Author:
Pinelli Jean-Paul,Da Cruz Josemar,Gurley Kurtis,Paleo-Torres Andres Santiago,Baradaranshoraka Mohammad,Cocke Steven,Shin Dongwook
Abstract
AbstractCatastrophe models estimate risk at the intersection of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Each of these areas requires diverse sources of data, which are very often incomplete, inconsistent, or missing altogether. The poor quality of the data is a source of epistemic uncertainty, which affects the vulnerability models as well as the output of the catastrophe models. This article identifies the different sources of epistemic uncertainty in the data, and elaborates on strategies to reduce this uncertainty, in particular through identification, augmentation, and integration of the different types of data. The challenges are illustrated through the Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model (FPHLM), which estimates insured losses on residential buildings caused by hurricane events in Florida. To define the input exposure, and for model development, calibration, and validation purposes, the FPHLM teams accessed three main sources of data: county tax appraiser databases, National Flood Insurance Protection (NFIP) portfolios, and wind insurance portfolios. The data from these different sources were reformatted and processed, and the insurance databases were separately cross-referenced at the county level with tax appraiser databases. The FPHLM hazard teams assigned estimates of natural hazard intensity measure to each insurance claim. These efforts produced an integrated and more complete set of building descriptors for each policy in the NFIP and wind portfolios. The article describes the impact of these uncertainty reductions on the development and validation of the vulnerability models, and suggests avenues for data improvement. Lessons learned should be of interest to professionals involved in disaster risk assessment and management.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Safety Research,Geography, Planning and Development,Global and Planetary Change
Reference45 articles.
1. Baradaranshoraka, M., J.-P. Pinelli, K. Gurley, M. Zhao, X. Peng, and A. Paleo-Torres. 2019. Characterization of coastal flood damage states for residential buildings. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering 5(1): Article 04019001.
2. Baradaranshoraka, M., J.-P. Pinelli, K. Gurley, X. Peng, and M. Zhao. 2017. Hurricane wind versus storm surge damage in the context of a risk prediction model. Journal of Structural Engineering 143(9): Article 04017103.
3. Biasi, G., M.S. Mohammed, and D.H. Sanders. 2017. Earthquake damage estimations: ShakeCast case study on Nevada bridges. Earthquake Spectra 33(1): 45–62.
4. Catbas, F.N., and T. Kijewski-Correa. 2013. Structural identification of constructed systems: Collective effort toward an integrated approach that reduces barriers to adoption. Journal of Structural Engineering 139(10): 1648–1652.
5. Chian, S.C. 2016. A complementary engineering-based building damage estimation for earthquakes in catastrophe modeling. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 7(1): 88–107.
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献