Suchergebnisse

This open access book summarizes the findings of the VUELCO project, a multi-disciplinary and cross-boundary research funded by the European Commission's 7th framework program. It comprises four broad topics: 1. The global significance of volcanic unrest 2. Geophysical and geochemical fingerprints of unrest and precursory activity 3. Magma dynamics leading to unrest phenomena 4. Bridging the gap between science and decision-making Volcanic unrest is a complex multi-hazard phenomenon. The fact that unrest may, or may not lead to an imminent eruption contributes significant uncertainty to short-term volcanic hazard and risk assessment. Although it is reasonable to assume that all eruptions are associated with precursory activity of some sort, the understanding of the causative links between subsurface processes, resulting unrest signals and imminent eruption is incomplete. When a volcano evolves from dormancy into a phase of unrest, important scientific, political and social questions need to be addressed. This book is aimed at graduate students, researchers of volcanic phenomena, professionals in volcanic hazard and risk assessment, observatory personnel, as well as emergency managers who wish to learn about the complex nature of volcanic unrest and how to utilize new findings to deal with unrest phenomena at scientific and emergency managing levels. This book is open access under a CC BY license. ;

This open access book summarizes the findings of the VUELCO project, a multi-disciplinary and cross-boundary research funded by the European Commission's 7th framework program. It comprises four broad topics: 1. The global significance of volcanic unrest 2. Geophysical and geochemical fingerprints of unrest and precursory activity 3. Magma dynamics leading to unrest phenomena 4. Bridging the gap between science and decision-making Volcanic unrest is a complex multi-hazard phenomenon. The fact that unrest may, or may not lead to an imminent eruption contributes significant uncertainty to short-term volcanic hazard and risk assessment. Although it is reasonable to assume that all eruptions are associated with precursory activity of some sort, the understanding of the causative links between subsurface processes, resulting unrest signals and imminent eruption is incomplete. When a volcano evolves from dormancy into a phase of unrest, important scientific, political and social questions need to be addressed. This book is aimed at graduate students, researchers of volcanic phenomena, professionals in volcanic hazard and risk assessment, observatory personnel, as well as emergency managers who wish to learn about the complex nature of volcanic unrest and how to utilize new findings to deal with unrest phenomena at scientific and emergency managing levels. This book is open access under a CC BY license

Scientific communication is one of the most challenging aspects of volcanic risk management because the complexities and uncertainties of volcanic unrest make it difficult for scientists to provide information that is timely, relevant, easily comprehensible and trusted. When poorly handled, scientific communication can cause social, economic and political problems, and undermine community confidence in disaster management regimes. This is the first of two related papers that together investigate the interface between the scientific consideration of volcanic hazards and the governance of volcanic risks. Both papers are principally concerned with issues of risk governance, and their focus is hazard communication by volcanologists at this hazard-risk interface (the interface) during periods of volcanic unrest. In this paper, we argue that the working practices of contextualisation must be more methodical and propose four quality assurance standards that will enhance hazard assessments. To improve hazard communication between volcanologists and risk-mitigation decision-makers (decision-makers), we argue that volcanologists need to adopt a more iterative and structured approach that openly embraces the benefits, and confronts the challenges, of stakeholder-orientated 'contextualisation'. Our analysis of the published literature reveals evidence of a slow paradigm shift from practices based upon strict linear technocratic approaches to more iterative stakeholder participation. The extent of this shift varies in different regions, however, the rules and practices of deliberation often appear ad hoc and unstructured. Since there is currently insufficient guidance for managing the practicalities and standards of contextualisation, we introduce two novel concepts; the 'scrutiny dimension' of risk governance, which is the slow changing governance context that may influence the processes of contextualisation, and the dynamic 'equilibrium of contextualisation', which is the metastable product of regulatory standards, natural and organisational constraints, and stakeholder pressures. We argue that the working practices of contextualisation must be more structured and should strive to be open, transparent and fully articulated. Contextualisation, which meets proposed quality assurance standards of materiality, proximity, comprehensibility and integrity, will enhance hazard assessments and, thereby, the utility of their outputs. In our second paper (Bretton et al, J Appl. Volcanol. DOI 10.1186/s13617-018-0079-8, 2018), the focus is directed away from the perceived qualities of more 'socially robust' hazard assessments towards the actual process of contextualisation.

In seeking to provide for the safety of local communities in the global south, there has been an apparent policy focus on making early warning systems more robust, and improving the operation of disaster management programmes. However, the critical security studies literature has highlighted the ways in which security practices, including those nominally implemented on behalf of local communities can have negative impacts on peoples. Human security literature, in particular, highlights the ways in which the state security apparatus, which is often relied upon to notify and enforce evacuations, may often be perceived as a serious risk to communities. At the same time individuals live within complex security situations where daily threats to peoples' lives may outweigh geological hazards. Grounded within critical literature on the social construction of risk (Lupton; Beck, Douglas), the ways in which volcanic risk is calculated, communicated, and enacted upon, will be assessed in relation to the local communities' security dilemmas. Drawing on field work in communities at risk from lahars generated from Cotopaxi in Sangolqui, Ecuador, explores the ways in which competing claims of what constitutes security challenge the operating assumptions in emergency preparedness. In June 2012, 158 primary interviews were undertaken as a part of the EU funded VUELCO project in Ecuador. The findings were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methodologies, drawing most heavily on interpretive methodologies to argue that the scientific representation of volcanic hazards, and the resultant disaster management strategies, do not account for local context. Indeed, the majority of interviewees indicated a lack of trust in either scientific expertise or government representatives, on questions of security. By incorporating a broader narrative of security beyond a narrow focus on natural hazards, disaster preparedness and communication plans can be more effective.

When a volcano emerges from dormancy into a phase of unrest, the civil protection authorities charged with managing societal risks have the unenviable responsibility of making difficult decisions balancing numerous competing societal, political and economic considerations. A volcano that is threatening to erupt requires sound risk assessments incorporating trusted hazard assessments that are timely, relevant and comprehensible. Foreseeable challenges arise when the inevitable uncertainties of hazard assessment and communication meet societal and political demands for certitude. In some regions that host volcanic hazards, it would be both realistic and prudent to adopt three working assumptions. The complex legal and administrative infrastructures of risk governance will be largely untested and possibly inadequate. Many volcano observatory scientists, and probably even more risk managers and at-risk individuals/communities, will have inadequate recent experience of the challenges of hazard communication during a period of unrest. And lastly, the scientists may also have inadequate practical experience of the needs and management capacities of the risk-mitigation decision makers with whom they must communicate. "Practice doesn't make perfect. Practice reduces the imperfection." (Beta 2011). If this statement is correct, volcanic unrest simulation exercises (VUSE) have a vital role to play within the complex processes of volcanic risk governance. Consistent with the broad approach of the Sendai Framework for Risk Reduction 2015–30, this chapter argues that practical knowledge of VUSE can and should be analysed and recorded so that key lessons can be shared for the widest possible benefit. This chapter investigates five recent simulation exercises and presents six complementary checklists based upon data, insights and practice pointers derived from those exercises. The use of checklists, supported by guidance notes, is commended as a pragmatic way to create, test and develop acceptable standards of governance practice. It is argued here that well planned and executed simulation exercises are capable of informing and motivating a wide range of risk governance stakeholders. They can identify process and individual shortcomings that can be mitigated. Simulation exercises can and should play a vital role in reducing volcanic risks.