Transcript Training - Politecnico di Milano

Introduction to risk assessment and
management in developing countries
Scira Menoni– Politecnico di Milano
Index
1. Risk mitigation as part of sustainable development
2. Urban areas at risk in developed and developing
countries
3. Basic components of risk definition
4. Conditions of multirisk/multihazard
5. What can be done? Mitigation measures
6. How assessment tools support mitigation
measures
RISK PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT FROM A SPATIAL AND LAND
USE PLANNING PERSPECTIVE
1 Introduction to the course
Risk assessment tools: definining hazard, exposure, vulnerability and risk in the
2 context of seismic risk
3 Risk assessment tools: scenarios versus PRA modelling
4 Case studies: Kobe earthquake, Boumedere (Algeria), Izmit (Turkey)
Multirisk perspective: multihazard and multirisk. A map of hotspots by the World
5 Bank
Long term risk mitigation measures (non structural): land use planning in the
6 context of megacities and remote areas
Reconstruction following disasters: linking rehabilitation to development.
7 Experiences from the EU Community Mechanism
8 Short term mitigation measures: contingency planning and crisis managment
9 Short term mitigation measures: increasing the coping capacity of communities
Tools for risk mitigation measures implementation. Differencies between
10 developed and developing countires
Idea of the course: provide the basic concepts of risk
analysis, risk assessment, risk mitigation and
prevention in an international context and as a
development issue
World wide natural disasters
(Source: Munich Re, 2005)
World wide cost of natural
disasters (Source: Munich Re, 2005)
The cost of natural disasters in
Europe
Damage in US $ (,000). Source CRED EM-DAT (from 5 to 20 bn US $/y)
25000000
Wild Fires
2%
20000000
Wind
St orm
24%
Drought
8%
Eart hqua
ke
22%
15000000
10000000
5000000
0
1900
1950
2000
2050
Slides
1%
Volc ano
0%
Wav e /
Surge
0%
Flood
38%
Ext reme
Temperat
ure
5%
Yearly cost for landslides damage in some Countries and comparison
with GDP*
Total cost
(million
US $)
% GDP
4500
0,25
4000
Japan
4000
0,08
3500
2
India
1000
0,20
3000
3
Italy
1000
0,079
4
USA
1000
0,009
5
China
500
0,037
6
Spain
220
0,034
7
Canada
225
0,029
8
Swedish
15
0,005
9
Hong Kong
25
10
New Zealand
12
11
Norway
6
0,2
0,15
% GNP
2500
2000
0,1
1500
1000
0,05
500
Norway
New Zealand
Hong Kong
Swedish
Canada
Spain
China
USA
0
Italy
0
India
cost (Million of US $)
1
Japan
Country
* GDP is 2000 data, while the total cost is an average value coming from variuos sources, manily Schuster, 1999
and CNR/GNDCI. Canadian losses are from P. Bobrowsky (Head, Canada Landslide Loss Reduction Program)
Victims in world, Europe, Japan and Italy
Wave /
Surge
2%
Volcano
Wild Fires
0%
Wind
St orm
11%
Eart hqua
ke
19%
Slides
2%
Volcano
1%
1%
Flood
5%
Slides
1%
Wild Fires
0%
Wave / Surge
0%
Wind Storm
5%
Flood
66%
World – (1900-2004) Source CRED EM DAT
Europe - Source CRED EM DAT (1900-2004)
fires
0,23%
t idal st orm
0,5%
volcanic
erupt ion
1%
Earthquake
87%
landslide
4%
heavy rainfall
7%
flooding
13%
eart hquake
75%
Italy - Victims last 50 yy (Source ENEA)
Japan - Victims 1967-2002
How are development and risk linked?


Disaster risk is lower in high
development countries than in
low development countries.
Development processes
intervene in the translation of
physical exposure to hazards
into disaster risk
Earthquakes: countries with rapid urban
growth
Tropical cyclones: countries with large rural
populations and a low rank on the Human
Development Index (HDI).
Floods: countries with low GDP per capita
and low local population densities

Source
UNEP
Developed countries
Urban areas and
megacities at risk
Fig. 3. Percentage of the number of disasters registered from 1900
until 1999 by regions of the world (Source: EM-DAT database).
Developing countries
Why the increasing trends?
