scholarly journals Different vantage points amongst different stakeholders in NATECH (NAtural hazard-triggered TECHnological) disasters: A case from the 2018 Mt. Anak Krakatau eruption and tsunami

2021 ◽  
Vol 630 ◽  
pp. 012024
Author(s):  
Dicky Pelupessy ◽  
Yasuhito Jibiki ◽  
Fatma Lestari ◽  
Agustino Zulys ◽  
Fumihiko Imamura
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Technological Disasters ◽  
Vantage Points

A comparative literature review of the methodologies to evaluate risk of NaTech disasters and Critical Infrastructure affected by natural hazard

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margherita D'Ayala ◽  
Riccardo Giusti ◽  
Marcello Arosio ◽  
Mario Martina
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Critical Infrastructures ◽  
Industrial Accident ◽  
Technological Disasters ◽  
Natural Event ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Change Framework ◽  
Oil Gas

<p>In a climate change framework extreme natural events are going to occur more frequently and intensively as a result of global warming. Therefore, the effects and consequences of climate-related natural hazards, such as flooding, heatwaves, drought, landslides and others, have the potential to become more disastrous and extensive. Consequences of such events are of particular concern considering that today’s societies are interconnected in complex and dynamic socio-technological networks and, hence, dependent more than before on Critical Infrastructures (CI) systems (such as transport, energy, water, ICT systems, etc.). Furthermore, there are also events of Natural Hazards Trigger Technological Disasters (also known as NaTech events), whereby an industrial accident caused by a natural event could affect people, the environment, and other facilities and systems. This work reviews studies in the fields of risk assessment of CI systems affected by natural hazards and NaTech events.</p><p>This study identifies and classifies: the methodologies applied (qualitative or quantitative), the type of infrastructures exposed (transport, electricity, oil, gas, water and waste water and telecommunications systems, industrial or nuclear plant) and hazard considered (flood, earthquake, lighting, landslide, avalanche, storm surge, heat and cold waves, wind), the scale of application and the level of spatial resolution.</p><p>The work provides a comparison of the scientific studies, the objectives and analysis methods to assess risk employed in the fields of CI systems and NaTech events in order to highlight similarities and differences and to guide the most suitable approach for each application case.</p>

scholarly journals Advances and Gaps in Natech Quantitative Risk Analysis

Processes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
Adriana Mesa-Gómez ◽  
Joaquim Casal ◽  
Mauricio Sánchez-Silva ◽  
Felipe Muñoz
Keyword(s):  
Risk Analysis ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Process Safety ◽  
Quantitative Risk Analysis ◽  
Critical Gap ◽  
Technological Disasters ◽  
Analysis Process

The occurrence of Natech (natural hazard triggering technological disasters) accidents has generated a reflection about the need to manage adequately the risk to people, to the environment, and to the infrastructures subjected to natural events. For this reason, academia and industry have increased research in the process safety area in the last decade, strengthening quantitative risk analysis (QRA) methodologies for Natech events. However, these methodologies have some gaps that must be closed for a better decision-making process. In this communication a comparative analysis of the existing Natech QRA approaches is done, to highlight features and differences and to identify main gaps that should be addressed in future research. It can be mentioned that all the analyzed methodologies, which have been applied to floods, earthquakes, and lightning, are based on an initial one developed in 2007. The critical gap is that in all these methodologies, the final step is the risk calculation based on fatalities, and they do not consider the area-wide as an essential element in the risk analysis process.

Variance in Natural Hazard Risk Perception in Coastal Areas

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 21-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyungjun Park ◽  
Gyoungjun Ha ◽  
Dalbyul Lee ◽  
Juchul Jung
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Coastal Areas ◽  
Hazard Risk

Chronofact Names: Their Transformations in Contemporary MassMedia

2020 ◽  
pp. 92-102
Author(s):  
Irina Kryukova
Keyword(s):  
Proper Names ◽  
Contextual Analysis ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Theoretical Understanding ◽  
New Words ◽  
Technological Disasters ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Tragic Event ◽  
Russian Media ◽  
Historical Periods

