocab.htm

Risk assessment: A process of evaluation including the identification of theattendant uncertainties, of the likelihood and severity of an adverse effect (s)/event(s) occurring to man or the environment following exposure under definedconditions to a risk source(s). A risk assessment comprises hazard identification,hazard characterisation, exposure assessment and risk characterisation.Note: A process intended to calculate or estimate the risk for a given target system followingexposure to a particular substance, taking into account the inherent characteristics of a substanceof concern as well as the characteristics of the specific target system. The process includes foursteps: hazard identification, dose-response assessment, exposure assessment, riskcharacterisation.

European Commission (2000)

Risk evaluation

Risk evaluation: Determining the significance of the estimated risks for thoseaffected, including the element of risk perception.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Risk evaluation: Establishment of a qualitative or quantitative relationshipbetween risks and benefits, involving the complex process of determining thesignificance of the identified hazards and estimated risks to those organisms orpeople concerned with or affected by them. It is the first step in riskmanagement.EEA 2006

Risk management

Risk management (Disaster risk management): The systematic process of usingadministrative decisions, organization, operational skills and capacities toimplement policies, strategies and coping capacities of the society andcommunities to lessen the impacts of natural hazards and related environmentaland technological disasters. This comprises all forms of activities, includingstructural and non-structural measures to avoid (prevention) or to limit(mitigation and preparedness) adverse effects of hazards.UN/ISDR 2004

Risk management: The process of intervening to reduce risk; the making ofpublic and private decisions regarding protective policies and actions that reducethe threat to life, property, and the environment posed by hazards.Disaster Central (2006)

Risk perception

Risk perception: The overall view of risk as perceived by a person or groupincluding feeling, judgement and culture.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project


– 17 –

Also in accordance with:FLOODsite (2005)

CENAT (2004)

Risk reduction

Risk reduction: The systematic development and application of policies,strategies, and practices to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughouta society, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) adverseimpact of hazards, within the broad context of economic development.CENAT (2004)

Risk reduction: The “consequence of adjustment policies which intensify effortsto lower the potential for loss from future environmentally extreme events.”(Mileti, et al. 1981; Nigg and Mileti. 2002)Note: Such adjustment policies may refer to a broad range of guidelines, legislation and plans thathelp to minimize damage potential (i.e. exposure to a hazard or maximizing coping capacity of aregion or community by, e.g. guaranteeing resources and preparing adequate plans for pre-disaster mitigation and post-disaster response measures). Risk reduction involves bothpolicy/regulatory issues and planning practices, i.e. it is the result of risk management relatedresponse (prevention orientated mitigation, non-structural mitigation, structural mitigation, andreaction).

ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Risk reduction (Disaster risk reduction): The conceptual framework of elementsconsidered with the possibilities to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risksthroughout a society to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation andpreparedness) the adverse impacts of hazards within the broad context ofsustainable development.WHO (2005)

Risk reduction: Selective applications of appropriate techniques and managementprinciples to reduce either the likelihood of an occurrence or its consequences, orboth.IRIN 2005

Sectoral planning

Sectoral planning: ’Sector’ in terms of ‘sectoral planning’ is spatial planningunder consideration of only one planning criteria (e.g. traffic, environmentalheritage, etc.). Sectoral as well as comprehensive planning can take place ondifferent administrative levels.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Sectoral planning: Sectoral planning in the broader sense of the term refers tothose plans and activities developed and implemented by departments at federal,Land or local level to meet their specific responsibilities. In the narrower sense, itmeans the formal sectoral planning procedures based on legislation enacted bythe upper two tiers of government (e.g. for federal transport systems).Umweltbundesamt (1995)

Sectoral planning: Form of planning that is carried out within a single sector suchas transport or water management or housing, etc. The priorities are likely to bequantitative (increase output) or qualitative (improve the service) with lessregard to issues of location and territorial impacts, though investment decisionswithin the sector will impact differentially on different places.Office of the Deputy Prime Minister


– 18 –

Sensitivity

Sensitivity: The degree of resilience of a community or a system potentiallyaffected by the impacts and consequences of natural hazards.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards -project

Sensitivity Analysis: A generic term used in both formal (mathematical) and indecision analysis for techniques that identify key assumptions, variables, orparameters for which uncertainty as to their values could significantly affectoutcomes and decisionsARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208