• More people and more complex societies
– Great concentrations of people in
urban areas
• More structure – much of its aging
– Particularly in urban areas
• Choices – where to live, work, play and travel
– Urbanization of societies – most
along coasts and rivers
• Human intervention in the environment
– Emission of pollutants and
greenhouse gases
It is estimated that natural disaster losses will
increase dramatically over the next 50 years. The
global cost of natural disasters is anticipated to
top $300 billion annually by 2050 (UNISDR
2001). Two broad demographic trends directly
impact the increasing losses from natural
hazards in the developing world: population
growth and the concentration of populations in
megacities.
increasing vulnerability?
Economic losses due to natural hazards in the years 1950-2002
(Source: Munich-Re)
Comparison between losses and number of event in the last 40
years
Comparison between death toll and economic losses worldwide
6,00E+08
2,50E+06
5,00E+08
danni in $
morti
2,00E+06
1,50E+06
1,00E+06
4,00E+08
3,00E+08
2,00E+08
1,00E+08
5,00E+05
0,00E+00
0,00E+00
'50-'59
'50-'59
'60-'69
'70-'79
'80-'89
decenni
'90-'99
'60-'69
'70-'79
'80-'89
'90-'99
'00-'05
'00-'05
decenni
Figure 1 e 2: confronto fra numero dei morti e danni nel periodo 1950-2005 in UE, America, Asia, Africa. Fonte dati: EMDAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database- www.em-dat.net. Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels - Belgium
We may go on with data and statistics, but let’s stop here and point
out that:
* Natural hazards have always been a major issue (when disaster
stroke) and still are, though with a slight change in the relative
proportion of death toll and economic losses;
* Victims and losses are unevenly distributed in the developed
and developing world;
* There are other causes besides events’ severity to explain
victims and losses (exposure and vulnerability)
You cannot reach sustainability without risk prevention. Why?
Without prevention you
put at risk present and
future generations
Costs of repair (and
human and economic
harm) is unduly paid by
large sectors of society,
particularly in
developing countries
Many times
unsustainable practices
also increase risk
A definition of
safety:
A dynamic
‘non-event’
(Karl Weick)
What kind of risks?
Connected to events for which a clear impact
zone and time of occurrence can be identified
What risk is all about?
1. It is about assigning
probabilities to events
2. About comparing
negativities
3. About establishing
thresholds
Assigning probabilities to events
Problems:
1. Not enough historical data
2. Enough historical data but not enough
knowledge regarding the phenomena
3. Subjective rather than objective
probabilities
Comparing negativities
Problems:
1. Subjective probabilities are influenced
by experience
2. Social perception is the issue
3. Public versus private risks
small
probabilities
minor
consequence
threshold
Deciding thresholds of acceptable risk
large
probabilities
RISK
major
consequence
s
Problems:
1. What are the criteria?
2. How criteria are related to the way risks
are measured?
3. Who decides?
Acceptable thresholds cannot be derived
from estimated probabilities
You should estimate not only the hazard
but also the vulnerabilities
&
1. Because acceptable thresholds can’t be
derived from probabilities;
2. Because risks are context-related;
3. Because you can’t separate social, political,
economic and technical issues properly
1. You can’t rely on one discipline only;
2. You need both analytical and synthetic
views of problems
it is a matter of “Mandated science”
(L. Salter, 1988)
Technical expertise
* Analytical
* Quantitative models
(mainly for the hazard)
* Poorly context related
Social sciences
* Synthetic
* Rarely or poorly
quantitative
* Context sensitive
(vulnerability)
What can be done to mitigate risks?
Risk assessment
Risk mitigation measures: structural and non
structural, long and short term
Implementation tools: laws, regulations,
directives, economic tools –insurance,
incentives, taxes- voluntary….
What can be done to mitigate risks?
Risk assessment
Risk mitigation measures: structural and non
structural, long and short term
Implementation tools: laws, regulations,
directives, economic tools –insurance,
incentives, taxes- voluntary….
1
Hazard
Vulnerability
D = f( y, V) d(y)
Risk
0
RISK = HAZARD * VULNERABILITY (Exposed systems)
Hazard
Vulnerability
Brief definition
Risk
RISK = HAZARD * VULNERABILITY (Exposed systems)
RISK measured in terms of expected damage
HAZARD = characteristics of the dangerous agent (phenomena)
VULNERABILITY= propensity to damage, fragility
(Exposed systems)= number and dimension of people
and goods in a dangerous area
In developing countries….