The article presents the results of the study devoted to the semantic transformations of chronofact names understood as proper names referring to resonance events that are often tragic. In spite of many studies devoted to the processes of new words activation in various historical periods, proper names, with rare exceptions, are not included in the phenomena under the study. The objective of the following research is to identify universal features of chronofact names that make it possible to study these names as a separate group of onyms with their specific semantic and motivational characteristics. The proper names that have become the symbols of technological disasters, terrorist attacks, antigovernment actions, etc. (Chernobyl, Fukushima, Nord-Ost, Beslan, Bolotnaya Square, Maydan, and so on) served as the material of this study. Contextual analysis of these names in Russian media in the last decades, as well as component analysis of the connotative semantics of each name, allowed the author to select several common characteristics of chronofact names. First, every chronofact name undergoes rapid semantic transformations in the following order: it denotes a certain object – it denotes a singular tragic event (metonymy) and the development of a connotative onym – it denotes any other similar event (metaphor) and develops the characteristics of a precedent name. Second, chronofact names display same lexical and grammatical signs and they are used in homogenous contexts. Third, under certain extra-linguistic conditions, chronofact names are capable of expanding their figurative meanings and denoting a genuine notion for a long time. The material under the analysis is of interest to theoretical understanding of connotation as well as lexicographic description.

Collaborating for Our Future

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Gray ◽  
Jill Purdy
Keyword(s):  
Management Education ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Scale Up ◽  
Collaborative Governance ◽  
Comprehensive Understanding ◽  
Theoretical Understanding ◽  
Effect Change ◽  
Working Together ◽  
Vantage Points ◽  
Multistakeholder Partnerships

Organizations turn to multistakeholder partnerships (MSPs) to meet challenges they cannot handle alone. By tapping diverse stakeholders’ resources, MSPs develop the capability to address complex issues and problems, such as health care delivery, poverty, human rights, watershed management, education, sustainability, and innovation. This book provides a comprehensive understanding of MSPs, why they are needed, the challenges partners face in working together, and how to design them effectively. Through the process of collaboration partners combine their differing strengths, vantage points, and expertise to craft innovative responses to pressing societal concerns. The book offers valuable advice for leaders about how to design and scale up effective partnerships and how to address potential obstacles partners may face, such as dealing with the conflicts and power issues likely to arise as partners negotiate with each other. Drawing on three comprehensive cases and countless shorter examples from around the world, the book offers practical advice for organizations embarking on an MSP, as well as theoretical understanding of how partnerships function. Using an institutional theory lens, it explains how partnerships can effect change in institutional fields by reducing turbulence and negotiating a common set of norms and routines to govern partners’ future interactions within the field of concern. Topics covered include: the nature of working collaboratively, why partnerships are needed, types of partnerships, guidelines for partnership design, partnerships and field dynamics, how to deal with conflicts among partners, negotiating across power differences, partnerships for sustainability, collaborative governance, working across scale differences, and how partnerships transform fields.

Connecting Gospels

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Second Century ◽  
Common Belief ◽  
Field Of Study ◽  
Early Christian ◽  
Single Field ◽  
Vantage Points ◽  
Canonical Texts ◽  
Normative Status ◽  
Two Bodies ◽  
Shed Light

By the late second century, early Christian gospels had been divided into two groups by a canonical boundary that assigned normative status to four of them while consigning their competitors to the margins. The project of this volume is to find ways to reconnect these divided texts. The primary aim is not to address the question whether the canonical/non-canonical distinction reflects substantive and objectively verifiable differences between the two bodies of texts—although that issue may arise at various points. Starting from the assumption that, in spite of their differences, all early gospels express a common belief in the absolute significance of Jesus and his earthly career, the intention is to make their interconnectedness fruitful for interpretation. The approach taken is thematic and comparative: a selected theme or topic is traced across two or more gospels on either side of the canonical boundary, and the resulting convergences and divergences shed light not least on the canonical texts themselves as they are read from new and unfamiliar vantage points. The outcome is to demonstrate that early gospel literature can be regarded as a single field of study, in contrast to the overwhelming predominance of the canonical four characteristic of traditional gospels scholarship.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document