Review article: Towards multi-hazard and multi-risk indicators – a review and recommendations for development and implementation
Résumé fourni par la source
Abstract. The development of indicators in disaster risk management has only recently started to explicitly include a multi-hazard and multi-risk approach. However, undertaking a natural hazard or risk assessment from a single hazard approach can be considered incomplete where the interactions between, and impacts from, multiple hazards and risks are not considered. Indicators contain observable and measurable characteristics to simplify information to understand the state of a concept or phenomenon, and/or to monitor it over time. To understand how indicators are being used in this context, using a systematic review, we identified 192 publications that mention indicators within either multi-hazard or multi-risk contexts, including hazards, vulnerability, and risk/impact. We found that most studies exploring indicators focused on multi-layer single hazards and risks, where multiple single hazards or risks within a given location were analysed individually and their outcomes presented in an overlaid format. The results also demonstrate a predominance of studies on hazard indicators (88 %) versus risk indicators, with a dominance of hydrometeorological indicators. Only 20 % of the studies integrated hazard, vulnerability and risk/impact. Based on the findings, we propose a set of actionable recommendations to enable the development and uptake of multi-hazard and multi-risk indicators.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Review article: Towards multi-hazard and multi-risk indicators – a review and recommendations for development and implementation
- Date Crossref
- 31/10/2025
- Éditeur
- Copernicus GmbH
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.