1. Status report from the GEO Geohazards Community of Practice Status report from the GEO Geohazards Community of Practice Gonéri Le Cozannet IGOS Geohazards Presentation given on behalf of Hormoz Modaressi http://www.igosgeohazards.org http://www.igosgeohazards.org

2. Overview Introduction: Benefits of a multi-hazards approach 1. GEO Geohazards Community of Practice 2. The need of improving access to data for disaster mitigation 3. Geohazards data clearinghouse GeoHazData 4. Regional communities of practice Conclusion

3. Introduction: Benefits of a multi-hazards approach

4. Earthquake Seismic monitoring Topography Soil behavior Hydrogeology Volcano Topography Seismic monitoring Deformation Gases Ground Instability Topography Deformation Hydrogeology Boreholes Geological structure InSAR images Seismological stations Geo-referenced data GPS Multi-hazards approach: Geohazards observations

5. Multi-hazard approach: Synergies Geo- and Meteorological Hazards Meteorological data can be used for the mitigation of Geohazards: e.g. Landslides In Thailand, Landslides can be due to seism occurring in a near country during the rainy season. Implementation of a system using both meteorological and geological data to produce Landslide hazard maps and inform people living in the exposed area Meteorological information Geological information Weather model Landslide model Landslide hazard maps Source:

6. GPS makes InSAR accurate. Leveling (cm) Up by InSAR (cm) y=1.211x+2.685 r=0.8675 Leveling (cm) Up InSAR + GPS (cm) y=0.8735x+0.30 r=0.9183 Before (InSAR only) After (InSAR+GPS) After Tobita, et al., 2004 Using Remote sensing together with in-situ data

7. Leveling vs. InSAR+GPS After Tobita, et al., 2004 Bench mark GPS station No leveling Small Scale Subsidence Interpolation of Leveling Bench Mark (Leveling) GPS station Cross section Down Up

8. The need for coordination in Geohazards Geohazards REMAINS a highly diverse community with little interaction between thematic areas This is DESPITE significant overlap in earth observations for different Geohazards Need to promote global and regional multi-disaster approach Need to develop synergies through a "system of systems" approach A large number of observables and a "local/site" scale phenomenon encourages dispersion in the community

9. 2. GEO Geohazards Community of Practice

10. Geohazards Community of practice Roles Coordinate activities that input to tasks Establish a "community consensus" on key issues Provide a forum for mutual technical support Facilitate the link between decision makers and grass roots practitioners Definition of priority study sites for multi-national projects Participation of South East Asia and Southern American communities working on Geohazards

11. IGOS Geohazards > UNESCO, CEOS and ICSU initiated and scoped the IGOS Geohazards Theme in 2001. > An Ad-hoc Working Group was formed, held an international workshop in Frascati (Italy), and delivered a proposal to the IGOS partnership in May 2002. > The resulting IGOS Geohazards Theme Team delivered a Theme Report to the IGOS Partners in May 2003. > Following an international peer review, the Geohazards Theme Report was published in April 2004. > The IGOS Geohazards Bureau was created by the BRGM and the European Space Agency (ESA) in September 2004 to monitor and coordinate theme implementation http://www.igosgeohazards.org

12. IGOS Geohazards activities To support the emergence of a Community of Practice (CoP) on Geohazards: Organization of international workshops Support to regional initiatives (e.g. in South East Asia and Latin America) Communication via website, newsletters and other publications To implement GEO specific tasks, with support of the CoP: Support, and advocate funding for, research projects that contribute to the improved integration of InSAR technology for disaster warning and prediction (GEO task DI-06-03) Conduct an inventory of existing geologic and all-hazard zonation maps and identify gaps and needs for digitization: GeoHazData (GEO task DI-06-07)

13. 3. The need of improving access to data for disaster mitigation

14. Access to data at different phases of the disaster cycle Preparadness Mitigation Prevention Development Recovery Response Disaster Disaster Charter Activation Need to facilitate access to Earth Observation data for Mitigation and Prevention of Geohazards Upon requests Subject to satellite tasking priorities Conflict with the need of regular acquisitions

