Fostering Public Preparations for Natural Hazards: Lessons from the Parkfield Earthquake Prediction

Author(s):  
Dennis S. Mileti ◽  
Colleen Fitzpatrick ◽  
Barbara C. Farhar
1998 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-130
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Michael ◽  
Lucile M. Jones

Abstract For a decade, the U.S. Geological Survey has used the Parkfield Earthquake Prediction Experiment scenario document to estimate the probability that earthquakes observed on the San Andreas fault near Parkfield will turn out to be foreshocks followed by the expected magnitude 6 mainshocks. During this time, we have learned much about the seismogenic process at Parkfield, about the long-term probability of the Parkfield mainshock, and about the estimation of these types of probabilities. The probabilities for potential foreshocks at Parkfield are reexamined and revised in light of these advances. As part of this process, we have confirmed both the rate of foreshocks before strike-slip earthquakes in the San Andreas physiographic province and the uniform distribution of foreshocks with magnitude proposed by earlier studies. Compared to the earlier assessment, these new estimates of the long-term probability of the Parkfield mainshock are lower, our estimate of the rate of background seismicity is higher, and we find that the assumption that foreshocks at Parkfield occur in a unique way is not statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. While the exact numbers vary depending on the assumptions that are made, the new alert probabilities are lower than previously estimated. Considering the various assumptions and the statistical uncertainties in the input parameters, we also compute a plausible range for the probabilities. The range is large, partly due to the extra knowledge that exists for the Parkfield segment, making us question the usefulness of these numbers.


Author(s):  
R. H. F. Holloway

In New Zealand, Civil Defence exists because many natural hazards and man-made accidents can create disasters of dimensions that could not be dealt with by the normal emergency services. The destructive earthquake without warning is probably the most difficult and dangerous threat to public safety for Civil Defence to contend with. Most other causes of disaster either have some degree of warning or are relatively localised compared with the sudden and widespread effects of a major earthquake. Civil Defence planning is, in a sense, already based upon a vague and imprecise prediction of earthquakes known to be more likely to occur in some areas than in others and accepted as likely to happen at any time. The effect on Civil Defence of
 better earthquake prediction will depend
 on the probability, accuracy (in time, location and magnitude) of such prediction and how soon before the event it can be made.


1993 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
J. C. Savage

Abstract The Parkfield earthquake prediction is generally stated as a 95% probability that the next moderate earthquake there should occur before January 1993. That time limit is based on a two-sided 95% confidence interval. Because at the time of the prediction (1985) it was already clear that the earthquake had not occurred prior to 1985, a one-sided 95% confidence interval would have been more appropriate. That confidence interval ended in October 1991. The Parkfield prediction was based on an extrapolation of five of the six events in the 1857 to 1966 earthquake sequence; the 1934 event was omitted because it did not fit the regularity exhibited by the other data. The fallacy in the prediction is that it did not take account of other less-contrived explanations of the Parkfield seismicity (e.g., not excluding the 1934 event). Even if the Parkfield earthquake should occur in the near future, it would be better explained by less-contrived hypotheses.


1986 ◽  
Author(s):  
W.H. Bakun ◽  
J.D. Bredehoeft ◽  
R.O. Burford ◽  
W.L. Ellsworth ◽  
M.J. Johnston ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document