PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY ›› 2023, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (1): 197-208.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2023.01.016

• Reviews • Previous Articles    

Multi-hazard risk assessment methods: A comparative analysis based on five authoritative reports

NING Jiachen1,2(), WU Jidong1,2,*(), TANG Rumei1, CHEN Xiaojuan3, XU Yingjun2   

  1. 1. State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    2. School of National Safety and Emergency Management, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    3. Defense Center for Meteorological Disasters of Hebei Province, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
  • Received:2022-07-22 Revised:2022-10-19 Online:2023-01-28 Published:2023-02-06
  • Contact: WU Jidong E-mail:JiachenNing@mail.bnu.edu.cn;wujidong@bnu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    The Second Tibetan Plateau Scientific Expedition and Research Program(2019QZKK0906);National Natural Science Foundation of China(42077437)

Abstract:

Multi-hazard risk assessment is the basis for formulating integrated risk governance strategies. Through examining the risk assessment practices in China and internationally, this study selected five authoritative global risk assessment reports, including the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction, Global Climate Risk Index, The Index for Risk Management Report, World Risk Report, and World Atlas of Natural Disaster Risk, to compare their objectives, contents, models, and results of assessment. The main conclusions are as follows: 1) The five risk assessment reports have different focuses in terms of objectives, and four of them regularly publish new reports to analyze the dynamic process of change that facilitates the identification of risks through continuous risk assessment. 2) The methods characterized by the synthesis of risk elements is easy to apply, but it is necessary to further improve the applicability of indicators and adopt more intuitive and practical risk representation methods. 3) The Belt and Road initiative countries have slightly higher risk levels than the global average. In the future, we need to deepen the research on the integrated risk assessment method of multi-hazards, strengthen the practice of natural disaster risk assessment in China, and explore the disaster risk management system of regional linkages. 4) On the whole, the five risk assessment reports all have their own advantages and disadvantages. In the future, we can combine the concepts of "multi-hazard additive losses" and "disaster chain losses" to enrich the models and methods, indicator system, and result representation of integrated risk assessment.

Key words: disasters, multi-hazards, risk assessment model, integrated risk governance, risk assessment reports