Towards multi-hazard and multi-risk indicators – a review and recommendations for development and implementation

Tools

White, Christopher J. and Adnan, Mohammed Sarfaraz Gani and Arosio, Marcello and Buller, Stephanie and Cha, YoungHwa and Ciurean, Roxana and Crummy, Julia M. and Duncan, Melanie and Gill, Joel and Kennedy, Claire and Nobile, Elisa and Smale, Lara and Ward, Philip J. (2025) Towards multi-hazard and multi-risk indicators – a review and recommendations for development and implementation. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 25 (11). 4263–4281. ISSN 1684-9981 (https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-4263-2025)

[thumbnail of White-etal-NHESS-2025-Towards-multi-hazard-and-multi-risk-indicators]
Preview
 Text. Filename: White-etal-NHESS-2025-Towards-multi-hazard-and-multi-risk-indicators.pdf
Final Published Version
License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 logo
Download (3MB)| Preview

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.

ORCID iDs

White, Christopher J. ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1791-4784, Adnan, Mohammed Sarfaraz Gani, Arosio, Marcello, Buller, Stephanie, Cha, YoungHwa ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9677-3889, Ciurean, Roxana, Crummy, Julia M., Duncan, Melanie, Gill, Joel, Kennedy, Claire ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5485-3808, Nobile, Elisa, Smale, Lara and Ward, Philip J.;
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)