More EXPOSURE
More VULNERABILITY
More HAZARD
RISK measured in terms of expected damage
Furthermore, multiple threats are not so uncommon,
unfortunately many times in megacities in developing countries
While the vulnerability of small states, particularly islands
should not be disregarded (lack of resources)
What can be done to mitigate risks?
Risk assessment
Risk mitigation measures: structural and non
structural, long and short term
Implementation tools: laws, regulations,
directives, economic tools –insurance,
incentives, taxes- voluntary….
Short term
measures
RISK PREVENTION
(OR MITIGATION?)
Long term
measures
Risk assessment tools
Risk prevention measures
(to feed prevention measures)
Land use planning
PRA
Structural
measures
* re-develpment
Hazard
Exposure
Physical
vulnerability
* relocation
Deterministic
scenario
Systemic
vulnerability
* restauration
Socioeconomic
vulnerability
* zoning
Support to implementation
* Disclosure
Complete event
scenario
* Communication
* Insurance; * tax incentives; * td/p rights
long term mitigation measures
short term mitigation measures
- buildings
consolidation
- buildings codes
Non structural
measures addressing
social and economic
vulnerabilities
- land use planning to
avoid the most
hazardous zones
- preparedness programs - land use planning
- buildings retrofit
- levees, outlets, etc. codes
- relocation from the
most critical areas
- education, training of
various public sectors
- norms to secure
public facilities,
- avalanches defence factories etc.
- insurance integrated - development of
to land use planning programs with the media
Non structural
measures to mitigate
environmental
vulnerabilities
- preserving diversity in
agricoltural activities
- locational decisions
regarding public
- tailoring agricoltural
services and
practices to the type of
infrastructures
soil/terrain
- protection of marsh
areas, humid zones,
shoreline dunes, etc.
- landslide
cosolidation
- buildings usability
- lava flows diversion checks
- evacuation
- accessibility to
- improvement of civil
services and to
protection organisational potentially damaged
capabilities
areas
- sandbags and
- temporary repairs
barriers to inundating particularly for
waters
lifelines
- business continuity
plans also for the public
sector
- fires control
- use of the media to
dispatch emergency
messages
- sustainable practices in
lava, water flows
diversion
Risk mitigation measures: structural and non structural, long and short term
Structural
measures dealing
with hazards
Structural measures Non structural
dealing with
measures
physical
addressing exposure
vulnerability
reduction
Non structural
measures to
mitigate the
vulnerability of the
built environment
Planners do different things in Europe dealing with spatial planning;
summarizing and comprising different schools of thought and practice:
rural
to
urban
(development)
Transform land uses
urban
to urban
(restoration, redevelopment)
urban
to rural
rural
to
rural
urban
to urban
Preserve land uses
Wider context of development
and redevelopment (so in
developing countries specific factors
pertaining for example to illegal/self
construction and financial constraints
must be considered)
Land use planning must be
considered in a wider context
Wider context of sustainibility (how
development and land use planning may
support environmentally sustainible
practices and compatible with ecosystems)
Is risk prevention part of
sustainibility?
land use planning in hazardous areas
Land use planning in
hazardous areas
prevention is
neither
economically
(discount rate)
nor politically
convenient
the “tragic choices”
dilemma
include as a crucial objective
risk prevention (in order to
maintain the same assets needed for
people’s life, social and economic
future)
as part of ordinary activities
should the community
consider this essential
(community? other actors?)
land use planning in hazardous areas
Where: hazards, exposure
and vulnerabilities are high
How? Depend on risk
assessment for planning
purposes
Densities and concentration
of: hazards, exposure and
vulnerabilities
Type of land uses:
influencing hazards, exposure
and vulnerabilities (including
type of population)
land use planning in hazardous areas
Densities, concentration
and specific features of:
hazards, exposure and
vulnerabilities
physical component:
hazards, physical
vulnerability (to multiple
stressors)
systems complexity –
inter-dependency;
interconnectedness;
non linear relations
social and economic
vulnerabilities:
-population (features, prepared.)
