Global Multiple Natural Hazards Risk Landscape and Climate Change Regionalization in the World, Peijun SHI

Global Multiple Natural Hazards Risk Landscape and
Climate Change Regionalization in the World
Peijun Shi
State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology
Key Laboratory of Environmental Change and Natural Disasters of Ministry of Education
Academy of Disaster Reduction and Emergency Management, Ministry of Civil Affairs and Ministry of Education
Beijing Normal University
China
spj@bnu.edu.cn
29-08-2016
International Disaster and Risk Conference Davos 2016,Integrative Risk Management - towards resilient cities
28 August - 1 September 2016 • Davos • Switzerland
Plenary 3: Green Development and Integrated Risk Governance Room: Davos I
4:55pm- 5:55pm, 29 August 2016

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting OUTLINE
Global Multiple Natural Hazards Risk Landscape
Climate Change Regionalization in the World

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Background
The seven global targets are
(a) Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming to lower the average per100,000
global mortality rate in the decade 2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;
(b) Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by 2030, aiming to lowerthe average
global figure per 100,000 in the decade 2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;9
(c) Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030;
(d) Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services,
among them health and educational facilities, including through developing their resilience by 2030;
(e) Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction
strategies by 2020;
(f) Substantially enhance international cooperation to developing countries through adequate and
sustainable support to complement their national actions for implementation of the present
Framework by 2030;
(g) Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and
disaster risk information and assessments to people by 2030.

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting Background
Multi-hazard risk
Multi-hazard risk assessment aims at assessing the total risk of
various types of hazards happened in a given region and in a certain
period of time (Shi, 2009）.Since the 1980s, many organizations
around the world have carried out in-depth research on multi-hazard
risk assessment, and attempted risk mapping at regional and global
scales.

24-05-2016
3rd
Multi-hazard risk
United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
evaluated for the first time, the vulnerability of hazards
based on eight social indicators including economy, type of
economic activity, environmental quality and reliance,
population, health and sanitation, early warning, education
and development at national level, and put forward the
disaster risk index (DRI) to calculate the mortality risk due
to four hazards including earthquake, cyclone, flood and
drought (UNDP, 2004).

24-05-2016
3rd
Multi-hazard risk
World Bank and Columbia University
evaluated the vulnerability of multi- hazards and
calculated the risk of mortality and economic
loss caused by six hazards including earthquakes,
volcanoes, landsides, floods, drought and
cyclones according to the historical loss data in
EM-DAT (Emergency Events Database) at
2.5°×2.5° scale (Dilley et.al, 2004).

24-05-2016
3rd
Multi-hazard risk
United Nations University evaluated
vulnerability at national level based on 28
indicators from three aspects, i.e., sensitivity,
coping capacity and adaptability, and calculated
the mortality risk due to five hazards including
earthquake, flood, cyclone, drought and sea level
rise by using the product of exposure and
vulnerability as world risk index (WRI) (UNU,
2013).

24-05-2016
3rd
Multi-hazard risk
In 2014, European Union Joint Research
Centre(JRC) developed INFORM (index for risk
management) model, with which it evaluated the
hazards & exposure, vulnerability and lack of
coping capacity of every country in the world on
the basis of 53 indicators and obtained the
dynamic risk ranking of 191 countries through
annual database updating (JRC, 2014).

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
Earthquake Volcano Landslide
Wildfires
Tropical Cyclone Sand-Dust Storm
Flood Storm Surge Drought
Heat WaveCold Wave
Geophysical
Hydrological
Wind
Temperature
Wildfires
Multiple Natural Hazards Based on the above study, this work presents a
multi-hazard risk assessment model of mortality and
GDP loss. This model is aimed to establish the
relationship among historical disaster mortality or
GDP loss ratios, the intensity level of multi-hazard
and GDP per capita or population to determine the
expected annual mortality or GDP loss rate, and then
develop vulnerability assessment model to calculate
the expected annual mortality risk and GDP loss risk
due to multi- hazards. The annual expected mortality
and GDP loss represent the risk level to multi-hazard,
which is composed of 11 single hazards, including
earthquake, landslide, volcano, flood, storm surge,
tropical cyclone, sand-dust storm, drought, heat
wave, cold wave and wildfires.

