Following a series of catastrophic events (floods, wildfires etc.) in Greece over the last few years (2023-2024), it has become clear that institutional issues such as legislation, accountability, political decisions, and participation have been the driving forces behind the vulnerability of communities to climate change-related hazards. An institutional vulnerability framework is used as a basis to analyse these institutional issues and their relationship to adverse outcomes. Institutional vulnerability refers to weaknesses in institutions that affect our capacities to resist, cope with and recover from the impacts of natural hazards. Efforts to reduce negative consequences and loss of natural hazards should include recognising and addressing these vulnerabilities as well as their impact on our physical robustness and coping capacities.  The framework is based on four pillars: socio-cultural, socio-political, legislative and regulatory, and fiscal economic. The socio-cultural pillar includes the level of community participation, the use of traditional methods of dealing with natural hazards as well as early warning systems that include vulnerable groups. The socio-political pillar is associated with accountability issues regarding the management of natural hazards and the management of critical infrastructure. The legislative and economic pillar includes European and national legislation related to accountabilities, land use planning, adaptation and risk transfer mechanisms. Finally, the fiscal economic pillar has to do with the national budget allocation and the financing of public bodies.

The results of this qualitative analysis show the link between individual vulnerability dimensions (physical, social, economic, environmental, etc.) and institutional issues, as well as the importance of considering institutional vulnerability as an “umbrella dimension” in vulnerability analysis. The study lays the foundation for further research to develop methodologies for assessing institutional vulnerability, but also to examine more closely the interaction between institutional issues and other dimensions of vulnerability.

How to cite: Papathoma-Koehle, M., Fuchs, S., Mavroulis, S., and Diakakis, M.: Institutional vulnerability as a key risk driver, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-4213, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-4213, 2025.

Vulnerability has been acknowledged as a dynamic concept since the Pressure and Release model of Blaikie et al. (1994), as well as by other well-known models that integrate this risk component. Nevertheless, it is only within the past three years that new conceptual and operational frameworks have emerged, revitalising the study of vulnerability dynamics. To date, these efforts remain largely disconnected from the concept of systemic vulnerability, which is seldom defined in the literature or is typically restricted to the vulnerability that comes from the interconnectivity of different systems. Here, we posit that using the dynamics of vulnerability as a lens to study systemic vulnerability holds a significant potential for advancing in disaster risk research.

In this study, we develop a connectivity-based Multi-hazard Systemic Vulnerability Model, drawing on our previous conceptual framework for analysing the augmentation of vulnerability due to hazard impacts and misfiring adaptation options. This framework is complemented by a tool we previously developed to capture this augmentation and provide it with the needed organisational and visual support, namely Enhanced Impact Chains. The model also integrates in-depth structural equations and multiple regressions, and it is validated through a robust validation procedure including three distinct validation procedures.

The case study at hand focuses on two impactful and recent hazards that affected Romania in 2020-2021, namely river floods and the COVID-19 pandemic. To implement the Multi-hazard Systemic Vulnerability Model, we constructed five Impact Chains, three for the flood events in 2020, 2021, and 2022, one for the flood events of this entire period, and one multi-hazard Impact Chain that integrates both the hydrological and epidemiological hazards referring to 2020-2022.

Key results show that vulnerability acts as both a passive (subject to change) and active (driving change) agent. It can initially contribute to hazard impacts, get augmented by them, and continue to reinforce these impacts afterwards. Another highlight is that vulnerabilities can slow down or hinder the implementation of adaptation measures. Reinforcement feedbacks are vital to understanding the progression of multi-hazards, especially forward from the point where impacts cease to be the results of hazards alone, but are amplified by systemic vulnerabilities that were left unaddressed by mitigation options or were even amplified by such measures that failed.

Considering the findings from the model, we propose a new definition of systemic vulnerability: the stable core of vulnerability that persists across time and space, regardless of mitigation efforts and societal progress. This definition highlights the epigenetic nature of vulnerability, showcasing that systemic vulnerability results from the incapacity of a system to assimilate environmental changes, which initiates vulnerability augmentation and leads to positive feedback loops.

Marking the first scientific work aiming to acquire an in-depth understanding of systemic vulnerability within multi-hazard contexts, this model sets the stage for developing the next generation of conceptual and operational frameworks to analyse changes in vulnerability.

How to cite: Iuliana, A., Andra-Cosmina, A., and Daniela, D.: Next steps in capturing vulnerability dynamics: Introducing a connectivity-based model on systemic vulnerability to multi-hazards, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-15397, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-15397, 2025.

Human casualties related to rapid-onset natural hazards are usually proportional to the number of people directly exposed. Yet population mobility makes  exposure difficult to assess due to temporal and spatial  variability. Population exposure is a crucial dimension of risk, and often the dynamics of exposure are overlooked in disaster risk assessment and subsequent management. Here, we quantify how disaster risk in Aotearoa New Zealand changes across multiple temporal and a highly resolved spatial scales due to dynamic population mobility and observe the significant influence it has on resulting risk.

We present a unique dataset from the highly touristic Piopiotahi Milford Sound in New Zealand using longitudinal data over a 790-day period, including throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. We demonstrate how minute-by-minute population changes of up to 1000-people within 5 minutes can dramatically affect the risk posed by a landslide-triggered tsunami in the fiord. During our study period, the societal risk fluctuated by two to three orders of magnitude, underscoring how dynamic population movement translates to the potential doubling of fatalities in a tsunami. Using an established threshold for acceptable risk, our dynamic approach reveals that the societal risk was only acceptable during the strictest COVID-19 lockdown measures, after which it became increasingly unacceptable as population mobility resumed.

This New Zealand case study demonstrates that integrating high-resolution dynamic population data into disaster risk assessment can significantly improve assessments of risk, particularly in rapidly changing or high population mobility contexts. Understanding these dynamics is essential for developing effective risk reduction strategies and adaptation plans. Our findings show that incorporating longitudinal high-resolution data on dynamic exposure substantially improves assessment accuracy and reduces inherent uncertainty of dynamic disaster risk, especially in popular touristic areas and where population shifts are frequent and significant.

How to cite: Darling, M., Robinson, T., Adams, B., Wilson, T., and Orchiston, C.: Minutes Matter for Risk to Life in Disasters - the experience from Aotearoa, New Zealand, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-1744, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-1744, 2025.

Integrating hazard, vulnerability, and exposure into a comprehensive assessment of flood risk is critical for sustainable disaster management and building community resilience in coastal urban environments. This presentation synthesizes findings from four investigations to explore the interplay between hazards, vulnerability, and exposure in diverse coastal settings along the U.S. Gulf Coast. First, an analysis of Mobile Bay, Alabama, spanning 2000–2020, illustrates shifting patterns of social vulnerability amidst rapid urbanization and changes in land use and land cover (LULC). Hotspot and cluster analyses identify regions requiring special policy attention to mitigate heightened disaster risks. Second, a similar spatiotemporal analysis of vulnerability in relation to LULC changes in Harris County, Texas during the same period (2000-2020), reveals comparable patterns, highlighting areas where rapid urbanization has amplified vulnerability. Third, a flood risk model for Harris County integrates flood susceptibility mapping using machine learning with a social vulnerability index, exposing discrepancies with the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) 100-year floodplain estimations. Finally, building on insights from the first three studies, a novel conceptual and methodological framework is proposed, integrating flood hazard, social vulnerability, and exposure into flood risk assessment for Tampa Bay, Florida. This framework employs multiple machine learning techniques to provide a more nuanced flood risk evaluation. Collectively, these findings underscore the necessity of integrating social and environmental datasets in flood risk assessments over time to improve resource allocation and foster long-term community resilience.

How to cite: Shao, W., Dey, H., Tabassum, A., and Haque, Md. M.: Integrating Hazard, Vulnerability, and Exposure into Flood Risk Assessment in Dynamic Coastal Urban Landscapes, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-2620, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-2620, 2025.

The paper­ presents a nationwide, spatially explicit, object-based assessment of buildings and citizens exposed to riverine flooding, torrential flooding, snow avalanches and multi-hazards in Austria. The assessment was based on two different datasets, (a) hazard information, which provides input for the exposure of the elements at risk, and (b) information on the building stock, which was combined from different spatial data available at the national level. Hazard information was compiled from available local scale hazard maps. The building stock information included information on the location and size of each building, as well as the building category and the construction period and year. In addition, this dataset has an interface with the population register, allowing the number of primary and secondary occupants to be retrieved for each building.

The results of the study challenge the commonly held assumption that exposure levels will inevitably increase as a result of continued population growth and the associated increase in property values. It is shown that this assumption needs to be carefully examined against the background of regional differences in the development of the building stock. While some regions in Austria have experienced asset growth well above the national average, others have experienced below-average growth patterns. These differences reflect not only the different topography of the country, but also the different economic activities and development priorities of the regions. The temporal assessment of exposure has revealed significant differences in the dynamics of exposure to different hazard categories compared to the total building stock.

In conclusion, the property-based assessment presented in this study is proving to be an important and effective tool for conducting nationwide exposure assessments. It provides a robust framework for identifying and addressing one of the most important non-climate risk drivers. Consequently, the insights generated by this approach should play a central role in operational risk management and the formulation of adaptive strategies to enhance resilience in the face of evolving climate change challenges. By revealing the complex dynamics of hazard exposure and asset growth, the study highlights the need to integrate such assessments into long-term planning and policy development.

How to cite: Echtler, P., Fuchs, S., Keiler, M., and Schlögl, M.: A multi-hazard spatiotemporal exposure assessment for buildings in Austria, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-5997, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-5997, 2025.

Agriculture is the main livelihood and food security source in India's rural Himalayas. At the same time, frequent landslides are increasing the risk of agriculture, particularly under the changing scenario of climate. However, a few studies explored the impact of landslides on the agricultural land in the Himalayan region. Therefore, the study focuses on two-fold objectives: i.e. (i) to analyze the impact of landslides on losing agricultural land, and (ii) to assess the risk of agricultural land to landslides. We consider the Darjeeling Himalayas of India as a case study of this research. The study area is composed of diverse agricultural lands such as tea plantations, pomiculture, and cropland. To achieve these objectives, a detailed landslide inventory database is generated that covers landslides from 2001 to 2024. We develop a GIS-based framework of the risk assessment using five indicators namely the susceptibility index of landslides, temporal probability index of landslides, total affected area index of landslides, proximity index of landslides, and recovery index of agricultural land. The study considers each village as a unit of analysis. Further, a composite risk index was developed by aggregating the five indexes.  Further, the spatial pattern of risk is analyzed using hot spot and cold spot analysis. The study found varying impacts and risks of landslides on tea plantations and frame land. The study will help to develop sustainable agricultural policy in the rural Himalayas.

Key words: Landslides; Risk index; Agricultural land; GIS; Hot-spot analysis; Darjeeling

How to cite: Ghosh, P., Bera, S., and Priyadarshi, S.: Assessing landslide risk on heterogeneous agricultural landscape in rural Himalayas, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-6075, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-6075, 2025.

Tropical cyclone-related losses are projected to increase globally due to climate change and socio-economic factors, with storm surges posing a significant threat to coastal regions. Enhanced preparedness among coastal populations is essential to reduce the impact of this trend. This study evaluates storm surge hazards and risks using a multi-attribute decision-making method and develops risk maps based on empirical data. The integration of hazard, vulnerability, and exposure indices highlights the eastern coast (Bay of Bengal) as the region with the highest present risk. Risk levels are comparatively lower along the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean coasts, but they still pose substantial threats, particularly in urbanized and low-lying areas. Additionally, by offering data-driven insights into risk management, the analysis facilitates the development of adaptable infrastructure and land-use planning for coastal resilience. Future research will focus on refining the hazard component to enhance the accuracy of risk assessments.

How to cite: Pradhan, P. P. and Hari, V.: Assessing Coastal Hazards and Mitigation Strategies for Vulnerable Communities in India, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-10801, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-10801, 2025.

On October 29, 2022, a tragic crowd crush incident occurred in Itaewon, Seoul, South Korea, during Halloween celebrations. 159 people died. In addition to this incident, South Korea has been experiencing new types of disasters that were previously unencountered. South Korea considers disasters into natural and societal categories. Natural disasters refer to calamities caused by natural phenomena, such as typhoons, floods, and heavy rainfall. Social disasters, on the other hand, include incidents such as fires, collapses, explosions, and large-scale traffic accidents, which can lead to significant damage and paralyze national functions. 