15. Mitigation vs Response policies Policies focusing on Response finally save lives, but costs continue to increase Preparadness Mitigation Prevention Development Recovery Response Disaster Mitigation policies yield to better land use, reduce vulnerability of exposed elements, and finally save both lives and costs

16. Mitigation Reducing vulnerabilityReducing hazardReducing exposure Mitigation policies can focus on: e.g. landslides Observations provide: - inputs to alert systems - input information to LAND USE PLANING Observations help to identify hazards and level of threat Need to collect all available data and use it for all hazards assessment Observations contribute to the assesment of systemic and physical vulnerabilities

17. Mitigation Aim: to increase the use of Earth Observation data for mitigation of disasters Earth observation data are used for modeling hazards and production of Hazard maps Using hazards maps for land use policies lead to reducing vulnerability of exposed elements -> Need to support use of data such as InSAR for disaster mitigation -> Need to make an Hazard maps catalogue to support efficient land use policies

18. 4. Geohazards data clearinghouse GeoHazData

19. Toward Earth Observation data clearing house GeoHazData GEO 10 years plan Open data access and visualization services Databases interoperability Access to all data Various databases Data collected by Geological surveys, mapping agencies, space agencies, universities… Inventories of data and observing means = Catalogue of Metadata Seismometers GPS networks Other in-situ instruments Satellite images Instruments Databases Application layer

20. Hazard Map Catalogue – GeoHazData system Aim: to share metadata on Hazard Maps Contribution of international partners needed!

21. 5. Regional communities of practice

22. Spatial distribution of hazards Principal earthquake zones and explosive volcanoes Ring of Fire S. E. Asia Caribbean Mount St. Helens 1980 Montserrat 1995-present Toba 73ka Pinatubo 1991 Tambora 1815 Aitapei 1998 Alaska 1964 Northridge 1994 Loma Prieta 1989 Chile 1960 Izmit 1999 Lisbon 1755 Tangshen 1976 Tokyo 1923 Kobe 1995 Tropical cyclone zones Bhuj 2001 Taiwan 1999 Columbia 1999 Venezuela 2000 Hurricane Mitch 1999 after UCL Multi-hazards approach: need of global and regional approaches

23. Report on the GEO Geohazards Workshop in South East Asia The Malaysian remote sensing Center (MACRES), the Group on Earth Observation (GEO), NASA, UNESCO and IGOS Geohazards organised this workshop in order to enhance regional and international cooperation on geological disasters in South East Asia. More than 90 participants Participants stressed the need of a Regional Multi-Hazards approach.

24. Workshop recommendations Data timeliness and coverage: need to move toward an open near real time data policy. This requires coordination of Southeast Asia countries and work with the space agencies and donor countries to focus on monitoring high-risk areas for disaster mitigation. System interoperability: need to move toward an open geospatial data portal to overcome interoperability issues and facilitate access to data in a timely manner. Historical and archive data: need to improve historical event databases, archives of observation data and to get easier access to these data sets Regional cooperation: need to establish a community of practice on geohazards at the regional level in South East Asia. Workshop outcome: IGOS Geohazards will advocate space agencies for providing an easier access to spaceborne data in specific high risks areas for disaster mitigation. Workshop outcome: IGOS Geohazards proposes a mechanism to collect metadata on hazard maps Workshop outcome: Need to consider the collection of metadata on these data in SE Asia Toward a community of practice on Geohazards in South East Asia ?...

25. Conclusions Need to focus on an easier data provision disaster mitigation Community of Practice on Geohazards aims at – supporting a multi-disaster approach – increase the exchange of data from various sources – moving toward an open access to data This Community of Practice on Geohazards contributes to GEO as a Geohazard community of practice – InSAR use for mitigation of disasters – Hazard maps catalogue

26. Next IGOS Workshop The next IGOS Workshop will be organized at the European Space Agency, ESRIN, Rome, in June 2006. 1st announcement in October 2006 Participation of experts and decision makers is necessary to make this workshop a success Please visit www.igosgeohazards.org or contact us.www.igosgeohazards.org

27. Thank you for your attention Contact: G.LeCozannet@brgm.fr Tungurahua volcano threatening the city of Banos in Ecuador Arnaud Joëlle and Scholl Pierre-Grégoire