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
Multi-hazard risk
Multi-hazard risk assessment aims at assessing the total risk of various
types of hazards happened in a given region and in a certain period of time
(Shi, 2009）.Since the 1980s, many organizations around the world have
carried out in-depth research on multi-hazard risk assessment, and
attempted risk mapping at regional and global scales.

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Data and Methods
Dataset Data Source Resolution Time
Expected Multi-Hazard Intensity Index
(Mh)
World Atlas of Natural Disaster Risk
(Shi and Kasperson 2015)
0.5⁰×0.5⁰ –
Death Toll and Affected Population Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT
2015)
National unit
scale
1980–2014
Population and GDP Density
(Grid Unit)
Greenhouse Gas Initiative (GGI) Program
of the International Institute for Applied
Systems Analysis (IIASA 2005)
0.5⁰×0.5⁰ 2000, 2010, 2020, and
2030†
Population and GDP (National scale) World Bank (2015) National 1980–2014
Note: †In the GGI database, the time interval of population and GDP data is ten years, therefore the population and
GDP data in 2005 and 2015 are represented by the average values of 2000 and 2010 and of 2010 and 2020, respectively.
Table 1 Sources and description of the datasets used for
calculating global mortality risk and affected population risk
Dataset

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
i Natural Hazard Expected Annual Intensity Index Weight (%)
1 Floods
Accumulated three-day extreme
precipitation (mm)
35.86
2 Tropical cyclones Speed of 3-second gust wind (m/s) 30.23
3 Earthquakes Peak ground acceleration (m/s2) 9.03
4 Landslides Landslide hazard index 5.65
5
Droughts (maize)
Normalized cumulative water stress
index during the crop’s growing season
2.10
Droughts (wheat) 0.52
Droughts (rice) 1.73
6 Heat waves Maximum temperature (°C) 1.77
7 Cold waves Largest temperature drop (°C) 2.99
8 Volcanos Volcanic explosivity index 2.21
9
Wildfires (forest)
Ignition probability (%)
1.38
Wildfires
(grassland)
1.04
10 Storm surges Maximum inundation area (km2) 0.88
11
Sand and dust
storms
Energy of sand/dust storm (J/ m3)
0.31
Table 2 Hazard intensity index and weight of each hazard when
calculating Expected Annual Intensity Index(Mh)
1
n
i imin
h i
i imax imin
h h
M w
h h

 


Natural Hazards
where hi is the expected annual intensity index of
hazard i—for example, the expected annual intensity
of cold wave is the expectation of the largest
temperature drop (°C) with return periods of 10, 20, 50,
and 100 years at each 0.5°×0.5° grid unit (Shi and
Kasperson 2015); himin and himax are the minimum and
maximum values of the expected annual intensity of
hazard i, respectively; wi is the weight of hazard i,
which was calculated based on the frequency of
hazards in EM-DAT (EM-DAT 2015) and Zheng (2009)
Expected Annual Multi-hazard Intensity
Index(Mh)

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
Expected Annual Multi-
hazard Intensity Index ( )
(National Unit Scale)
Exposure
GDPp, Population (0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
2005–2015, 2020–2030
Average Annual Affected
Population Rate (National
Unit Scale, 1980–2009)
GDP Per Capita (GDPp)
(National Unit Scale, 1980–
2009)
Regression Model
Mortality Risk and Affected Population Risk (0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
2005–2015, 2020–2030
Average Annual Mortality
Rate (National Unit Scale,
1980–2009)
Dependent Variable Independent VariableIndependent Variable
Natural
Factor
Natural
Factor
Social
Factor
Social
Factor
Vulnerability Function
AR = f (Mh, GDPp)
MR = g (Mh, GDPp)
Hazard
Mh
(0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
Average Annual Mortality and
Affected Population
2014)
ValidationValidation
hM
Framework
Fig. 1 Flowchart for calculating
the global mortality and affected
population risks for multiple
natural hazards

