Framework and Indicators for Vulnerability assessment: Vulnerability mapping to tsunami disaster in the context of early warning in Indonesia

J. Post, K. Zoeder, G. Strunz, German Remote Sensing Data Center (DFD) German Aerospace Center (DLR) J. Birkmann, N. Gebert United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS)

Early Warning and Mitigation System

Seismic and GPS Tide Gauges OBU (pressure, seismic) Buoys EO Data

Decision support at BMG headquarters (and regional centers)

Tsunami scens., matching of scenarios, continuous refinement of warning processes

Risk- and Vulnerability assessment for disaster management Selection of evacuation support products
Rapid mapping with geo- and EO data
Continuous data stream Periodical data stream Post-event data stream Event-triggered data stream

Local authorities

Warning dossier

Disaster Management

Objectives
Develop a risk and vulnerability assessment methodology and tool Determine the impact of possible tsunami events and assess their possible consequences on humans and their environment Determine the existence and degree of vulnerabilities Identify the capacities and resources available to address or manage threats Provide a methodological manual and promote knowledge transfer to scientist and practitioners

Assessment scales

Indian Ocean

Broadscale Assessment

Pilot Areas

Products
- Risk & Vulnerability indicators & maps for early warning and disaster management

End-users
-Decision Support System (DSS) of the National Early Warning Centre

-Guidelines for vulnerability assessment

-Local authorities & decision makers

Timeline Clusters of Disaster Management within the Tsunami Early Warning System

Indicators are needed for each of the disaster management purposes

Warning

Evacuation

Emergency Relief

Recovery

During the event

After the event

Conceptual Approach: Decision tree

Components of risk assessment: Hazard assessment Exposure Susceptibility Coping Recovery

Concept: Decision tree Hazard assessment

Hypothetic question Hazard with a significant intensity ? 1-p Relevant components Hazard P (wave height above 0,5m) p

Examples of Indicators/parameters For risk mapping: Local distribution of hazard intensity (wave heights at coast line)
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1

frequency [%]

n = 158

1-p

Distance to coast

DATA from NGDC

10

100

1000

10000

max. Inundation [m]

Degree of hazard impact on land ? Probably covered by inundation modeling

Altitude

1-p

Altitude

3 classes <10 m: 70-100% <20 m: 10-70% <30 m: 10-0%

1-p

Protective measures

Protective measures

Dam, vegetation, forest, available infrastructure

Is this area also exposed to landslides (or other additional hazards)?

Landslides/ geology

Decision tree: exposure & susceptibility

How many people are exposed? Exposed People 1-p Exposed People
Population density in the max inundation zone (or % of population in the high risk zone)

Able to receive and understand the warning? 1-p

Receiving of early warning p

Receiving of early warning

Education, language-ethnicity, access to media of warning, dissemination at households, work places, open spaces (e.g. sirens)

Susceptibility:

Able to respond appropriately?

Immediate response

Immediate response p

gender, age, health status, awarness, risk knowledge (tsunami, believes, religion)

1-p

Decision tree: Coping and Recovery

Coping Awareness what to do: access to information technology (TV, radio, mobile, social networks), language-ethnicity Physical capacity / mobility factors: safe areas, main roads accessible,

Able to respond appropriately?

Immediate response
1-p p

Immediate response

Able to recover (sustainable livelihoods)?

Recovery

Restore Livelihoods
1-p

Restore Livelihoods

affected local income and food source and supply (markets) sectors of regional importance (agriculture: cropland, paddy field fishery, forest industry, cultural and natural heritage sites, tourism) p

RISK

Spatial Distribution of wave heights at the coast derived from hydraulic modelling (AWI)
90 80 70 100%
180 160 140
n = 468

Hazard intensity

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50%

n = 231

90% 80% 70% 60% 50%

frequency

50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

frequency

60

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

One scenario all points at the coast for one Kabubaten

40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

wave heights at coast [m]

wave heights at coast [m]

e.g. Kodya Pariaman 600 scenarios per point 138 600 values for a mean wave height probability
70000 100% 90% 60000
n = 136 800

((( !!! (( !!! (!!! (( (!! ((!!! (((!! ((!! ((!! ((! (!! ((! (!! ((! (!! ((! (!! ((! (!! ((! (!! ((! (! (!! ((! (! (! (! (

80% 50000 70% 60% 50% 30000 40% 30% 20% 10000 10% 0 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 0%

40000

20000

wave heights at coast [m]

((( !!! ((( !!! (( !!! (! (! Padang Pariaman (! !( (! ( (! !! ( (! (!! ((! (! ( (( !! ( !! (! (! ( !( ( ! ( ! ( ! Kodya Pariaman (( !! ((( !!! (( !! ((( !!! ((( !!! ((( !!! ((( !!! ((( !!!! (! (! (!! ((! (!!! ((! (( ((( !!! !! (( ((( !!! ((( ! !! (((( !!!! ((( !!! ((( !!! (( !! ((( !!! ((( !!! ((( !!! ((( !!! (( !! (( !!! (!! ((! (!! ((! (!! ((! (! ( !( ( !

Legend
Wave height at coast
[m]

( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( !

0-1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 admistrative boundary [Kabubaten]

frequency

modelled scenario

altitude
[m above sea level]
High : 3000

Low : 0

Gain relationships from historical event data

Inundation modelling

Distance

Altitude

historical data: distance from coast relative frequency

elevation classes relative frequency

NGDC data base, 2007 (Tsunami world wide) http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov

Combine distance to coast / elevation

Inundation modelling
Distance

Altitude

Protective measure

low distance to coast low elevation low roughness high vulnerability

Estimate population density on a sub-census aggreg. level

Exclusion factors nobody lives there
0%

reduced area for the population density

census data

100%

Exposed People

Land use terrain

A
P(B)

reduced area

P(B)

P(C|B)

B No Settlement area

P(D|B)

B Settlement area

C spread in the rural area

P(E|B)

D Buffer along river (stat. data)

E Buffer along streets

P(F|P(E|B))

Distance from stettlement

Methods

H. Taubenbck et al. 2007 (DLR)

Results

daytime

nighttime

Population
[In/km]
1 - 1000 1001 - 5000 5001 - 10000 10001 - 20000 20001 - 30000 30001 - 40000 40001 - 50000 50001 - 60000 60001 - 100000

Accuracy assessment
Population in a 500 x 500 m raster in Zeytinburnu Residential area Reference study
16,795 24,221 13,219

Top-down

Variance [%]
-3.8 -9.3 -7.3 +21.6 +65.2 +18.0 +33.9

Bottom-up

Variance [%]
+6.9 +2.1 +5.3 +32.0 +74.3 +24.4 +44.5

16,162 21,981 12,259 1,152 694 8,784 3,055

17,958 24,723 13,922 1,250 732 9,260 3,295

Commercial Mixed

947 420 7,441 2,281

Total

65 324

64087

-1,9 %

71 140

+8,9 %

H. Taubenbck et al. 2007 (DLR)

Exposed people
Exposed People

Probability of exposure depending on the Population density in a desa combined with the exposed areas

Example to classify people affected

Function of people exposed and people affected Brown, C.A. & Graham, W.J. (1988): Loss of Life=f(PAR, Tw) LoL=0,5 PAR Tw < 15 min: 15 min >= Tw <= 1,5 h: LoL=PAR 0,56 Tw > 1,5 h: LoL = 0,0002 PAR DeKay, M.L. & McCleeland, G.H. (1993): Loss of Life=f(PAR, Tw, FO) PAR: population at risk Tw: warning time FO (force): damage variation depending on inundation height and velocity functions for flash floods and for conditions in America and Europa
Exposed People

Function for tsunami events and for indonesia unknown

function (age, health, roads for evacuation, infrastructure, warning devices, )

Receiving of EW: warning devices

Receiving Early Warning

mosques density: amount of mosques/ population

Are the people able to receive and understand the warning? Parameter e.g.: Warning devices mosques density access to media Education Knowledge Awarness
PODES 2005, BPS

Estimate access to save areas

Immediate Response

Are the people able to reach a save area? Parameter e.g.: road network road quality road type slope

Road network analysis

Vulnerability classes

Immediate response: Access to save areas, streets to evacuate

Immediate Response

road network analysis constrains (examples): -no access over bridges -average running speed3 m per s

Are the people able to respond appropriately? Parameter e.g.:

evacuation plan road network mobility health status age structure gender disability tsunami knowledge

Immediate response: Age structure and gender

Immediate Response

Are the people able to respond appropriately? Parameter e.g.: evacuation plan road network mobility health status age structure gender disability awareness
Census 2000, BPS

vulnerability and risk assessment

A risk analysis should take place within a well-defined context (Stewart & Melcher, 1997)

Hazard Update data vulnerability components

Exposure Determine, quantify and combine indicators and components Susceptibility stage of stage of early warning early warning short time before disaster

Coping

Recovery

stage of stage of risk managment risk managment

pre- and postdisaster

Conclusions
Assessment method follows disaster management chain People centred Builds on available data Establish new criteria and indicators through surveys and learning from disasters Provides information for Early warning, immediate response and recovery phase Disaster management Determination and quantification of relevant indicators Historical data (event data; post disaster analysis) Expert knowledge Data availability and survey needs Combination of indicators and parameters (correlations, significance, scale effects, different types of data, uncertainty, validation)

vulnerability and risk assessment problems- Validation

Needs of event data

(limited by time and location) requirements: hazard intensity map of affected area damage assessment statistical data (e.g. loss of life per desa)

Damage assessment

Validation of risk modelling Statistical Data

Terima Kasih Thank You Danke

www.gitews.org

Vulnerability Definitions
VULNERABILITY Vulnerability is the conditions determined by physical social, economic and environmental factors or processes, which increase the susceptibility of a community to the impact of hazards (e.g. tsunami hazards). (UN/ISDR 2004) ... the likelihood of injury, death, loss, disruption of livelihood or other harm in an extreme event, and/or unusual difficulties in recovering from such effects (Wisner, 2002)

Susceptibility Likelihood and the degree that a system faces major losses / fragility of a system (e.g. an older person is relatively more susceptible to wave impact due to his limited physical abilities and limitation in evacuation) Coping Capacity The means by which people or organizations use available resources and abilities to avoid adverse / negative consequences that could lead to disaster, (UN/ISDR, 2004). Degree of exposure The amount of people, property, systems, or functions exposed to hazards in a specific units (Multihazard Mitigation Council, 2002). Receiving & Understanding Warning The amount of people that are able to receive the warning (in term of warning disseminations and communications means) and to understand the meaning of the warning clearly (UN/ISDR).

Evacuation Decision The amount of people that are aware of the tsunami risk and would decide to evacuate in case of tsunami event Evacuation Capacity The capacity of a person to understand how and to be able to evacuate properly in case of a hazard event Short term Recovery The amount of people and elements which are able to bounce back to meet basic vital needs and have access to basic service shortly aftermath (TRIAMS). Long term Recovery The amount of elements of infrastructure which are able to bounce back to an acceptable livelihood condition and to fulfill the major functions in a long term.

Early warning context

Early warning is more than just a prediction a complete early warning system comprises of four elements:
(ISDR-PPEW)

Risk knowledge: systematically collect data and undertake risk assessments Monitoring and warning service: develop hazard monitoring and early warning services Dissemination and communication: communicate risk information and early warnings Response capability: build national and community response capabilities

The BBC-Meta framework

Natural phenomena HAZARD
e.g. Land use changes

Risk reduction

Event

VULNERABILITY
Physical sphere Social sphere

RISK
Physical risk

e.g. Emission control e.g. Early warning e.g. Insurances

Susceptibility exposed and vulnerable Coping elements capacity

Social risk

Economic sphere

Economic risk

INTERVENTION SYSTEM

Vulnerability reduction (t=0) Preparedness

FEEDBACK

Vulnerability reduction (t=1)

Source: BBC Concept (Bogardi, Birkmann, 2004; Cardona 1999. 2001)

Disaster/emergency management

4 elements of effective early warning systems (UN/ISDR PPEW)

Risk knowledge:
systematically collect data and undertake risk assessments

Monitoring and warning service:

develop hazard monitoring and early warning services

Dissemination and communication:

communicate risk information and early warnings

Response capability:
build national and community response capabilities

Hazard

Degree of Impact Intensity and prob. Degree of Exposure

Tsunami modelling + historical events Distance elevation land cover Secondary hazards People (absolute/relative population in high risk zone) Infrastructure (house resistance) Economic Units (% GDP of different sectors) Physical capital (mosque density, nr. of sirens) Human features (language skills, knowledge on EW existence) Risk perception (tsunami knowledge, trust) Human features (degree of family dispersion) Evacuation knowledge (period of stay, access to info) Mobility factor (gender, age) Built environment (evacuation area accessibility) Emergency preparedness (availability of fire brigades) Health facilities (nr. of hospitals, health insurance) Health condition (mortality, morbidity, epidemiology) Income continuity (job diversity in households) Access to additional resources (solidarity, aids) Housing rehabilitation (landownership) Infrastructure rehabilitation (depending on damage)

Susceptibility

Receiving & Understanding Warning Immediate Response Decision to Evacuate

Coping Capacity

Immediate Response Capability to evacuate Health maintenance & rehabilitation capability

Recovery
Livelihood rehabilitation

Adaptation Intervention Tools

Risk reduction capacity

population density
Exposed People

Probability of exposure depending only on the Population density in a desa

Census 2000, BPS

save areas
Inundation modelling
(roughness) (landslides)

Distance

Altitude

Predictive measure

secondary hazard

Save areas derived from distance to coast elevation predictive measures secondary hazards > 10.000 m2

Top-down method LA = LNA * F

LA = Living space of a homogeneous structure zone LNA = Area of buildings of a homogeneous structure zone F = average number of floors of a building height class

PZ =

L
j =1

* LAi
Aj

Pz = absolute population of a homogeneous structure zone N = total population of a unit (here: district) g = number of homogeneous structure zones within the unit

Methode

Houses Commercial use; 1-3 floors Streets High density zone Commercial use; 4-7 floors Trees Medium density zone Commercial use; > 7 floors Grassland Low density zone ResidentialSoil 1-3 floors Bare use; Open spaces Residential use; 4-7 floors Water Residential use; > floors Shadows

H. Taubenbck et al. 2007 (DLR)

Damaged house Pandangaran (Java Indonesia)

Learning from damage assessment

Spatial analysis of building damage in Banda Aceh (Suamtra, Indonesia)

Urban land cover classification

Buildings Water Streets Bare soil Grassland Agriculture Forest

Possibility to infer vulnerability classes of the built environment by means of high resolution EO data analysis

VULNERABILITY
Combination with ground observations and structural engineering surveys HIGH Criteria based on: Building height Building form Building size Building roof type and color LOW
Criteria for classification simple geometric form (rectangle or quadrat), flat and rusty roofs, small in areal dimension

CLASS A

simple geometric form (rectangle or quadrat), flat and seldom rusty roofs with homogenious roof color red or grey, small to medium in areal dimension CLASS B Complex geometric form, several foors, inclined roofs, medium to large in aeral dimension

CLASS C

simple geometric form (rectangle), flat or inclined roof, large in aeral dimension CLASS D simple geometric form. Terraces or sveral roofs. Large dimension. e.g. Mosque

CLASS E

Source: Tsunarisque (CNRS, 2006)

Building Vulnerability
HIGH Vulnerability LOW

YES

buildings in a coastal zone < 500m?

Estimate building vulnerability

Exposure

Not stable/ High vulnerability of the buildings YES

NO

soil condition: sandy, liquidation factor

Significant criteria needed:

NO

Not stable/ High vulnerability of the buildings

Material (wood, concrete) Building code applied Engineered / non - engineered Geometry Area Height

YES

land with low market value

Not stable/ High vulnerability of the buildings

NO

YES

area with high earthquake intensity

Not stable/ High vulnerability of the buildings

NO

Type of foundation Roof type

NO

YES

bad quality building structure

Not stable/ High vulnerability of the buildings

Stable/ Low vulnerability of the buildings

aggregate to an observation area

YES Low Ratio: stable/ unstable buildings in the utilized area ?

NO

High building density YES NO

Low vulnerability of the area

High vulnerability of the area

Low to middle vulnerability of the area

1
Tsunami Scenario

+
Spatial distributed building vulnerability information and maps

Classification: secondary hazards

secondary hazard

BMG, Departemen Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral Badan Geologi, Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi

Receiving of EW: no education

Receiving Early Warning

no education: %-age of people have not finished primary school

Are the people able to receive and understand the warning? Parameter e.g.: warning devices education language-ethnicity knowledge
Census 2000, BPS

natural disaster experience - awareness

Receiving Early Warning

Natural disasters occured at the desa: landslides floods flash floods earthquakes tsunamis

Are the people able to receive and understand the warning? Parameter e.g.: warning devices education language-ethnicity awareness
PODES 2005, BPS

Job diversity
recovery

Are the people able to recover? Parameter e.g.: local income (affected?) job diversity food source poverty line health facilities emergency prepardness Census 2000, BPS

Broad - scale assessment

Existing data Indo. research partners (working group +) - statistics Indonesia (BPS)
Up scaling of indicators

Products
-Vulnerability indicators & maps for coastal municipalities / subdistricts & districts

End-users
-Decision Support System (DSS) of the National Early Warning Centre

Priority areas assessment

New data collection: Household survey and physical V. in three coastal districs in Sumatra, Java, Bali Indo. Research partners (working group +) - BPS: Socio-economic survey 2007 - Universities (Padang and Yogyakarta)
-Guidelines for vulnerability assessment -National and local decision makers / agencies

Challenges
-

Using existing data sets for Vulnerability Assessment

Sustainability of the project:

Necessity to include local authorities into the research process to enhance results and self-commitment for continuous vulnerability monitoring! Cooperation and coordination with GTZ is important !!!

Assessment Approach in Indonesia

Broad-Scale Assessment Kabupaten Priority area Assessment Kecematan / Keluharan

Existing data from BPS Population Census Susenas 2006 Potensi desa Poverty monitoring

New data collection household survey 1. BPS SUSENAS 2007 Attaching a Questionaire Oversampling in coastal Kecamatan 2. In-depth survey with Universities Padang - Andalas University Cilacap, Denpasar Gadjah Mada University

Products: Vulnerability Maps for Coastal Kabupatens of Sumatra, Java, Bali

Products: Vulnerability Maps for Coastal Kecematans in Kabupaten of Padang, (Pariaman), Cilacap, (Kebumen, Bantul, Ciamis), Badung