IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05293163.html

Improvement of mountain natural risks analysis: assessment of reach, seasonal expo- sure and presence probabilities

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-Marc Tacnet

    (IGE - Institut des Géosciences de l’Environnement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - INSU - CNRS - Institut national des sciences de l'Univers - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Fédération OSUG - Observatoire des Sciences de l'Univers de Grenoble - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes - Grenoble INP - Institut polytechnique de Grenoble - Grenoble Institute of Technology - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes)

  • Jean Dezert

    (DTIS, ONERA, Université Paris Saclay [Palaiseau] - ONERA - Université Paris-Saclay)

  • Simon Carladous

    (ONF-DRN - Département Risques Naturels - ONF - Office National des Forêts)

  • Christophe Bérenguer

    (GIPSA-SAFE - GIPSA - Safe, Controlled and Monitored Systems - GIPSA-PAD - GIPSA Pôle Automatique et Diagnostic - GIPSA-lab - Grenoble Images Parole Signal Automatique - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes - Grenoble INP - Institut polytechnique de Grenoble - Grenoble Institute of Technology - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes)

Abstract

Mountain natural phenomena threaten people and infrastructures. Risk-informed decision making to select risk reduction measures always starts with risk analysis. Natural risks are assessed through a combination of hazard, exposure and vulnerability (equivalent to severity and probability in industrial technological contexts). In practice, characterizing the exposure is indeed not that easy since for a given magnitude, a phenomenon can have several possible trajectories, each of them corresponding to a sub-scenario with a given conditional probability. Seasonal mountain phenomena occurrence and human touristic occupation are highly variable inducing peaks in occupancy rates. This paper addresses the issue of operational assessment of assets exposure considering their seasonal reach and presence probability for different phenomenon sub-scenarios. Simplified and practical methodologies are proposed to first calculate risk based on seasonal phenomenon occurrence and exposure and secondly calculate the reach probabilities of their spatial extent. Simple examples are given for a first single phenomenon (torrential flood) and demonstrate the influence of seasonal occurrence and presence hypothesis on calculated risks. Methodologies can be extended to deal with multi-risk contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-Marc Tacnet & Jean Dezert & Simon Carladous & Christophe Bérenguer, 2025. "Improvement of mountain natural risks analysis: assessment of reach, seasonal expo- sure and presence probabilities," Post-Print hal-05293163, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05293163
    DOI: 10.3850/978-981-94-3281-3_ESREL-SRA-E2025-P8986-cd
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05293163v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-05293163v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3850/978-981-94-3281-3_ESREL-SRA-E2025-P8986-cd?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean-Marc Tacnet & Jean Dezert & Corinne Curt & Mireille Batton-Hubert & Eric Chojnacki, 2014. "How to manage natural risks in mountain areas in a context of imperfect information? New frameworks and paradigms for expert assessments and decision-making," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 288-311, June.
    2. Jochen Schmidt & Iain Matcham & Stefan Reese & Andrew King & Rob Bell & Roddy Henderson & Graeme Smart & Jim Cousins & Warwick Smith & Dave Heron, 2011. "Quantitative multi-risk analysis for natural hazards: a framework for multi-risk modelling," 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. 58(3), pages 1169-1192, September.
    3. Stan Kaplan & Yacov Y. Haimes & B. John Garrick, 2001. "Fitting Hierarchical Holographic Modeling into the Theory of Scenario Structuring and a Resulting Refinement to the Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 807-807, October.
    4. Carladous, Simon & Tacnet, Jean-Marc & Batton-Hubert, Mireille & Dezert, Jean & Marco, Olivier, 2019. "Managing protection in torrential mountain watersheds: A new conceptual integrated decision-aiding framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 464-479.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Johansson, Jonas & Hassel, Henrik, 2010. "An approach for modelling interdependent infrastructures in the context of vulnerability analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(12), pages 1335-1344.
    2. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    3. Yacov Y. Haimes, 2012. "Systems‐Based Guiding Principles for Risk Modeling, Planning, Assessment, Management, and Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1451-1467, September.
    4. Amro Nasr & Oskar Larsson Ivanov & Ivar Björnsson & Jonas Johansson & Dániel Honfi, 2021. "Towards a Conceptual Framework for Built Infrastructure Design in an Uncertain Climate: Challenges and Research Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    5. James H. Lambert & Benjamin L. Schulte & Priya Sarda, 2005. "Tracking the complexity of interactions between risk incidents and engineering systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 262-277, September.
    6. Guoqiang Shen & Long Zhou & Yao Wu & Zhiming Cai, 2018. "A Global Expected Risk Analysis of Fatalities, Injuries, and Damages by Natural Disasters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Chahrour, Nour & Bérenguer, Christophe & Tacnet, Jean-Marc, 2024. "Incorporating cascading effects analysis in the maintenance policy assessment of torrent check dams against torrential floods," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    8. Hong Sun & Fangquan Yang & Peiwen Zhang & Yunxiang Zhao, 2023. "Flight Training Risk Identification and Assessment Based on the HHM-RFRM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-20, January.
    9. Ioanna Ioannou & Jaime E. Cadena & Willy Aspinall & David Lange & Daniel Honfi & Tiziana Rossetto, 2022. "Prioritization of hazards for risk and resilience management through elicitation of expert judgement," 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. 112(3), pages 2773-2795, July.
    10. Clyde Chittister & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2010. "Harmonizing high performance computing (HPC) with large‐scale complex systems in computational science and engineering," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 47-57, March.
    11. Jeremy Rohmer & Eric Chojnacki, 2021. "Forecast of environment systems using expert judgements: performance comparison between the possibilistic and the classical model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 131-146, March.
    12. Mark Abkowitz & Janey Camp, 2017. "Structuring an Enterprise Risk Assessment Protocol: Traditional Practice and New Methods," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 20(1), pages 79-97, March.
    13. Corinne Curt & Jean‐Marc Tacnet, 2018. "Resilience of Critical Infrastructures: Review and Analysis of Current Approaches," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(11), pages 2441-2458, November.
    14. Barry M. Horowitz & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2003. "Risk‐based methodology for scenario tracking, intelligence gathering, and analysis for countering terrorism," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(3), pages 152-169.
    15. Maria Leung & James H. Lambert & Alexander Mosenthal, 2004. "A Risk‐Based Approach to Setting Priorities in Protecting Bridges Against Terrorist Attacks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 963-984, August.
    16. Henrik Hassel & Alexander Cedergren, 2019. "Exploring the Conceptual Foundation of Continuity Management in the Context of Societal Safety," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1503-1519, July.
    17. Ayman Nagi & Meike Schroeder & Wolfgang Kersten, 2021. "Risk Management in Seaports: A Community Analysis at the Port of Hamburg," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    18. Chahrour, Nour & Nasr, Mohamad & Tacnet, Jean-Marc & Bérenguer, Christophe, 2021. "Deterioration modeling and maintenance assessment using physics-informed stochastic Petri nets: Application to torrent protection structures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    19. Kenneth G. Crowther & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2005. "Application of the inoperability input—output model (IIM) for systemic risk assessment and management of interdependent infrastructures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 323-341.
    20. Yacov Y Haimes, 2012. "Strategic Preparedness for Recovery from Catastrophic Risks to Communities and Infrastructure Systems of Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1834-1845, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-05293163. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.