1252003 - Decision Making for Earthquake Mitigation

Project Title/ID Number	Decision Making for Earthquake Mitigation—1252003
Start/End Dates	10/1/03—9/30/04
Project Leader	Jacqueline Meszaros (UW/F), Ufuk Ince (UW/F)
Team Members

F=faculty; GS=graduate student; US=undergraduate student; PD=post-doc; I=industrial collaborator; O=other

Click on images to enlarge in a new window

1. Project Goals/Objectives:

Extend analytic decision model so that it is more comprehensive and better fits users’ needs.
Extend case study and survey work to yield more complete understanding of how model may be made useful and other matters that can affect PBEE adoption.
Develop validity and reliability data supporting the model.
Analyze the closed claims associated with the Nisqually earthquake in order to examine (insofar as possible) how insured repair costs, business interruption losses, revenue losses and non-structural losses are associated with some categories of soil conditions, construction type and building ages.

(click image to enlarge)

2. Role of this project in supporting PEER’s mission (vision):

The model and associated work explore barriers to and options for disseminating of the PBEE technology to owners.

The insurance work explores options for improving loss estimation in the PBEE framework.

3. Methodology Employed:

Interview, case study and survey methodologies
Monte Carlo simulation modeling
Exploratory data analysis (primarily regression based)

4. Brief Description of past year’s accomplishments (Year 6) & more detail on expected Year 7 accomplishments:

Year 6:

Initial build of model and application to Van Nuys testbed.
Survey of engineers’ experiences with PBEE clients.
Analysis of Nisqually data to identify predictors of mitigation.

Year 7:

Refine model, particularly improving cost estimates and downtime estimates (collaborating with Miranda).
Extend variables in model to include value at risk and risk of ruin.
Explore substitutes for physical mitigation (e.g., insurance)
Survey cross-functional differences in risk perception/preferences in order to better understand decision patterns.
Mine closed Nisqually claims for useful loss information.
Extend survey work on how PBEE is currently used in practice.

5. Other Similar Work Being Conducted Within and Outside PEER and How This Project Differs:

None.

6. Plans for Year 8 if project is expected to be continued:

7. Describe any actual instances where you are aware your results have been used in industry:

The City of Seattle emergency management office quotes one of our Nisqually findings to support need to better prepare small business employees for future earthquakes/disasters. (I haven’t seen them do this in writing, but they have mentioned it in meetings.)

8. Expected Milestones & Deliverables:

Improved decision model – Oct 2004.
Report on optimal use of decision model – Oct 2004.
Report on Nisqually loss analysis – Oct 2004.