- institutions/organisations
-economic structure/activities
land uses in the plan
physical vulnerability:
- different types of
agricoltural uses
-different types of soil uses
type of hazard
- seismic (Se) - floods (Flo)
- landslides (L)
- volcanic (VO) - avalanches (A) -forest fires (F)
Hazard intensity
socio-economic coping
capacity:
-economic activities
-age classes
- trend of abandonment
urban
Hazard frequency
Chain Na-Na
risk assessment (expected
physical damage:
matrixes
physical vulnerability:
- urban fabric
- industrial/ commercial buildings
- network infrastructures
- strategic equipments
fragility curves
multirisk synthesis table:
urban coping capacity:
- economic activities
- network infrastructures
- strategic equipments
social coping capcity:
- age classes
- handicapped
H, Vexp, R, CC, Na-tech
Increases
Hazard?
land use preservation
future?
land use transformation
compatibility table and map
criteria based on H,V,R
land use
acceptable
mitigation measures to
reduce Hazard(s)
mitigation measures to
reduce Vulnerability
Increases
Vulnerability?
reduces coping
capacity?
mitigation measures to
increase coping capacity
land use not
acceptable
A framework to address land use and spatial planning decisions
natural/ rural
Ways to reduce systemic
vulnerability
Ways to reduce physical
vulnerability
ZONING
BUILDING CODES
A. Special seismic study zone
A. Performance standards for
sensitive lands
A. Supplemental seismic standards
B. Open space/conservation
zones
B. Standards and regulations for
new development areas
B. Standards to be introduced in
building codes
C. No-building zones
C. Regulations and codes for
urban renewal
C. Seismic standards for
retrofitting residential buildings
HAZARDOUS BUILDINGS
ABATEMENT ORDINANCE
STRATEGIC PUBLIC
FACILITIES
LIFELINES
A. Abatement ordinance for
risky plants
A. Abatement ordinance for public
facilities in dangerous areas
A. Substitution of old lifelines in
dangerous areas
C. Increase the mutual distance
between dangerous facilities and
residential areas
B. Relocation of strategic facilities
from dangerous areas
B. Retrofitting of lifelines in the
most vulnerable situations
B. Incentives to relocate industrial
plants in dangerous sites
C. New public facilities in safer
areas
C. New infrastructures in safer
areas
PROPERTY ACQUISITION or
PURCHASE DEVELOP. RIGHTS
TAX CREDITS
A. Tax benefits for those who
retrofit their house
B. Incentives for those relocating
from dangerous areas
INSURANCE
Economic type of tools
SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
A. Insurance programs for goods
exposed to risks
A. Property voluntary acquisition or
expropriation
B. Insurance programs not only
for private citizens but also for
local/provincial authorities
B. Purchase or expropriation of
development rights
REAL ESTATE
DISCLOSURE
A. Obliging contractors disclose
risk to potential buyers
B. Particular conditions on selling
and buying contracts
TYPE OF SETTLEMENT
new development
already built area
H
A
NATURAL
Z
compatibility assessment
of the new development
in the hazardous area,
given possible mitigation
measures
decision concernig the
priority to assign in
reducing expected levels
of damage
decisions concerning
the new development close
to an existing technological
hazard: is it desirable?
decisions regarding the
possibility/opportunity
to change the settlement
or to modify/relocate
the plant
compatibility of the new
plant with the present and
future land use in the area
(trying to avoid conflicts
over land use)
building a new plant should
undergo a careful and
detailed risk assessment
and environemntal impact
analysis procedure
A
R
existing
D
T
TECHNOLOGICAL
Y
P
E
to be located
Description
Land-use, urban planning tools
Existing settlements/built areas
Redevelopment. Integration with redevelopment with substantial
rebuilding
existing/designed structural
measures should be foreseen;
residual risk assessed and tackled
Needed assessment input
* hazard, *vulnerability,
*exposure
* buildings
specify norms to deal with
physical vulnerability
vulnerability assessment for
existing hazards (to be
developed)
* networks
* industries
as for buildings
as for buildings
assessment tool
specific tools needed
* open spaces
type, shape, facilities
* access ways
characteristics of designed
access ways (internal/external)
distances from
residential/working areas;
facilities inside
width, shape, alternatives
Urban Restauration. Integration substantial conservation of
with existing/designed structural existing structures
measures should be foreseen;
residual risk assessed and tackled
Risk factors managed by
the tool
* hazard, *vulnerability,
*exposure
Positive aspects
Critical aspects
gives the opportunity to redesign the area, build less
densely, more resistant
structures, rethink accessibility
and facilities
reduces substantially fatalities
and economic damage
costly; private interest needed,
easier during reconstruction
physical and systemic
vulnerability
systemic vulnerability
work opportunities
possibility of na-tech disasters
systemic vulnerability
can be created where they did careful design
not exist before; can be
changed and improved
permits to maintain the identity need to preserve population,
of historic centres
activities, and create "safety" in
ancient spaces
physical vulnerability
* hazard, *vulnerability,
*exposure