Severity

Severity: A quantitative measure of hazard magnitude, expressed in suitableunits of measurement.American Public Transport Association (2006)

Spatial planning

Spatial planning is the comprehensive, coordinating spatially-oriented planningon all spatial scales (national – local)ARMONIA project (2005)

Spatial planning is action to influence spatial structure by managing territorialdevelopment and coordinating the spatial impacts of sectoral policies.INTERREG IIIB Northwest Europe

Spatial planning goes beyond traditional land use planning to bring together andintegrate policies for the development and use of land with other policies andprogrammes which influence the nature of places and how they function. Thatwill include policies which can impact on land use, for example by influencing thedemands on, or needs for, development, but which are not capable of beingdelivered solely or mainly through the granting or refusal of planning permissionand which may be implemented by other means.Government Office Network (2005)

Susceptibility

Susceptibility: The degree of sensitivity of a community or system to potentialimpacts of hazards (see sensitivity).ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –projectSusceptibility: Areas that have the potential for occurrence of natural hazards(e.g. landslides, floods). These areas are determined by correlating some ofpotential factors that contribute to natural events, such as slope angle, lithology,land use, with the past distribution of the events.USGS (2005)

Susceptibility is the propensity of a particular receptor to experience harm.FLOODsite (2005)

Technological hazard

Technological hazard: A hazard of anthropogenic origin that has the potential toharm people, facilities and/or the environment through specific transmissionmedia (water, air, soil).ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project


– 19 –

Technological hazard: Danger originating from technological or industrialaccidents, dangerous procedures, infrastructure failures or certain humanactivities, which may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social andeconomic disruption or environmental degradation.UN/ISDR (2004)

Turkish Red Crescent Society (2005)

Typology

Typology: The clustering of a large number of items (variety of descriptions) intosmaller groups by virtue of shared characteristics. Examples for typologies are:- Hazard typology: Clustering of hazards that are somehow interrelated to each

other.- Spatial typology: The result of a clustering process that is based on relevant

spatial data. Typology of risk / risk typologisation: Clustering risks into groupsby the characteristics of probability (and certainty of assessment), extent ofdamage (and certainty of assessment), ubiquity, persistency, irreversibility,delay effect and mobilisation potential.


Uncertainty

Uncertainty exists where there is a lack of knowledge concerning outcomes.Uncertainty may result e.g. from imprecise knowledge of risk, from modeluncertainty which my be related to vague process knowledge, or imprecise datameasures, etc. Uncertainty may affect both in a risk approach, the probabilityand the consequences.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208

Vulnerability

To understand the different definitions of vulnerability (as a potential for loss), itis important to distinguish between the origins of vulnerability, which isdiscussed below in accordance with Cutter 1996, p. 530. Further definitionsdiscussed by Cutter 1996 are given in Annex 1. Other interesting approaches tocategorize different concepts of vulnerability are discussed, for example, byDowning & Watts (1994), Füssel & Klein(2006), Klein (2002) and Turner et al.(2003).

Origins of vulnerability are:− Individual potential for/sensitivity to losses: spatial and non-spatial domains;

term: individual vulnerability.− Susceptibility of social groups or society at large to potential structural and

non-structural losses from hazardous events and disasters: distinct spatialoutcomes and variation over time; term: social vulnerability.

− Potential for loss derived from the interaction of society with biophysicalconditions – these affect the resilience of the environment to respond to thehazard or disaster as well as influencing the adaptation of society to suchchanging conditions: also explicit spatial outcomes; term: biophysicalvulnerability.

Social and biophysical vulnerability have explicit spatial relevance and thereforeare in the focus of spatial oriented risk management.

The last bullet above highlights also the ambiguity described by Timmerman(1981, p). The hazard “out there” and the systems internal conditions togetherform vulnerability. The hazard we are vulnerable to is at the same time part ofthe vulnerability. Villa and McLeod (2002) try to clarify the picture by introducing


– 20 –

intrinsic and extrinsic factors. While the expressed intrinsic factor is “related toconservation status and criticality of dynamics” the expressed extrinsic factordepends on the “present exposure”. However, since the exposure to a hazardmay well contribute to the “criticality of dynamics” of a system, the ambiguity isnot solved entirely. Klein (2002) set up his frame for vulnerability as “a priorcondition, bound up with the social and economic situation of household andcommunities, and although external physical factors … play a role raisingvulnerability, they are not preconditions or sole causes.”