Accordingly, South Korea government manages large-scale safety incidents that can arise not only from natural phenomena but also from the malfunctions of social systems. Particularly, cascading and complex damages, such as physical damage caused by typhoons leading to power outages due to accumulated impacts, are treated as critical management concerns. To effectively manage and analyze risks at a national level, it is essential to incorporate the characteristics of natural and physical phenomena occurring within the country, along with measures to mitigate their intensification, into a risk management framework. This requires a framework capable of multidimensionally assessing the potential risks and cascading impacts of disasters, enabling a comprehensive risk management approach.

Therefore, this paper proposes a complex disaster risk management framework that leverages a risk management framework to comprehensively analyze the cascading and complex risks and damages of disasters, considering the characteristics of disaster risk management in Korea. Disaster safety management in South Korea focuses on identifying and mitigating various risks, including societal impacts such as dam breaches, road disruptions, and power outages, in anticipation of hazards like typhoons. To effectively manage these risks, it is necessary to conduct a systematic evaluation of the potential extreme damage scenarios that may result from these hazards. For instance, in the case of Seoul, which is exposed to super typhoons with strong winds and heavy rain, disaster management requires not only preparedness for the primary impacts of typhoons but also for secondary impacts scenarios that may result from the initial damage. In other words, a risk management framework is needed to analyze the cascading effects on other facilities when vulnerable facilities in the exposed area are damaged and these damages are considered secondary hazards.

This study proposes a framework that redefines the damage resulting from the interactions between the vulnerabilities of exposed areas (or facilities) and the response capacity of the state or facilities as a secondary hazard(or new risk factors) thereby enabling the management of complex and interconnected disaster risks. This proposed risk management framework allows for a detailed analysis of the causal chains leading to disaster-related damages and facilitates the reevaluation of previously considered impacts as secondary hazards, enabling the identification of complex and cascading risks. The proposed risk management framework is intended to be integrated into a web-based system in the future. This system will enable users to visualize the causal interactions among hazard factors, exposure, damage (as new hazards), response capacity, and vulnerability.

How to cite: Choi, D., Seo, K., and Jeong, J.: A Risk Management Framework for Disaster in Korea: Application to Disaster Damage Scenario Planning, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-14664, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-14664, 2025.

In recent years, the emergence of novel, unidentified diseases on a global scale has posed a significant threat to national healthy systems and public safety. In the case of such unidentified infectious diseases, as the cause is often unknow during the initial outbreak, it becomes more difficult to respond effectively in the early stages. Consequently, there has been an increasing emphasis on evaluating the impact of policies implemented during the response phase of outbreak, rather than solely focusing on prevention and preparedness. Infectious diseases have the potential to escalate from localized outbreak into national and even global crises. It also exhibits a cascading pattern of damage, significantly impacting not only the healthcare sector but also socioeconomic condition. As a result, nations have developed unique healthcare and public systems, accompanied by respective legal frameworks. The outcomes of these systems vary significantly based on their level of preparedness. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated how different countries responses to infectious diseases can lead to vastly different outcomes in terms of confirmed cases and the resulting damage. Although it is challenging to definitively rank the effectiveness of different countries responses to the pandemic given their unique characteristics, the significance of having a well-defined diseases response policy is widely acknowledged. 

South Korea faced five distinct waves of COVID-19  infections, each presenting unique challenges. The country responded to these crises with tailored policies, ultimately allowing for a shift towards a “With COVID-19” approach after the fifth wave. South Korea had established a robust infectious disease response system through previous outbreak like SARS and MERS. The country’s innovative approaches to COVID-19, including drive-through, testing and rapid diagnostic development, drew international acclaim. Nevertheless, ir remained challenging to completely to completely eliminate vulnerabilities in responding to entirely new infectious diseases. 

This research seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of South Korea’s infectious disease response policies by focusing on five trigger by rapid surges in COVID-19 cases. Although is desirable to quantify the precise influence of individual policies on disease transmission, the inherent unpredictability of pandemics, such as the variability in susceptible populatinos, outbreak location, and transmission dynamics, often necessitates the simultaneous implementation of multiple interventions. Consequently a holistic approach is essential to analysis the overall impact of these policies. This research seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of various policies implemented at different phases of the outbreak in mitigation the spread of the infectious disease and to draw lessons for future infectious diseases reponse strategies in South Korea.

How to cite: Seo, K., Choi, D., and Jeong, J.: An Analysis of South Korea Government Infectious Disease Response Policies: Focusing on the Cascading Impacts of COVID-19, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-14946, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-14946, 2025.