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
Vulnerability function
Social factor: Coping capacity index Natural factor: Mh
Sig = 0.01; N = 171; R² = 0.65
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
INFORMIndex-LackofCopingCapacity
GDP per capita, Purchasing Power Parity, 2014
[current international thousand $]
Pearson's cc = -0.719
 ,h pMR f M GDP
 ,h pAR g M GDP
where MR is the mortality rate for multiple
natural hazards; AR is the affected population
rate for multi-hazards;
Fig. 2 Comparison of INFORM 2015 Lack of Coping
Capacity Index with GDP per capita
Source JRC (2014)
Vulnerability is a measure of both the sensitivity
of population to natural hazards and its ability to
respond to and recover from the impacts of those
hazards

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
Vulnerability function
MR/AR in EM-DAT disaster database between 1980 and 2009 was selected as training
sample
  6
ln 9.77 10 9.371 14.512p hMR GDP M
      
  4
ln 1.58 10 7.73 5.984p hAR GDP M
      
Same database between 2010 and 2014 was selected as validation sample
Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.45 (mortality) and 0.68 (affected population) (166
countries were included in the analysis since the mortality and affected population data
of other countries are not recorded for this period)
(Sig=0.01)

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
Total Risk and validation
where RM is the mortality risk for multiple
natural hazards (persons per year); RA is the
affected population risk for multiple natural
hazards (persons per year); and POP is the
total population of a country or region.
 6
9.77 10 9.371 14.512p hGDP M
MR POP e

     
 
 4
1.58 10 7.73 5.984p hG
A
DP M
R POP e

     
 
Expected Annual Multi-
hazard Intensity Index ( )
Exposure
GDPp, Population (0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
2005–2015, 2020–2030
GDP Per Capita (GDPp)
2009)
Regression Model
Mortality Risk and Affected Population Risk (0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
2005–2015, 2020–2030
1980–2009)
Natural
Factor
Natural
Factor
Social
Factor
Social
Factor
Vulnerability Function
AR = f (Mh, GDPp)
MR = g (Mh, GDPp)
Hazard
Mh
(0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
Average Annual Mortality and
Affected Population
2014)
hM

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Methods
Multiple Climatic Hazards
MCh
POP, GDP and GDPP
(0.5⁰×0.5⁰, 2015)
GDP Per Capital (GDPp),
Population (POP)
(National Unit Scale,
1980–2009)
Binary
Linear
Regression
Model
Mortality, Affected Population and GDP Loss Risk
for Multiple Climatic Hazards (0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
1980–2009)
Climate FactorClimate Factor
Social FactorSocial Factor
AR = f (Mch, GDPp)
MR = g (Mch, GDPp)
GR= h (Mch, POP)
MCh
(0.5⁰×0.5⁰)
Vulnerability Fuction Exposure
CRI,Average Annual Death Toll,
Affected Population and GDP Loss
(National Unit Scale, 2010–2014)
Hazard
Average Annual GDP Loss
1980–2009)
 5
1.32 10 6.10 15.48p chGDP M
gridMR POP e

     
 
5
( 1.28 10 7.20 7.77)p chGDP M
gridAR POP e

     
 
5
( 1.02 10 8.30 7.69)p chGDP M
gridGR GDP e

    
 
where 𝑀𝑐ℎ is the average value of Multiple climatic hazards
intensity of the country or region; RM is the expected annual
mortality risk for multiple climatic hazards (people per year);
RA is the expected annual affected population risk for
multiple climatic hazards (people per year); RG is the
expected annual GDP loss risk for multiple climatic hazards
(USD per year); GDPgrid is GDP data at grid scale;
and 𝑃𝑂𝑃𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑is the population data at grid scale.