* hazard, *vulnerability,
*exposure
a strong public motivation
needed to support and control
implementation (further research
needed too)
can be created where they did management of property rights in
not exist before
the area
* buildings
retrofitting
vulnerability assessment for
existing hazards (to be
developed)
physical vulnerability
reduces substantially fatalities
and economic damage
apart from public motiviation,
need for specialists and workers
with experience in buildings
restauration and retrofitting (a
sort of "practice code")
* networks
generally have to be created
vulnerability assessment tool
impoves the environment
* industries
compatibility with historic centres specific tools needed
difficult to intervene in already
built areas
possibility of na-tech disasters
* open spaces
type and extent
distances from
residential/working areas;
facilities inside
physical and systemic
vulnerability
physical and systemic
vulnerability
systemic vulnerability
* access ways
characteristics of designed
access ways (internal/external)
width, shape, alternatives
relocation of settlements (parts
of)
*hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability exposure
Relocation
* buildings
* networks + facilities
* industries/economic
activities
systemic vulnerability
work opportunities
can be created through careful
assessment of existing open
spaces and connections
among them
existing ones should be
managed to guarantee
accessibility
reduces substantially the risk
(and therefore expected
damage)
management of property rights in
the area
new networks and facilities (or
imrpovement of existing ones)
must be provided to resettlement
areas
some economic activities are
strongly rooted in a given
environment and are difficult to
move
type of buildings
networks and facilities in the
relocation zone
*hazard
*exposure
possibility to take into account
hazards in designing new
facilities/infrastrctures
type,dimension
*hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability *exposure
possibility to consider the
compatibility of industries with
residential and other urban
functions
careful design
very difficult tool; to be limited to
highly critical situations
Land-use, urban
* networks
generally have to be created
* industries
compatibility with historic centres specific tools needed
* open spaces
type and extent
distances from
residential/working areas;
facilities inside
* access ways
characteristics of designed
access ways (internal/external)
width, shape, alternatives
relocation of settlements (parts
of)
*hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability exposure
Relocation
* buildings
* networks + facilities
Support to implementation
Existing settlements/built areas
existing hazards (to be
developed)
vulnerability assessment tool
physical and systemic
vulnerability
physical and systemic
vulnerability
systemic vulnerability
systemic vulnerability
and economic damage
need for specialists and workers
with experience in buildings
restauration and retrofitting (a
sort of "practice code")
impoves the environment
difficult to intervene in already
built areas
possibility of na-tech disasters
work opportunities
can be created through careful
assessment of existing open
spaces and connections
among them
existing ones should be
managed to guarantee
accessibility
reduces substantially the risk
(and therefore expected
damage)
management of property rights in
the area
new networks and facilities (or
imrpovement of existing ones)
must be provided to resettlement
areas
some economic activities are
strongly rooted in a given
environment and are difficult to
move
experience has shown little
influence of disclosure on the
market
dificult in already built context
type of buildings
networks and facilities in the
relocation zone
*hazard
*exposure
possibility to take into account
hazards in designing new
facilities/infrastrctures
* industries/economic
activities
type,dimension
*hazard, *exposure,*vulnerability *exposure
Disclosure
of hazards while selling land
parcels/houses
*hazard; *exposure
*exposure
possibility to consider the
compatibility of industries with
residential and other urban
functions
fairness to the buyer
Transfer prop. rights
from hazardous areas to safer
zones
against natural calamities
*exposure
*exposure
*risk (expected damage)
*risk (expected damage)
Tax incentives
tailored to the type of tool to be
implemented
*hazard,*exposure, *vulnerability, *exposure, *vulnerability
*risk
Communication and
participatory practices
communication of risks and
*hazard,*exposure, *vulnerability, *exposure, *vulnerability
opportunities in the area;
*risk
participation to land use decisions
Insurance
careful design
very difficult tool; to be limited to
highly critical situations
possibility to maintain the
property value
important to connect insurance in the absence of clear
to land use management
prevention policies insurance
may encourage dangerous
behaviors
tax incentives (and the
poorly used in the realm of
opposite) to
natural hazards; generally
encourage/discourage desired opposed by the public
land uses and safe building
construction
people's participation to land
apparently requires more time;
use decisions is essential to
risk of paternalism practices
achieve the full recognition of
the need of given norms, such
as building restriction,
relocation etc.
