Articles | Volume 18, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2741-2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2741-2018
Review article
 | 
24 Oct 2018
Review article |  | 24 Oct 2018

Epistemic uncertainties and natural hazard risk assessment – Part 1: A review of different natural hazard areas

Keith J. Beven, Susana Almeida, Willy P. Aspinall, Paul D. Bates, Sarka Blazkova, Edoardo Borgomeo, Jim Freer, Katsuichiro Goda, Jim W. Hall, Jeremy C. Phillips, Michael Simpson, Paul J. Smith, David B. Stephenson, Thorsten Wagener, Matt Watson, and Kate L. Wilkins

Viewed

Total article views: 6,922 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
4,205 2,568 149 6,922 94 112
  • HTML: 4,205
  • PDF: 2,568
  • XML: 149
  • Total: 6,922
  • BibTeX: 94
  • EndNote: 112
Views and downloads (calculated since 21 Aug 2017)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 21 Aug 2017)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 6,922 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 6,369 with geography defined and 553 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 26 May 2024
Short summary
This paper discusses how uncertainties resulting from lack of knowledge are considered in a number of different natural hazard areas including floods, landslides and debris flows, dam safety, droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic ash clouds and pyroclastic flows, and wind storms. As every analysis is necessarily conditional on the assumptions made about the nature of sources of such uncertainties it is also important to follow the guidelines for good practice suggested in Part 2.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint