IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v90y2018i2d10.1007_s11069-017-3070-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A conceptual model of avalanche hazard

Author

Listed:
  • Grant Statham

    (Parks Canada Agency)

  • Pascal Haegeli

    (Simon Fraser University
    Avisualanche Consulting)

  • Ethan Greene

    (Colorado Avalanche Information Centre)

  • Karl Birkeland

    (USDA Forest Service National Avalanche Centre)

  • Clair Israelson

    (Canadian Avalanche Centre)

  • Bruce Tremper

    (USDA Forest Service Utah Avalanche Centre)

  • Chris Stethem

    (Chris Stethem & Associates Ltd.)

  • Bruce McMahon

    (Parks Canada Agency)

  • Brad White

    (Parks Canada Agency)

  • John Kelly

    (Canadian Avalanche Centre)

Abstract

This conceptual model of avalanche hazard identifies the key components of avalanche hazard and structures them into a systematic, consistent workflow for hazard and risk assessments. The method is applicable to all types of avalanche forecasting operations, and the underlying principles can be applied at any scale in space or time. The concept of an avalanche problem is introduced, describing how different types of avalanche problems directly influence the assessment and management of the risk. Four sequential questions are shown to structure the assessment of avalanche hazard, namely: (1) What type of avalanche problem(s) exists? (2) Where are these problems located in the terrain? (3) How likely is it that an avalanche will occur? and (4) How big will the avalanche be? Our objective was to develop an underpinning for qualitative hazard and risk assessments and address this knowledge gap in the avalanche forecasting literature. We used judgmental decomposition to elicit the avalanche forecasting process from forecasters and then described it within a risk-based framework that is consistent with other natural hazards disciplines.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant Statham & Pascal Haegeli & Ethan Greene & Karl Birkeland & Clair Israelson & Bruce Tremper & Chris Stethem & Bruce McMahon & Brad White & John Kelly, 2018. "A conceptual model of avalanche hazard," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 90(2), pages 663-691, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:90:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-017-3070-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-017-3070-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-017-3070-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-017-3070-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. H. V. Ravinder & Don N. Kleinmuntz & James S. Dyer, 1988. "The Reliability of Subjective Probabilities Obtained Through Decomposition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 186-199, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Massimiliano Fazzini & Marco Cordeschi & Cristiano Carabella & Giorgio Paglia & Gianluca Esposito & Enrico Miccadei, 2021. "Snow Avalanche Assessment in Mass Movement-Prone Areas: Results from Climate Extremization in Relationship with Environmental Risk Reduction in the Prati di Tivo Area (Gran Sasso Massif, Central Italy," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-33, November.
    2. Prabhjot Kaur & Jagdish Chandra Joshi & Preeti Aggarwal, 2022. "A multi-model decision support system (MM-DSS) for avalanche hazard prediction over North-West Himalaya," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 110(1), pages 563-585, January.
    3. Peyman Yariyan & Ebrahim Omidvar & Foad Minaei & Rahim Ali Abbaspour & John P. Tiefenbacher, 2022. "An optimization on machine learning algorithms for mapping snow avalanche susceptibility," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 111(1), pages 79-114, March.
    4. Vladislava Košová & Mário Molokáč & Vladimír Čech & Miloš Jesenský, 2022. "Avalanche Hazard Modelling within the Kráľova Hoľa Area in the Low Tatra Mountains in Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert L. Winkler & Robert T. Clemen, 2004. "Multiple Experts vs. Multiple Methods: Combining Correlation Assessments," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 167-176, September.
    2. Jeffrey M. Keisler, 2005. "Additivity of Information Value in Two‐Act Linear Loss Decisions with Normal Priors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 351-359, April.
    3. Arvan, Meysam & Fahimnia, Behnam & Reisi, Mohsen & Siemsen, Enno, 2019. "Integrating human judgement into quantitative forecasting methods: A review," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 237-252.
    4. Robert T. Clemen & Gregory W. Fischer & Robert L. Winkler, 2000. "Assessing Dependence: Some Experimental Results," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(8), pages 1100-1115, August.
    5. Ali Mosleh & Vicki Bier, 1992. "On Decomposition and Aggregation Error in Estimation: Some Basic Principles and Examples," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), pages 203-214, June.
    6. Robert T. Clemen & Canan Ulu, 2008. "Interior Additivity and Subjective Probability Assessment of Continuous Variables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 835-851, April.
    7. Mehrez, A. & Yuan, Y. & Gafni, A., 1995. "The search for information -- A patient perspective on multiple opinions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 244-262, September.
    8. Gary J. Summers, 2021. "Friction and Decision Rules in Portfolio Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 101-120, June.
    9. Jeryl L. Mumpower & Gary McClelland, 2002. "Measurement Error, Skewness, and Risk Analysis: Coping with the Long Tail of the Distribution," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 277-290, April.
    10. Jason Merrick & Gregory S. Parnell, 2011. "A Comparative Analysis of PRA and Intelligent Adversary Methods for Counterterrorism Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(9), pages 1488-1510, September.
    11. Chen, Clara Xiaoling & Rennekamp, Kristina M. & Zhou, Flora H., 2015. "The effects of forecast type and performance-based incentives on the quality of management forecasts," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 8-18.
    12. Saurabh Bansal & Genaro J. Gutierrez, 2020. "Estimating Uncertainties Using Judgmental Forecasts with Expert Heterogeneity," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 363-380, March.
    13. Jason R. W. Merrick & Philip Leclerc, 2016. "Modeling Adversaries in Counterterrorism Decisions Using Prospect Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 681-693, April.
    14. James E. Smith & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2004. "Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 561-574, May.
    15. Robert T. Clemen & Robert L. Winkler, 1999. "Combining Probability Distributions From Experts in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 187-203, April.
    16. Morera, Osvaldo F. & Budescu, David V., 1998. "A Psychometric Analysis of the "Divide and Conquer" Principle in Multicriteria Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 187-206, September.
    17. Saurabh Bansal & Genaro J. Gutierrez & John R. Keiser, 2017. "Using Experts’ Noisy Quantile Judgments to Quantify Risks: Theory and Application to Agribusiness," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(5), pages 1115-1130, October.
    18. Abraham Mehrez & Amiram Gafni, 1989. "Quality-adjusted Life Years, Utility Theory, and Healthy-years Equivalents," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(2), pages 142-149, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:90:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-017-3070-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.