1HlG51J

Figure 4-3. Internationally reported global disaster mortality (events with fewer than 100 deaths) 320Assessed level of risk; hazard, exposure, vulnerability andcapacityAnother option for baseline setting would be to use theassessed level of risk (for mortality and economic losses)for the year 2015 as the baseline. In this option, thecountries could aim at bringing down their estimated riskby reducing their exposure or vulnerability to hazards andincreasing their capacities to deal with them. This wouldhelp to take better into consideration the existingsituations in different countries and the specific risk typesthey face, but would require a considerable amount ofadditional research to build countries’ risk, exposure,vulnerability and capacity profiles. In this case the countriescould monitor their progress by updating the riskassessments based on their actions.Risk assessment usually encompasses the systematic use ofavailable information to determine the likelihood of certainevents occurring and the magnitude of their possibleconsequences. As a process, it is generally agreed that itincludes: identifying the nature, location, intensity andprobability of a hazard; determining the existence anddegree of vulnerabilities and exposure to those hazards;identifying the capacities and resources available toaddress or manage hazards; and determining acceptablelevels of risk 321 . The first is often determined byestablishment of probabilistic hazard maps that serve asthe basis for assessment. These represent the hazardparameter (e.g. strength of ground shaking, flood depthetc.) expected at each location at a given annual probabilityof a hazard, and form the basis also for probabilisticmodels. For assessing vulnerability and capacity, severaldifferent methods exist.For SDG monitoring ODI for example has proposed 322 adifferentiated approach depending on the hazards faced,using three categories of hazard, based on the appropriatetype of responses: Category 1. would include hazards suchas floods and storms, where, for mortality reduction,evacuation of people is key. Category 2. would includehazards such as earthquakes where reduction of buildingvulnerability is key to reduce expected mortality rates.Category 3. would consist of slow-onset hazards, such asdrought, where appropriate action plans regarding forexample distribution of water and food are needed toreduce expected mortality rates. Simply summarized, forcategory 1 for example, probabilistic hazard would becombined with the exposure (number of people in adefined hazard area combined with the people covered byan evacuation plan, multiplied by an effectiveness factor ofthese plans) and vulnerability (the percentage of peopleexpected to die who do not evacuate). For category 2,hazard would be combined with exposure (number ofpeople and the buildings they are in) and vulnerability(fatality rates for certain types in buildings at certain levelsof ground shaking.For assessing economic losses, it would be necessary tocombine the hazard with estimated values ofbuildings/infrastructure/agricultural production in theaffected area. With categories 1 and 2 the vulnerability ofbuildings affected would need to be taken intoconsideration, while with drought the effectiveness ofmitigation efforts, such as coverage of irrigation systems,should be factored in. These calculations however wouldonly capture a portion of economic losses and, if so wished,costs of business and livelihood disruption would need tobe accounted for.79