Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-7333-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-7333-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
07 Dec 2015
Status: this preprint has been withdrawn by the authors.
Epistemic uncertainties and natural hazard risk assessment – Part 1: A review of the issues
Abstract. Uncertainties in natural hazard risk assessment are generally dominated by the sources arising from lack of knowledge or understanding of the processes involved. There is a lack of knowledge about frequencies, process representations, parameters, present and future boundary conditions, consequences and impacts, and the meaning of observations in evaluating simulation models. These are the epistemic uncertainties that can be difficult to constrain, especially in terms of event or scenario probabilities, even as elicited probabilities rationalized on the basis of expert judgements. This paper reviews the issues raised by trying to quantify the effects of epistemic uncertainties. Such scientific uncertainties might have significant influence on decisions that are made for risk management, so it is important to communicate the meaning of an uncertainty estimate and to provide an audit trail of the assumptions on which it is based. Some suggestions for good practice in doing so are made.
This preprint has been withdrawn.
How to cite. Beven, K. J., Aspinall, W. P., Bates, P. D., Borgomeo, E., Goda, K., Hall, J. W., Page, T., Phillips, J. C., Rougier, J. T., Simpson, M., Stephenson, D. B., Smith, P. J., Wagener, T., and Watson, M.: Epistemic uncertainties and natural hazard risk assessment – Part 1: A review of the issues, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., 3, 7333–7377, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-7333-2015, 2015.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Download & links
-
Withdrawal notice
This preprint has been withdrawn.
-
Preprint
(673 KB)
Download & links
-
This preprint has been withdrawn.
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
- Printer-friendly version
- Supplement
-
RC C2527: 'Epistemic uncertainties and natural hazard risk assessment. 1. A review of the issues', Anonymous Referee #1, 10 Dec 2015
-
RC C3275: 'Review report', Anonymous Referee #2, 06 Mar 2016
-
EC C3408: 'Editorial comment', Richard Chandler, 24 May 2016
-
AC C3437: 'Response to Referees' Comments', Keith Beven, 31 Jul 2016
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
- Printer-friendly version
- Supplement
-
RC C2527: 'Epistemic uncertainties and natural hazard risk assessment. 1. A review of the issues', Anonymous Referee #1, 10 Dec 2015
-
RC C3275: 'Review report', Anonymous Referee #2, 06 Mar 2016
-
EC C3408: 'Editorial comment', Richard Chandler, 24 May 2016
-
AC C3437: 'Response to Referees' Comments', Keith Beven, 31 Jul 2016
Viewed
Total article views: 2,623 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 07 Dec 2015)
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,733 | 763 | 127 | 2,623 | 97 | 110 |
- HTML: 1,733
- PDF: 763
- XML: 127
- Total: 2,623
- BibTeX: 97
- EndNote: 110
Cited
10 citations as recorded by crossref.
- Hazard communication by volcanologists: Part 1 - Framing the case for contextualisation and related quality standards in volcanic hazard assessments R. Bretton et al. 10.1186/s13617-018-0077-x
- Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Saudi Arabia using spatially smoothed seismicity and analysis of hazard uncertainty V. Sokolov et al. 10.1007/s10518-016-0075-5
- Disaster Risk Analysis Part 2: The Systemic Underestimation of Risk A. Mamuji & D. Etkin 10.1515/jhsem-2017-0006
- Deterministic seismic hazard assessment for the Makkah region, western Saudi Arabia H. Zahran et al. 10.1007/s12517-019-4648-x
- A Vulnerability‐Based, Bottom‐up Assessment of Future Riverine Flood Risk Using a Modified Peaks‐Over‐Threshold Approach and a Physically Based Hydrologic Model J. Knighton et al. 10.1002/2017WR021036
- Optimization-based decision-making models for disaster recovery and reconstruction planning of transportation networks M. Zamanifar & T. Hartmann 10.1007/s11069-020-04192-5
- Sources of uncertainty in a probabilistic flood risk model B. Winter et al. 10.1007/s11069-017-3135-5
- Hazard communication by volcanologists: part 2 - quality standards for volcanic hazard assessments R. Bretton et al. 10.1186/s13617-018-0079-8
- Assessing future vent opening locations at the Somma‐Vesuvio volcanic complex: 2. Probability maps of the caldera for a future Plinian/sub‐Plinian event with uncertainty quantification A. Tadini et al. 10.1002/2016JB013860
- Seismic hazard assessment for Harrat Lunayyir – A lava field in western Saudi Arabia H. Zahran & S. El-Hady 10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.06.009
Saved
Latest update: 21 Nov 2024
Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
W. P. Aspinall
School of Earth Sciences, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
P. D. Bates
School of Geographical Sciences, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
E. Borgomeo
Environmental Change Institute, Oxford University, Oxford , UK
Department of Civil Engineering, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
J. W. Hall
Environmental Change Institute, Oxford University, Oxford , UK
T. Page
Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
J. C. Phillips
School of Earth Sciences, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
J. T. Rougier
School of Mathematics, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
M. Simpson
Environmental Change Institute, Oxford University, Oxford , UK
D. B. Stephenson
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Exeter University, Exeter, UK
P. J. Smith
Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
T. Wagener
Department of Civil Engineering, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
Cabot Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
M. Watson
School of Earth Sciences, Bristol University, Bristol, UK
Short summary
Uncertainties in natural hazard risk assessment are generally dominated by the sources arising from lack of knowledge or understanding of the processes involved. This is Part 1 of 2 papers reviewing these epistemic uncertainties that can be difficult to constrain, especially in terms of event or scenario probabilities. It is based on the work of the CREDIBLE research consortium on Risk and Uncertainty in Natural Hazards.
Uncertainties in natural hazard risk assessment are generally dominated by the sources arising...
Altmetrics