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Global expected annual mortality rate for multiple natural hazards (2020–2030) 0.5°×0.5°

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Global expected annual mortality risk for multiple natural hazards (2020–2030) 0.5°×0.5°

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Global expected annual affected population rate for multiple natural hazards (2020–2030) 0.5°×0.5°

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Global expected annual affected population risk for multiple natural hazards (2020–2030) 0.5°×0.5°

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
𝑀ℎ Expected Annual Mortality Rate Expected Annual Affected Population Rate
Rank Country Name
Index†
Value
Rank Country Name
Rate (per 105
people per
year)
Rank Country Name
Rate (per 105
people per
year)
1 Bangladesh 0.395 1 Philippines 3.57 1 Bangladesh 5329
2 Vietnam 0.340 2 Bangladesh 2.20 2 Philippines 5043
3 Laos 0.322 3 Vietnam 1.45 3 Vietnam 3237
4 Belize 0.322 4 Laos 1.16 4 Madagascar 2703
5 Guatemala 0.315 5 Japan 1.16 5 Laos 2702
6 Burma 0.303 6 Burma 1.08 6 Bhutan 2679
7 Philippines 0.301 7 South Korea 1.01 7 Guatemala 2094
8 South Korea 0.294 8 Belize 1.00 8 Burma 2058
9 Madagascar 0.286 9 Bhutan 0.98 9 Nepal 1885
10
Papua New
Guinea
0.278 10 Madagascar 0.93 10 Dominican Republic 1852
Ranking of 𝑀ℎ, expected annual mortality rate, and expected annual affected population rate
for multi-hazards at the national scale in descending order (2020–2030)

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Global Expected Annual Mortality Rate for Multiple Climatic Hazards (0.5°×0.5°)

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Global Expected Annual Affected Population Rate for Multiple Climatic Hazards (0.5°×0.5°)

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Global Expected Annual GDP Loss Rate for Multiple Climatic Hazards (0.5°×0.5° )

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Results
Top fifteen countries with highest expected annual mortality rate, affected population rate and GDP loss rate for
multiple climatic hazards
Expected annual mortality rate Expected annual affected population rate Expected annual GDP loss rate
Rank Country Name
Per million people per
year
Rank Country Name
Per thousand people
per year
Rank Country Name % per year
1 Philippines 6.87 1 Philippines 31.55 1 Philippines 7.53%
2 Bangladesh 4.16 2 Bangladesh 16.14 2 Bangladesh 3.05%
3 Vietnam 3.56 3 Vietnam 13.83 3 Vietnam 2.68%
4 Laos 2.61 4 Laos 9.49 4 Bhutan 1.66%
5
South Korea 2.47
5
South Korea 8.98
5
New Caledonia 1.66%
6
Madagascar 2.40
6
New Caledonia 8.91
6
Lao PDR 1.62%
7 Belize 2.38 7 Belize 8.49 7 Korea, Rep. 1.62%
8
New Caledonia 2.38
8
Madagascar 8.47
8
Japan 1.60%
9 Dominican
Republic
2.08
9
Japan 8.13
9
Madagascar 1.53%
10
Japan 2.08
10 Dominican
Republic
7.19
10
Belize 1.50%
11 Burma 2.02 11 Burma 7.08 11 China 1.33%
12 Papua New
Guinea
1.88
12 Papua New
Guinea
6.40
12
Dominican Republic 1.24%
13 Guatemala 1.76 13 Bhutan 6.09 13 Myanmar 1.16%
14
Bhutan 1.75
14
Guatemala 5.86
14
Papua New Guinea 1.12%
15
North Korea 1.60
15
China 5.44
15
Guatemala 0.94%

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Validation
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
AverageAnnualDeathTolls
（EM-DAT,2010-2014）
Expected Annual Mortality Risk
(Mch model)
Person CC=0.898;
Sig=0.01; N=123
Comparison of the expected annual mortality risk (𝑀𝑐ℎ
model) and the historical disaster data in EM-DAT
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 2 4 6 8 10
AverageAnnualAffectedPopulation
（EM-DAT,2010-2014）
Millionpeolpe
Expected Annual Affected Population Risk
(Mch model)
Million peolpe
Person CC=0.940;
Sig=0.01; N=123
Comparison of the expected annual affected
population risk (Mch model) and the historical disaster
data in EM-DAT

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
Validation
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
TherankofCRIeconomiclossscore1994-2013
The rank of the GDP loss score in Mch model
Spearman CC= 0.737;
Sig=0.01;N=135
Comparison of the rank of CRI (Germanwatch program) economic loss score and the rank of the
GDP loss score in Mch model

