Ref. Ares(2020)86590 - 08/01/2020 www.improdiret.eu Report on methodology Project acronym: ImProDiReT Improving disaster risk reduction in Project full title: Transcarpathian region, Ukraine Grant agreement no.: 783232 Responsible: Rafał Wróbel Joanna Kozioł, Karolina Tyrańska-Wizner, Contributors: Stella Shekhunova Document Reference: D1.9 Dissemination Level: PU Version: Draft Date: 24/12/19 Disclaimer: The content of this document represents the views of the author only and is his/her sole responsibility. The European Commission does not accept any responsibility for use that may be made of the information it contains. This project is funded by the European Union Civil Protection, under grant agreement No 783232 D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 2 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 3 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology History Version Date Modification reason Modified by 0.1 Initial draft Rafał Wróbel Final reviewed deliverable Izabella Grabowska-Lepczak 0.9 Quality check Edmunds Akitis 1.0 Final reviewed deliverable © Copyright 2019 4 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 5 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology Table of contents History 2 Table of contents 3 List of tables 4 List of charts 5 List of abbreviations 6 Executive summary 7 Introduction 8 1 Risk identification 10 2 Risk analysis 11 3 Risk evaluation 15 4 Hierarchisation of risk and risk treatment 17 5 Tool used to source, collect process and visualize risk data 19 6 Conclusions 23 7 References 24 APPENDIX I 25 © Copyright 2019 6 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 7 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology List of tables Table 1: A qualitative and semi-quantitative description of probabilities 12 Table 2: A qualitative the classification of consequences. 13 Table 3: Classes of consequences with the points 13 Table 4: The weight value of the every consequences category 14 Table 5: Classes of consequences along with the quantitative range 14 Table 6: Risk matrix tool 15 Table 7: Risk acceptance criteria and risk level criteria 16 Table 8: Risk levels for identified 8 hazards for every districts of the Transcarpathian region 18 © Copyright 2019 8 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 9 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology List of charts Chart 1. Transcarpathia regions in the QGIS map background 20 Chart 2. Possibilities of QGIS software presenting different values of colors for each of regions of Transcarpathia 21 Chart 3. Flood risk map for each of the Transcarpathian regions. 21 © Copyright 2019 10 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 11 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology List of abbreviations C – Consequences D – Deliverable GIS – Geographic Information System IGS NASU – Institute of Geological Sciences National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine ImProDiReT – Improving disaster risk reduction in Transcarpathian region, Ukraine MSFS – The Main School of Fire Service (Poland) P – Probability R – Risk SIP – Spatial Information System QGIS – Quantum Geographic Information System WP 1 – Work package 1 © Copyright 2019 12 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 13 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology Executive summary Project ImProDiReT (Improving disaster risk reduction in Transcarpathian region, Ukraine) has clearly defined goals and methodology. They are defined in detail in the project proposal. The project falls under the policy area of prevention, and the priorities are focused on implementing multi-hazard assessments of risks, risk management capabilities assessments, risk management planning and risk awareness campaigns, with a particular focus on cross- border and regional dimensions (proposal, part B, page 3). The implementation of the project will result in in a better informed population and government of the region. This will increase the resilience of the region and will lay the fundament for action to reduce the existing risks, leading to a lower risk of disasters and less impact of occurring disasters. Among others, the specific objectives (expected outcomes) of the project are: 1. To make Hazard and Risk map of the region of all disaster types (Multi hazard/ risk assessment anticipating on climate change). 2. To conduct a Public awareness campaign based on the risk map of the region. 3. To develop a transparent risk evaluation and decision-making method* which includes all stakeholders, especially communities and inhabitants. The method described also addresses the necessary capacities to keep it sustainable. It should be noted that deliverable D.1.9. is very closely related to other previously prepared deliverables prepared under WP 1. Preparation of deliverable D.1.9 is intended to be developed for the needs of the project steering committee. It represents the approach of the project team to determine how they conduct their research in the Hazard and risk mapping (Work package 1) part of the project. Presentation of this methodology allows, first of all, to define the significance of individual deliverables (D.1.1.