GAR 2015 Main Report

145

applications to transfer risk and contingency plans to deal with possible disasters.

Globally, risk information should inform international agreements and policies on development priorities. In the insurance sector, the quantification of disaster risk is essential given that the solvency of most non-life insurance companies is strongly influenced by their exposure to catastrophe risk. Through their finance or planning ministries, governments should be using risk information to inform public investment and to assess their fiscal resilience to large disasters (UNISDR, 2011a

UNISDR. 2011a,Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Revealing Risk, Redefining Development, Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. .

). In the construction sector, quantifying the potential hazard expected in the lifetime of a building, bridge, or critical facility should be driving the creation and modification of building codes. In the land-use and urban planning sectors, an analysis of flood risk, for example, should be driving investment in flood protection, informing zoning changes and possibly leading to changes in insurance pricing ( GAR 13 paper

GFDRR, 2014a

GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2014a,Understanding Risk: The Evolution of Disaster Risk Assessment since 2005, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR..
Click here to view this GAR paper.

). In hazard-exposed communities, risk information should be underpinning locallevel disaster risk management initiatives. Finally, in the private and financial sectors, it should be informing not only business continuity planning but also corporate planning, investment and risk management (UNISDR, 2013a

UNISDR. 2013a,Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: From Shared Risk to Shared Value: the Business Case for Disaster Risk Reduction, Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. .

In practice, however, and as the short story by Jorge Luis Borges cautions, the burgeoning risk assessment community would appear to be making greater investments in increasing the accuracy and rigour of risk models and assessments than in developing understandable and actionable information that responds to the needs of users.

It is unclear how much of the risk information that has been produced since the adoption of the HFA is really seeping and spilling out of that community of practice into sector and territorial development or even into the mainstream disaster risk management sector (CDKN, 2014

CDKN (Climate and Development Knowledge Network). 2014,Risk-informed decision-making: An agenda for improving risk assessments under HFA2, CDKN Guide, April 2014.. .

). In fact,

the exponential growth of risk information has the effect of creating an elaborate play of reflections in a room full of mirrors. Inside the community of practice, there would seem to be growing opportunities to produce more and better risk information. Seen from outside the room, however, disaster risk information is still perceived as an exotic commodity. Outside of the insurance industry, cases where risk information has become fully integrated into decision-making are still the exception rather than the rule (Box 7.9).

There appear to be a number of instrumental reasons for this disconnect. Risk information produced by the insurance and catastrophe modelling industry is still largely retained as intellectual property within each company and is rarely accessible to governments, businesses or households. The information is based on proprietary models, and even if the results were made available, it might be unclear how the data was transformed and what assumptions were made to generate risk estimates.

The predominant academic culture of publication in scientific journals is likewise an obstacle to accessing risk information. For many university-based risk modellers and researchers, publication becomes an end in itself rather than a means of opening the results for application and dissemination. Given that scientific journals are usually only read by other scientists, this creates a closed circuit. The fact that so much published scientific literature is in English further removes it from application in non-English speaking countries.

Insufficient emphasis has been placed on making fundamental data sets generated through the risk assessment process more open and accessible for reuse and repurposing, meaning that resources are wasted through the repetitive creation of the same data sets ( GAR 13 paper

GFDRR, 2014a

Hazard and risk assessments tend to be driven by well-intentioned science and engineering experts

	145 applications to transfer risk and contingency plans to deal with possible disasters. Globally, risk information should inform international agreements and policies on development priorities. In the insurance sector, the quantification of disaster risk is essential given that the solvency of most non-life insurance companies is strongly influenced by their exposure to catastrophe risk. Through their finance or planning ministries, governments should be using risk information to inform public investment and to assess their fiscal resilience to large disasters (UNISDR, 2011a x UNISDR. 2011a,Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Revealing Risk, Redefining Development, Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. . ). In the construction sector, quantifying the potential hazard expected in the lifetime of a building, bridge, or critical facility should be driving the creation and modification of building codes. In the land-use and urban planning sectors, an analysis of flood risk, for example, should be driving investment in flood protection, informing zoning changes and possibly leading to changes in insurance pricing (GFDRR, 2014a x GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2014a,Understanding Risk: The Evolution of Disaster Risk Assessment since 2005, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. Click here to view this GAR paper. ). In hazard-exposed communities, risk information should be underpinning locallevel disaster risk management initiatives. Finally, in the private and financial sectors, it should be informing not only business continuity planning but also corporate planning, investment and risk management (UNISDR, 2013a x UNISDR. 2013a,Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: From Shared Risk to Shared Value: the Business Case for Disaster Risk Reduction, Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. . ). In practice, however, and as the short story by Jorge Luis Borges cautions, the burgeoning risk assessment community would appear to be making greater investments in increasing the accuracy and rigour of risk models and assessments than in developing understandable and actionable information that responds to the needs of users. It is unclear how much of the risk information that has been produced since the adoption of the HFA is really seeping and spilling out of that community of practice into sector and territorial development or even into the mainstream disaster risk management sector (CDKN, 2014 x CDKN (Climate and Development Knowledge Network). 2014,Risk-informed decision-making: An agenda for improving risk assessments under HFA2, CDKN Guide, April 2014.. . ). In fact, the exponential growth of risk information has the effect of creating an elaborate play of reflections in a room full of mirrors. Inside the community of practice, there would seem to be growing opportunities to produce more and better risk information. Seen from outside the room, however, disaster risk information is still perceived as an exotic commodity. Outside of the insurance industry, cases where risk information has become fully integrated into decision-making are still the exception rather than the rule (Box 7.9). There appear to be a number of instrumental reasons for this disconnect. Risk information produced by the insurance and catastrophe modelling industry is still largely retained as intellectual property within each company and is rarely accessible to governments, businesses or households. The information is based on proprietary models, and even if the results were made available, it might be unclear how the data was transformed and what assumptions were made to generate risk estimates. The predominant academic culture of publication in scientific journals is likewise an obstacle to accessing risk information. For many university-based risk modellers and researchers, publication becomes an end in itself rather than a means of opening the results for application and dissemination. Given that scientific journals are usually only read by other scientists, this creates a closed circuit. The fact that so much published scientific literature is in English further removes it from application in non-English speaking countries. Insufficient emphasis has been placed on making fundamental data sets generated through the risk assessment process more open and accessible for reuse and repurposing, meaning that resources are wasted through the repetitive creation of the same data sets (GFDRR, 2014a x GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2014a,Understanding Risk: The Evolution of Disaster Risk Assessment since 2005, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. Click here to view this GAR paper. ). Hazard and risk assessments tend to be driven by well-intentioned science and engineering experts	Page 1 Page 10 Page 20 Page 30 Page 40 Page 50 Page 60 Page 70 Page 80 Page 90 Page 100 Page 110 Page 120 Page 130 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 ->Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 Page 159 Page 160 Page 170 Page 180 Page 190 Page 200 Page 210 Page 220 Page 230 Page 240 Page 250 Page 260 Page 270 Page 280 Page 290 Page 300 Page 310