In this blur of hazard exposure and system response (or response possibilities)Cutter (1996, pp. 530) tries to delineate three conceptual differences that can befound in vulnerability studies (Cutter 1996, pp. 530):1. Vulnerability as risk/hazard exposure: Examines the source (or potential

exposure to risk) of biophysical or technological hazards. Focus on distributionof hazardous conditions, human occupancy of hazardous zones in combinationwith the occurrence of an hazardous event (e.g. Hewitt & Burton 1971).

2. Vulnerability as social response: Focus on coping responses including societalresistance and resilience to hazards. The nature of the hazardous event isusually taken as a given – or at the very minimum viewed as a socialconstruct – but not a biophysical condition. Here, the social construction ofvulnerability is highlighted, rooted in historical, cultural, social and economicprocesses (e.g. Chambers 1989; Bohle et al. 1994; Blaikie et al. 1994).

3. Vulnerability of places: Focus on the combination of the elements of the firsttwo directions but it is more geographically centred. “In this perspective,vulnerability is conceived as both a biophysical risk as well as a socialresponse, but within a specific areal or geographic domain” (Cutter 1996, p.533).

The vulnerability of places approach is most likely the definition of vulnerabilitythat shall be used in the ARMONIA context because on the one hand it is notpossible to deny the physical existence of hazards – because without hazardthere is no risk. On the other hand, many examples have shown that risksdepend very much on societal aspects like perception of risks, cultural oreconomic aspects.

Vulnerability: Vulnerability is the degree of fragility of a (natural or socio-economic) community or a (natural or socio-economic) system towards naturalhazards. Vulnerability is determined by the typology of a natural hazard, theresulting risk and the potential to react to and/or to withstand it, i.e. itsadaptability, adaptive capacity and/or coping capacity.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project

Also in accordance with:UN/ISDR (2004)

WHO (2005)

Vulnerability: Characteristic of human behaviour, social, and physicalenvironments, describing the degree of susceptibility (or resistance) to theimpact of e.g. natural hazards. Vulnerability is determined by combining hazardawareness, condition of human settlements and infrastructure, public policy andadministration, and organizational strength in disaster management. Poverty isone of the main causes of vulnerability in many parts of the world.CENAT (2004)

Vulnerability: (system) Characteristic of a system that describes its potential tobe harmed. This can be defined as the product of susceptibility and value.


– 21 –

FLOODsite (2005)

Vulnerability: Vulnerability is the susceptibility of human settlements to theharmful impacts of natural hazard.Burby (1998)

Vulnerability: The characteristics of a person or group and their situation thatinfluence their capacity to anticipate, cope with, resist and recover from theimpact of a natural hazard.Wisner et al. (2004).

Vulnerability: A condition wherein human settlements or buildings are threatenedby virtue of their proximity to a hazard, the quality of their construction, or both.Degree of loss (from 0 percent to 100 percent) resulting from a potentialdamaging phenomenon.IRIN 2005

Vulnerability: The level of exposure of human life, property, and resources todamage from natural hazards.NOAA (2006)

Zoning

Zoning: Zoning is a local governments’ tool that regulates land-use, promotesorderly growth, and protects existing property owners by ensuring a convenient,attractive and functional community. Zoning is the way the local governmentscontrol the physical development of land and the kinds of uses to which eachindividual property may be put.ARMONIA EU FP6 project no. 511208 modified after ESPON 1.3.1 Hazards –project

Also in accordance with:http://glossary.eea.eu.int/EEAGlossary/

Zoning: Zoning of the territory relative to each natural hazard and risk is asubdivision of the territory in areas, which could be affected by hazardousphenomena to variable degrees.UNINA Università Federico II, Italy


– 22 –

ReferencesAmerican Public Transport Association (2006)http://www.apta.com/services/safety/glossary.cfm

ARMONIA project Greiving, S., Fleischhauer, M. & Wanczura, S. (2005):Deliverable 1.3 Report on the definition of possible common procedures andmethodologies of spatial planning for natural hazards, to inform the developmentof a new spatial planning standard for the EU, Dortmund, Rome.

Association of American Geographers, glossary,http://www.aag.org/hdgc/www/hazards/glossary/glossary.html, visited February2006

Australian Emergency Management Glossary (1998)http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900SID/LGEL-5SZNYS?OpenDocument,visited February 2006

Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I. & Wisner, B. (1994): At risk. Natural hazards,people’s vulnerability, and disasters (London, New York, Routledge), 284pp.