Description
* buildings
division of the
development areas
according to different
fucntions
specify norms to deal
with physical
vulnerability
* open spaces
type, shape, facilities
* access ways
characteristics of
designed access ways
(internal/external)
width, shape, alternatives
Land-use, urban planning tools
Zoning
Locating new
plants
Locating new
facilities +
infrastructures
Support to implementation
Needed assessment
input
type, dimension
*hazard; *future exposure;
*future vulnerability
vulnerability assessment
for existing hazards (to be
developed)
distances from
residential/working areas;
facilities inside
*hazard; *future exposure;
*future vulnerability
*hazard; *future exposure;
*future vulnerability
Disclosure
type, dimension
of hazards while selling
land parcels/houses
*hazard; *exposure
Transfer prop.
rights
from hazardous areas
to safer zones
*exposure
Insurance
against natural
calamities
*risk (expected damage)
Tax incentives
tailored to the type of
*hazard,*exposure,
tool to be implemented *vulnerability, *risk
communication of risks
Communication and opportunities in the
and participatory area; participation to
*hazard,*exposure,
Risk factors managed
Positive aspects
by the tool
traditional way to tackle
the design of newly
*hazard,
developed areas in order
*exposure,*vulnerability to guarantee compatibility
reduces substantially
fatalities and economic
physical vulnerability
damage
can be created and
design for multiple
systemic vulnerability
purposes (including
can be created so as to
serve the development
area taking into
systemic vulnerability
consideration multiple
can be located assessing
physical and systemic
the compatibility with
vulnerability
other designed urban
can be located so as to
guarantee equal access
physical and systemic
to all citizens and in safe
vulnerability
areas (attracting private
Critical aspects
risk of rigidity in planning
practices
a strong public motivation
needed to support and
control implementation
need for strong public
control to avoid
overexploitation at the
need for good design
the compatibility must be
"checked" over time
need to go beyond the
simple rule of "cheap land
available"
experience has shown little
*exposure
fairness to the buyer
influence of disclosure on
requires excellent laws;
generally proved to be
possibility to maintain the difficult to implement; need
*exposure
property value
to control areas from which
important to connect
in the absence of clear
insurance to land use
prevention policies
*risk (expected damage) management
insurance may encourage
tax incentives (and the
poorly used in the realm of
opposite) to
natural hazards; generally
*exposure, *vulnerability encourage/discourage
opposed by the public
people's participation to
land use decisions is
essential to achieve the apparently requires more
full recognition of the
time; risk of paternalism
What can be done to mitigate risks?
Risk assessment
Risk mitigation measures: structural and non
structural, long and short term
Implementation tools: laws, regulations,
directives, economic tools –insurance,
incentives, taxes- voluntary….
Economic tools: insurance
Economic tools: insurance: the
French approach
Commune de Veurey-Voroize
PLAN DE PREVENTION DES RISQUES NATURELS PREVISIBLES
ZONAGE REGLEMENTAIRE DU RISQUE hors débordement de l'Isère (sur fond
topographique)
Niveau de contraintes* :
Zones d'interdictions
Zone de projet possible sous
maîtrise collective
Zones de contraintes faibles
Zones sans contraintes
spécifiques
Nature du risque* :
I, i2, i3 : crues des fleuves et des rivières
M : marécages
I', i' : inondation de plaine en pied de versant
T : crues des torrents et des rivières torrentielles
V, v : ruissellement sur versant
G, g1, g2 : glissement de terrain
P, p : chutes de pierres
f : suffosion, voir encart au 1/25 000è
Chaque zone est référencée par deux indices alphabétiques au moins :
* le premier correspond au niveau de contraintes à appliquer
** le second à la nature du risque (caractère en minuscule pour les zones de faibles contraintes, caractère en majuscule
Economic tools: insurance
Economic tools: real estate disclosure. Does it work?