Temperature tendency
Spatial distribution of temperature tendency values (1961–2010)
Temperature data are from Monthly Mean Surface Dataset (2.5° resolution, from 01/1948 to present) of NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis provided by U.S. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Temperature fluctuation
Spatial distribution of temperature fluctuation values (1961–2010)

Precipitation tendency
Spatial distribution of precipitation tendency values (1961–2010)
Monthly Dataset (0.5° resolution, from 01/1901 to present) of GPCC provided by U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, while precipitation
data of Antarctic continent is filled by NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis Dataset because of missing data.

Precipitation fluctuation
Spatial distribution of precipitation fluctuation values (1961–2010)

World Regionalization of Climate
Change

Regionalization unit
Comparable geographic of world
Use state or province level administrative regionalization of countries as the basic unit

Global Land Elevation
Global Land Elevation
Global 30 Arc-Second Elevation dataset (1 kilometer resolution) provided by the United States Geological Survey (https://lta.cr.usgs.gov/GTOPO30).

World Regionalization of Climate Change (1961-2010)
World Regionalization of Climate
Change

Confidence Test
Classified statistic of proportion of area under different confidences among indicators (%)

Classification of Modes
Classification of Modes of Climate Change of the world (1961-2010)
Tendency and fluctuation of temperature and precipitation of the world are identified under the given confidence of 90% (significance level 0.1)
Modes of Temperature Change
（area proportion (%)）
Modes of Precipitation Change
（area proportion (%)）
SHI Peijun etal., Article title: World Regionalization of Climate Change (1961–2010) ,
International Journal of Disaster Risk Science [J]. 2016,DOI: 10.1007/s13753-016-0094-5

Trade-off risk
(Trend)
Uncertainty risk
(Fluctuation)
Extreme risk
(extreme events)
he composition of the climate change risk
(Shi, 2014)

Family
Community
Institu
tes
Governments
Local
Regiona
lGloba
l
Place
Integration
Coordination
Cooperation
Construction
Communication
mitigation
adaptatio
n
Government: Development and Disaster Reduction (Governance)
Community: Safety Construction (Legislation)
Institute: Risk Transformation (Mechanism)
Family: Risk Awareness (Education)
Forming integrated CCR governance
paradigm

Toward the measurement of synergistic adaptation by
using the concept of Consilience （凝聚力）
Government Institute Interprise Individual
Nation
City
Province
County
Planning
Finance
Professional
Civil
State-owned
Community
Private
Joint Venture Children
Youth
Middle-Ager
Age
Extraction
Consilience
Integreted System
Communication
Construction
Cooperation
Coordination
Society
Economy
Culture
Politics

Consilience Model for Integrated DS
Governance
Consilience
resilience
vulnerabilityadaptation

社会—生态系统风险防范的“凝聚力模型
Consilience model for integrated social-ecosystem risk
governance
h
b
构件间无摩擦情况：极限荷载 ∝ W=bX2h3/6
构件间协同工作情况：极限荷载 ∝ W=bX(2h)3/6
如果n个构件协同工作，极限荷载增加n2倍。
协同放大原理示意图
Collaborative amplification
假定，单根无缺陷承载力为100，有缺陷为50，那么，
系统A的极限承载力为50X4=200；
系统B的极限承载力至少100X3=300。
①
②
③
④
系统A 系统B
协同分散原理示意图
Collaborative
diversification
协同约束原理示意图
Collaborative
constraint
协同宽容原理示意图
Collaborative tolerance
来源：http://www.hnhfgl.com/ps124.htm
工程中，为了使钢制绳索
满足大变形、抗冲击和易成卷
捆扎等需求，多股钢丝以一定
的规则绞合成钢绞线，钢绞线
的力学原理体现了本文所述
的“协同宽容”内涵。
具体表现在：（一）所有
钢丝遵循统一原则进行绞合，
体现对规则的宽容；（二）在
对规则宽容的前提下，整体钢
绞线形成对大变形和冲击荷
载更高的宽容性；（三）钢绞
线拥有单根钢丝所不具备的
良好的工作性能，极大提升其
包装、运输、应用方面的宽容
性。