Bogard, W. C. (1989): Bringing Social Theory to Hazards Research: Conditionsand Consequences of The Mitigation of Environmental Hazards. SociologicalPerspectives 31: 147-68.

Bohle, H.G.; Downing, T.E.; Watts, M.J. (1994): Climate change and socialvulnerability: the sociology and geography of food insecurity. GlobalEnvironmental Change, Vol. 4, pp. 37-48.

Burby, R.J. (ed.) (1998): Cooperating with nature. Joseph Henry Press,Washington D.C.

CENAT (2004): Monte Verità Workshop 2004, Coping with Risks due to NaturalHazards in the 21st Century, 28 November 2004 - 03 December 2004,GLOSSARY, http://www.cenat.ch/index.php?navID=824&userhash=41529&I=e,, visited February 2006

Chambers, R. (1989): Vulnerability, coping and policy. IDS Bulletin, Vol. 20, pp.1-7.

City of Downey, Californiahttp://www.downeyca.org/city/fire/App%20E%20Downey%20_15_.pdf, visitedFebruary 2006

Cutter, S. L., J. T. Mitchell, and M. S. Scott. (2000): Revealing the Vulnerabilityof People and Places: A Case Study of Georgetown County, South Carolina.Annals of the Associations of American Geographers 90 (4): 713-737.

Cutter, S.L. (1996): Vulnerability to environmental hazards. In: Progress inHuman Geography, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 529-539.

Deyle R., French, S. Olshansky, R. and Paterson, R. (1998): Hazard Assessment:The Factual Basis for Planning and Mitigation. Chapter five in Cooperating withNature, edited by Raymond Burby. Washington, DC: National Academy Press,Joseph Henry Press.

Disaster Central (2006) http://www.disaster-central.com/glossary3-may3.pdf,visited February 2006

Dow, K. (1992): “Exploring Differences in Our Common Future(s): The Meaningof Vulnerability to Global Environmental Change.” Geoforum 23: 417-36


– 23 –

Downing, T. E. (1991): Vulnerability to Hunger and Coping with Climate Changein Africa. Global Environmental Change 1: 365-80.

Downing, T.E. and Watts, M.J.(1994): Climate Change and social vulnerability:towards a sociology and geography of food insecurity. Global EnvironmentalChange 4: 37-48.

Easton, V.J. and McColl (1997): J.H. Statistics glossaryhttp://www.stats.gla.ac.uk/steps/glossary/probability.html, visited 13.11.2006

EEA 2006. European Environment Agency multilingual environmental glossary,http://glossary.eea.eu.int/EEAGlossary/, visited 13.11.2006

EM-DAT, Emergency Disasters Data Base: http://www.em-dat.net/glossary.htm,visited February 2006

Environment Waikato, glossaryhttp://www.ew.govt.nz/enviroinfo/hazards/index.htm, visited February 2006

European Commission - Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General,Directorate C - Scientific Opinions: First Report on the Harmonisation of RiskAssessment Procedures, Part 2: Appendices. 26-27 October 2000.

Federal Office for Civil Protection, BZS (2002): KATARISK - Katastrophen undNotlagen in der Schweiz eine Risikobeurteilung aus der Sicht desBevölkerungsschutzes.http://www.bevoelkerungsschutz.admin.ch/internet/bs/en/home/themen/gefaehrdungen/katarisk.html, visited February 2006.

FLOODsite (2005): Language of Risk – Project Definitions, FLOODsite ConsortiumReport T32-04-01, available at www.floodsite.net)

Fournier d’Albe, E.M. (1979): Objectives of volcanic monitoring and prediction. J.Geol. Soc. London, 136: 321-326.

Füssel, H.M. and Klein, R.J.T. (2006): Climate Change VulnerabilityAssessments: An Evolution of Conceptual Thinking. Climatic Change, inpressGabor, T. and T. K. Griffith. (1980). “The Assessment of CommunityVulnerability to Acute Hazardous Materials Incidents.” Journal of HazardousMaterials 8: 323-33.

Garvey, Paul R., (2001): Implementing a Risk Management Process for a LargeScale Information System Upgrade - A Case Study, INCOSE Insight, May 2001: 5

Godschalk, D.R., Beatley, T., Berke, P., Brower, D.J. and Kaiser, E.J. (1999):Natural Hazard Mitigation. Recasting Disaster Policy and Planning, Island Press,Washington, DC.

