Rational hazard forecasts should fully recognize the large, indeed dominant role of uncertainties in volcanic processes, and be therefore expressed through probabilities.
Here, I do not review the methods and their technical aspects; rather, I focus on the value of rational hazard forecasts, that account for both epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties that dominate in the natural processes involved in volcanic systems; and I outline a recommended best practice approach to dealing with volcanic hazards and risks, with reference to short-term forecasts.
In contrast, rational volcanic hazard forecasts fully and explicitly account for the uncertain nature of both volcanic processes and the evolution of a volcanic system, thus maximizing the exploitation of diverse knowledge and expertise for societal benefits.
I argue that rational volcanic hazard forecasts assure a clear, unambiguous distinction between volcano scientists and decision-makers, with the formers providing forecasts in the probabilistic form that is best suited for decision-making under uncertainty – the natural state characterizing any situation of volcanic risk.
Although protecting volcanologists against legal issues related to their conduct during a crisis is not among the arguments in this paper, it should be noted that as a consequence of rational volcanic hazard forecasts, volcanologists are released from the inappropriate duty of making decisions impacting society.
There is a perceived need for rational toxicological (hazard) assessment of the large number of untested NPs and their variants (e.g., size, derivatization, composition), but there is also strong ethical and financial pressure to carry out such toxicological testing using in vitro approaches.
The effect of uncertainties associated with input parameters arising out of these were taken into account by rational maximization of hazard.
A probabilistic methodology is also proposed, which, when results of an accurate survey are not available for a particular basin, may provide a rational basis for a first hazard zonation and the design of mitigative measures.
For New Yorkers, agoraphobia may not be an illness at all, but a perfectly rational defense strategy against the hazards of daily life.
A rational attitude in forecasting volcanic hazards should be respectful of the distinct roles of the various actors involved in the management of volcanic crises, and fully acknowledge uncertainty as a fundamental condition upon which forecasts are based.
The PBHE framework introduced in this paper represents a step toward a rational methodology for probabilistic risk assessment and design of structures subjected to multi-hazard scenarios.