24-05-2016
3rd
ASTAAG Meeting
共识最高
成本最低
福利最大
风险最小
协同宽容
协同约束
协同放大
协同分散
社会认知
普及化
成本分摊
合理化
组合优化
智能化
费用效益
最大化
综
合
风
险
防
范
的
凝
聚
力
社
会
-
生
态
系
统
风险转移
基本设防
应急管理救灾救济
备灾
重建
应急响应恢复
综
合
风
险
防
范
协
同
运
作
制
度
设
计
经济结构
生态结构
产业结构土地结构
生态系统
服务功能
区域发展
调节功能
环境友好
保护功能
资源节约
保障功能
目标原理实现手段适应措施制度调整产出
社会-生态系统综合风险防范的凝聚力模式
Consilience mode of integrated risk governance for social – ecological systems

23-08-2016
1st
ASTCDRR
Discussion
1
n
h i i
i
M H w

 
Expected Annual Multi-hazard Intensity Index(Mh)
The weight of measurement methods led to different risk assessment. Hence, how to
calculate the adequately Wi would be the key issue of natural hazards risk assessment. To
achieve that, greater amounts of data and further research are needed.
Peijun SHI, Xu Yang,Wei Xu, Jing’ai Wang. Mapping Global Mortality and Affected Population Risks for Multiple Natural Hazards [J].
International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2016, 7(1): 54-62.
SHI Peijun, YANG Xu, FANG Jiayi, WANG Jing’ai, XU Wei, HAN Guoyi,Mapping and ranking global mortality, affected population and GDP loss
risks for multiple climatic hazards [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2016, 26(7): 878-888.

Discussion
Disaster Risk Science is a multidisciplinary science
that studys formation mechanism, dynamic change,
assessment model, emergency response, and
governance paradigm of disaster system. It may be
classified into disaster science, emergency
technology and risk management based on view of
theory, methodology and technology.

Peijun SHI, Xu Yang,Wei Xu, Jing’ai Wang. Mapping Global Mortality and Affected Population Risks for Multiple
Natural Hazards [J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2016, 7(1): 54-62.
SHI Peijun, YANG Xu, FANG Jiayi, WANG Jing’ai, XU Wei, HAN Guoyi,Mapping and ranking global mortality, affected
population and GDP loss risks for multiple climatic hazards [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2016, 26(7): 878-
888.
SHI Peijun etal., Article title: World Regionalization of Climate Change (1961–2010) , International Journal of Disaster
Risk Science [J]. 2016,DOI: 10.1007/s13753-016-0094-5
Peijun Shi, Ning Li, Qian Ye, Wenjie Dong, Guoyi Han, and Weihua Fang. Research on Integrated Disaster Risk
Governance in the Context of Global Environmental Change[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science,
2010,1(1): 17-23.
Peijun Shi. On the role of government in integrated disaster risk governance— Based on practices in China.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Science[J], 3(3)(2012):139-146
Pjun Shi, Qian Ye, Guoyi Han et al. Living with global climate diversity— suggestions on international governance for
coping with climate change risk[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 3(4)(2012):177-183.
Peijun Shi, Jiabing Shuai, Wenfang Chen, Lili Lu. Study on Large-Scale Disaster Risk Assessment and Risk Transfer
Models[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2010,1(2): 1-8.
References

Global Multiple Natural Hazards Risk Landscape and Climate Change Regionalization in the World, Peijun SHI

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Global Multiple Natural Hazards Risk Landscape and Climate Change Regionalization in the World, Peijun SHI

Ähnlich wie Global Multiple Natural Hazards Risk Landscape and Climate Change Regionalization in the World, Peijun SHI (20)

Mehr von Global Risk Forum GRFDavos

Mehr von Global Risk Forum GRFDavos (20)

Global Multiple Natural Hazards Risk Landscape and Climate Change Regionalization in the World, Peijun SHI

Hinweis der Redaktion