Government Of f i ce Network (2005): P lann ing g lossaryhttp://www.gos.gov.uk/gone/docs/planning/planning_glossary2005.pdf, visitedFebruary 2006

Hewitt, K. & Burton, I. (1971): The hazardousness of a place: a regional ecologyof damaging events (Toronto, University of Toronto, Department of Geography;Research Publication 6), 312pp.

INTERREG IIIB Northwest Europe, Glossary of Spatial Planninghttp://www.nweurope.org/upload/documents/programme/825.Spatial_Vision_Glossary.rtf, visited February 2006


– 24 –

IRIN (2005): Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN, IRINnews.org),UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs,http://www.irinnews.org/webspecials/DR/Definitions.asp, visited February 2006

Klein, R.J.T. (2002): Coastal Vulnerability, Resilience and Adaptation to ClimateChange – an Interdisciplinary Perspective, Kumulative Dissertation, Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Kiel

Liverman, D. (1990): Vulnerability to Global Environmental Change.Understanding Global Environmental Change: the Contributions of Risk Analysisand management, edited by R.E. Kasperson et al. Worcester, MA: ClarkUniversity, The Earth Transformed Program, 27-44.

Mileti, D.S., Hutton, J., and Sorenson, J. (1981): Earthquake Prediction Responseand Options for Public Policy. Boulder: Institute of Behavioral Science, Universityof Colorado.

Mitchell, J.K. (1989): Hazards research. Geography in America, edited by Gaile,G.L., and C.J. Willmott. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

NOAA (2006): A Glossary of Tsunami and Seismic-Related Terminologyhttp://www.csc.noaa.gov/products/tsunamis/htm/cascadia/terms.htm, visitedFebruary 2006

NOAA Coastal Services Center, glossaryhttp://www.csc.noaa.gov/vata/glossary.html, visited February 2006

Nigg, J.M., and Mileti, D. (2002): Natural Hazards and Disasters. In R.E. Dunlap,and W. Michelson (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Sociology. 272-294.Westport: Greenwood Press.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister(http://www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1145459, visited February 2006

Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, Disaster Terminologyhttp://pdm.medicine.wisc.edu/vocab.htm, visited February 2006

Rial, J., Pielke Sr., R. A., M. Beniston, M. Claussen, J. Canadell, P. Cox, H. Held,N. de Noblet- Ducoudre, R. Prinn, J. Reynolds, and J. D. Salas, (2003):Nonlinearities, feedbacks and critical thresholds within the earth's climatesystem. Climatic Change, submitted.

Roger A. Pielke Sr. and Lelys Bravo de Guenni, Eds. Part E of Kabat, P.,Claussen, M., Dirmeyer, P. A., Gash, J. H. C., Bravo de Guenni, L., Meybeck, M.,Pielke Sr., R. A., Vörösmarty, C. J., Hutjes, R. W. A., Lütkemeier, S. (Eds.)(2003): Vegetation, Water, Humans and the Climate: A New Perspective on anInteractive System, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, approx. 550 pp.

Susman, P., P. O’Keefe, and B. Wisner (1984): Global disasters: a radicalinterpretation. In Interpretations of Calamity, edited by Hewitt, K. Boston: Allen& Unwin, pp. 264-83.

Swiss Virtual Campus, dealing with natural hazardshttp://www.ika.ethz.ch/nathaz/glossary/, visited February 2006

Timmerman, P. (1981): Vulnerability, resilience and the collapse of society: areview of models and possible climatic applications. Institute for EnvironmentalStudies, Environmental Monograph No. 1. Toronto: University of Toronto.

Turkish Red Crescent Society (2005), Vocabularyhttp://eng.kizilay.org.tr/channels/2.asp?id=342%20, visited February 2006


– 25 –

Turner B.L., RE Kasperson, PA Matson, JJ McCarthy, RW Corell, L Christensen, NEckley, JX Kasperson, A Luers, ML Martello, C Polsky, A Pulsipher, A Schiller(2003): A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. PNAS100(14): 8074-8079.

Umweltbundesamt (1995):http://www.umweltdaten.de/rup/glossar/englisch.pdf, visited February 2006

UNDRO (United Nations Disaster Relief Organization) (1982): Natural disastersand vulnerability analysis. Geneva: Office of the United Nations Disaster ReliefCoordinator.

