I would say that vulnerability is a helpful concept when thought of as
"the propensity of a sensor to be affected by an earthquake". The
discussion in the European Macroseismic Scale guidelines (see
http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/pb1/pg2/ems_new/INDEX.HTM
) is, I believe, helpful.
Clearly an adobe structure is more easily damaged by the same amount
of shaking than a steel one. Therefore we can say that the former is
more vulnerable than the latter. But the same applies to geotechnical
cases. Given two slopes, one may fail more easily (likely due to
hydrological factors); therefore it is more vulnerable. The difficulty
comes in that it is much harder to assess the vulnerability of a slope
than of a structure. This is why it is hard to use natural phenomena
like slope failure for accurate assessment of intensity.
Roger Musson
British Geological Survey
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The term vulnerability seems to be en vogue in many research
areas.I think its application should be restricted to human life and
property. I forwarded your questions to my colleague Peter Jordan,
geographer in the Institute of Eastern European Studies in Vienna -
we are preparing a joint research proposal on hazard, vulnerability
and risk.
kind regards
Roman
Dr. Roman Lahodynsky
Institut fuer Risikoforschung
Tuerkenschanzstrasse 17/8
A-1180 Wien
0043 1 4277 22123
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|