-D1.8.) provided under Work package 1 (WP 1) in the general approach to hazard and risk mapping. © Copyright 2019 14 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology © Copyright 2019 15 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology Introduction WP 1 Hazard and risk mapping has been divided into four main parts: 1.1. Identifying possible sources for hazard and risk data. 1.2. Hazard identification. 1.3. Consequences for the population in relation to hazard types. 1.4. Development of a risk mapping methodology. Each of the indicated parts has been divided into a number of activities that are to ultimately result in the development of specific deliverables. The effect of research carried out under individual parts are/will be1: 1. In case Identifying possible sources for hazard and risk data and Hazard identification – deliverables: ● D.1.1. List of Hazards in Solotvyno, ● D.1.2. List of hazards in Transcarpathia, ● D.1.3. Data collection on hazards in Solotvyno, ● D.1.4. Data collection on hazards in Transcarpathia. 2. In case Consequences for the population in relation to hazard types – deliverables: ● D.1.5. Data collection on consequences Solotvyno, ● D.1.6. Data collection on consequences Transcarpathia, 3. In case Development of a risk mapping methodology – deliverables: ● D.1.7. Risk map of Solotvyno, ● D.1.8. Risk map of Transcarpathia, ● D.1.9. Report on methodology, ● D.1.10. Scientific article on risk mapping in Transcarpathia. Deliverable D.1.9. Report on methodology covers issues related to the concept of the risk assessment process corresponding to the adaptation of ISO 31000: 2009. In the view of the interpretation of the aforementioned ISO 31000: 2009, deliverable D.1.9. in the area of risk assessment approach, adopts a three-step procedure of activities related to risk identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation. From the perspective of the project assumptions described in the proposal in WP 1, the methodology is based on the implementation of ten activities, i.e. 1 Deliverable D.1.10. Scientific article on risk mapping in Transcarpathia is still being developed - the deadline for its completion - by 28/02/2020. © Copyright 2019 16 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology 1. Identification of necessary data (partly done in activity 1.1, extra meeting for finding gaps). 2. Choice of mapping form in relation to hazard and consequences (GIS vs description). 3. Assembling GIS data. 4. Identification of GIS data gaps. 5. Assembling other data. 6. Digitalisation of data. 7. Unification of GIS data. 8. Selection of GIS tools. 9. Data risk analysis (hazard vs losses). 10. Risk analysis visualization. The goal of Deliverable D.1.9 is to specify the method (methodology) of risk assessment in the Transcarpathian region. In the course of research carried out under WP 1, ten activities described in the project proposal were described in the form allowing for better presentation of the work done and more precise visualization of results. The Deliverable D.1.9 structure is based on mapping the elements of the defined risk assessment method in the Transcarpathian region. From a practical point of view, it describes the individual stages of the risk assessment process, which then allows it to be prioritized and the appropriate risk treatment strategy applied. The deliverable structure D.1.9 in the main part of the research refers to such elements as: 1. Risk identification. 2. Risk analysis. 3. Risk evaluation. 4. Gradation of risk and risk treatment Ways and tools used to source, collect process and visualize risk data. © Copyright 2019 17 | Page D1.9 Report on methodology 1 Risk identification Risk is defined in many ways. This is confirmed by numerous studies made by literature researchers. The research team (MSFS) for the ImProDiReT project also carried out extensive literature analysis. The results in the form of a Literature review were presented during a meeting of the consortium implementing the project in June 2018 in Kyiv. Risk is closely correlated with the hazard, and more precisely risk is a measure of the hazard. Obtaining the answer to the question of how much a given phenomenon, event or situation hazards defined protected values (e.g. life, health, property, environment) is possible due to assessing the value of risk. The risk can be estimated qualitatively (more general, descriptive) or quantitative (more precise, based on indexes / values). Identification of risk in the view of design is nothing but identification of hazards in the adopted area. With the above in mind, the first major step in the work of the research team (MSFS) was to identify the hazards: ● in a narrow context - for the city of Solotvyno, ● in a wide context - for the Transcarpathian region. Hazards can be identified in many ways, e.g. by: ● heuristic methods (brainstorming), ● interviews with people living in the study area, ● expert judgment, ● analysis of statistical data on past hazards in a specific area.