UNEP (2002): Assessing Human Vulnerability due to Environmental Change:Concepts, Issues, Methods and Case Studies.http://www.unep.org/geo/pdfs/AssessingHumanVulnerability.pdf, visitedFebruary 2006

UN-ISDR (2003): Terminology on disaster risk reduction (working document),http://www.adrc.or.jp/publications/terminology/, visited February 2006

UN/ISDR (2004): International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, Library onDisaster Risk Reduction, http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/lib-terminology-eng.htm, visited February 2006

UNESCO (1972): Report of consultative meeting of experts on the statisticalstudy of natural hazard and their consequences. Document SC/WS/500 pagg. 1-11.

United Nations Development Programme (1991): UNDP/UNDRO DisasterManagement Manual. Geneva, 1991.

University of Wisconsin–Disaster Management Center (UW–DMC), Annex 1,Glossary, visited February 2006

USGS (2005): glossary,http://landslides.usgs.gov/learningeducation/glossary.php#s, visited February2006

Villa, F., and H. McLeod (2002): “Environmental Vulnerability Indicators forEnvironmental Planning and Decision-Making: Guidelines and Applications”,Environmental Management, 28,3: 335-348

Watts, M.J., and J.G. Bohle. (1993): “The space of vulnerability: the causalstructure of hunger and famine.” Progress in Human Geography. 17:43-67.

Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., and Davis, I. (2004): At Risk. Second edition.Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Routledge, London andNew York.

WHO (2004): The World Health Organisation. The Fifty-seventh Session of theRegional Committee for South-East Asia, Emergency Health Preparedness, PartI I , G l o s s a r y ,http://w3.whosea.org/EN/Section1430/Section1439/Section1638/Section1646/Section1723_7443.htm, visited February 2006


– 26 –

Annex 1: Further definitions of vulnerability (according to Cutter 1996):

− Gabor and Griffith (1980): Vulnerability is the threat (to hazardousmaterials) to which people are exposed (including chemical agents and theecological situation of the communities and their level of emergencypreparedness). Vulnerability is the risk context.

− Timmerman (1981): Vulnerability is the degree to which a system actsadversely to the occurrence of a hazardous event. The degree and qualityof the adverse reaction are conditioned by a system’s resilience (ameasure of the system’s capacity to absorb and recover from the event).

− UNDRO (1982): Vulnerability is the degree of loss to a given element orset of elements at risk resulting from the occurrence of a naturalphenomenon of a given magnitude.

− Susman et al. (1984): Vulnerability is the degree to which different classesof society are differentially at risk.

− Bogard (1989): Vulnerability is operationally defined as the inability totake effective measures to insure against losses. When applied toindividuals vulnerability is a consequence of the impossibility orimprobability of effective mitigation and is a function of our ability todetect the hazards.

− Mitchell (1989): Vulnerability is the potential for loss.− Chambers (1989): Vulnerability refers to exposure to contingencies and

stress, and difficulty in coping with them. Vulnerability has thus two sides:an external side of risks, shocks, and stress to which an individual orhousehold is subject: and an internal side which is defenselessness,meaning a lack of means to cope without damaging loss.

− Liverman (1990): Distinguishes between vulnerability as a biophysicalcondition and vulnerability as defined by political, social and economicconditions of society… vulnerability is defined both in geographic space(where vulnerable people and places are located) and in social space (whoin that place is vulnerable).

− Downing (1991): Vulnerability has three connotations: it refers to aconsequence (e.g., famine) rather than a cause (e.g., drought); it impliesan adverse consequence; and it is a relative term that differentiatesamong socio-economic groups or regions, rather than an absolutemeasure of deprivation.

− Dow (1992): Vulnerability is the differential capacity of groups andindividuals to deal with hazards based on their positions within physicaland social worlds.

− Watts and Bohle (1993): Vulnerability is defined in terms of exposure,capacity and potentiality. Accordingly, the prescriptive and normativeresponse to vulnerability is to reduce exposure, enhance coping capacity,strengthen recovery potential and bolster damage control (i.e., minimizedestructive consequences) via private and public means.

Also:− Cutter et al. (2000): Broadly defined, vulnerability is the potential for loss

of property or life from environmental hazards.

Documents

Report: Technical Glossary of a Multi Hazard Related ... · 3/23/2007 · ARMONIA project, expressed the need for a harmonized version of a glossary on hazards and risk assessment