A formal security definition for digital control system of the critical or hazard assets is discussed.
A fundamental assumption in RiskScape is the three pronged approach – that hazard, assets, and vulnerability are considered independently.
We found that a binary vulnerability function for lava flow impact was appropriate for most combinations of lava flow hazard and asset characteristics but that building and infrastructure type, and the flow thickness, affected the level of impact.
RiskScape has a modular structure, with hazard layers, assets, and loss functions prepared separately.
Vulnerability has been assessed using different methods, ranging from geospatial overlays of hazards and assets (Aceves-Quesada et al. 2007) to probabilistic loss assessments (Spence et al. 2005), and from municipal (Kaye et al. 2009) to global (Chester et al. 2000) scales.
It has a modular structure, relying on hazard information, an asset inventory, and a suite of vulnerability and fragility functions.
While RiskScape was originally developed for New Zealand, given suitable hazard and exposed asset information, RiskScape can be run anywhere in the world.
The error term, υ, includes the remaining dwelling damage that cannot be explained by the intensity of the natural hazard and the asset indicator of wealth.17 This is our indicator of household (revealed) vulnerability at the time of the earthquake.
The Sendai Framework highlights that disaster risk is multifaceted, comprising "vulnerability, capacity, exposure of persons and assets, hazard characteristics and the environment" (UNISDR 2015b, Paragraph 23) and that knowledge of risk should inform all elements of the disaster management cycle.
