Symposium 3

Civil protection, education, community members, news media,citizen science, hazards and risk specialists.

Click on a Symposium title for details

S3.1Health hazards and environmental impacts associated with volcanic eruptions: emissions, exposure and response

S3.2Outreach Exchange

S3.3 Communicating across the science, policy, and user domains: considering relevance, legitimacy, and credibility of communication tools

S3.4 State of the Volcanic Hazard Map: Crisis and scenario mapping

S3.5 Evaluation and quantification of errors and uncertainty in models and data to support volcanic hazard and risk assessment

S3.7 How the arts and humanities can improve warnings of eruptions: innovation in engaging communities at risk

S3.8Mt. Baekdu volcano: Risk Perception and Preparedness (Volcanic risk: evaluation and mitigation)

S3.9Probabilistic volcanic hazard assessment: from numerical modeling to benefits for society

S3.10 Volcanic risk analysis as a tool for crisis management

S3.11 The path from volcanic hazard to risk analysis

S3.12 International Risk Communication to mitigate Transboundary effect caused by Volcanic Eruption

S3.13Volcanic ashfall, gas and acid rain impacts: current and future research and resources in support of preparedness, assessment and mitigation

S3.14Emergency planning tools in inhabited volcanic risk areas

S3.15Creating “volcano-ready” communities: communicating for resilience and response

S3.17 Strategies and tools for communicating geohazards and georisks, raising public awareness and enhancing preparedness to natural disasters

S3.18 Application of geological mapping in volcanic areas for hazard assessment, geothermal potential evaluation and ore geology

S3.19Innovative and cutting-edge techniques for geological exploration, data collection and teaching in onshore and offshore volcanic areas

S3.1 > Health hazards and environmental impacts associated with volcanic eruptions:emissions, exposure and response

Conveners

Volcanic eruptions pose a considerable threat to the wellbeing and livelihoods of communities living near active volcanoes, where a range of potential human health and environmental impacts may arise following an eruption. In addition, exposure to volcanic pollution may adversely impact downwind environments and populations, notably in the event of active and passive degassing, ashfall, and resuspension of deposited material, since ash and gases can be transported over great distances. Human physical health can be affected in various ways, including fatalities and injuries from pyroclastic flows/surges, lava flows and ballistic projectiles, whereas exposure to fine-grained ash and gases can exacerbate or induce respiratory diseases and symptoms, and eye and skin irritation. Other, more indirect, effects include contamination of water supplies and crops, and psychological distress related to the eruption crisis. A recent period of unrest (2011-2012) at Santorini volcano (Nea Kameni), Greece, raises concerns about the possibility of a future gas and/or ash emission crisis. Consideration of such hazards, and those from existing passive degassing on other islands like Nisyros, are of importance because of their potential impact on population health and the overall economy of Greece. Co-ordinated, multi-disciplinary efforts are needed to assess and successfully prepare for health populations and emergency managers during volcanic crises. In this session, we welcome submission of abstracts from a broad range of disciplines relating to human and environmental health in volcanic areas, including: i) community exposure and protection, ii) health hazard and impact assessment(mineralogical, toxicological, clinical and epidemiological studies), iii) air and water quality monitoring and forecasting, iv) risk assessment and hazard management, including modelling studies predicting impacts from future eruptions, v) community preparedness and response to volcanic eruptions. This session is sponsored by the International Volcanic Health Hazard Network (IVHHN). 

Core connection with societal risk mitigation: Volcanic eruptions pose a considerable threat to the wellbeing and livelihoods of communities living near active volcanoes. Coordinated, multi-disciplinary efforts are needed to assess and successfully prepare for health hazards associated with volcanic phenomena, and to provide timely advice to anxious populations and emergency managers during volcanic crises.

S3.2 > Outreach Exchange

Conveners

The Cities and Volcanoes Commission Executive Board

"No Abstract Required".  The COV Outreach Exchange is an informal 90-minute session for the sharing of volcano-related educational projects and products. Participants are asked to prepare a thirty second to four-minute presentation about the projector product’s purpose, scope, and broader availability. Conveners encourage participants to bring product descriptions, samples, copies for distribution,materials for demonstration, and files for viewing on a computer. Observers are warmly welcomed. A presenter sign-up list will be available at the start of COV11.

S3.3 > Communicating across the science, policy, and user domains: considering relevance, legitimacy, and credibility of communication tools

Conveners

Volcano observatories have adapted to provide numerous communication strategies and policies to disseminate information about volcanic behaviour and potential hazards to stakeholders. These tools differ between countries but typically include: call-down lists, warning systems, bulletins, social media, stakeholder meetings and plans, and personal communication between the decision-makers. These can be described as either information provision or knowledge sharing, depending on whether they allow for one-way (uni-valent)or two-way (multi-valent) communication. These tools can be general, event, or time driven and are usually implemented under policies devised at either national or local levels. It is widely accepted that the effective use, value, and deployment of information across science-policy interfaces of this kind depend on three criteria: i) the scientific credibility of the information or knowledge, ii) its relevance to the needs of stakeholders, and iii) the legitimacy of the information or knowledge,the processes that produced it, and the outcomes of decisions based upon it. In this interactive participatory session, we invite contributions to explore the capacity of communication tools to enhance the relevance, legitimacy, and credibility of knowledge sharing and decision-making across the science, policy,and user domains using translation and two-way communication. The conveners will host a ‘campfire’ discussion that enables participants to create content themselves through discussions and mini presentations (of varying formats), and a Q&A. This provides the opportunity for participants to learn from their peers, share experiences, and build new connections that may result in guidance on the varying tools available to assist stakeholders and policy globally.

Core connection with societal risk mitigation: This session explores the interaction of volcanic science and societal risk mitigation by focusing on how different stakeholders communicate across different policies and user groups. This session focuses not just on ‘multi-valent’ two-way session communication in terms of volcanic practices, but also by the nature of the session set up. Using a ‘Campfire’ style, this session will be facilitated by the conveners to enable the participants to create content themselves through discussions and mini presentations (using PowerPoint, or posters, or other tools), and a Q&A. It is hoped this session will attract a wide diversity of stakeholder attendees to really focus on multiple perspectives of risk mitigation.

S3.4 > State of the Volcanic Hazard Map: Crisis and scenario mapping

Conveners

On behalf of the Hazard Mapping Working Group part of the IAVCEI Commission on Hazard and Risk

Volcanic hazard maps are visual, spatial depictions of the areas that could be potentially impacted by volcanic phenomena. They can represent a common reference point for discussion and mitigation of volcanic risk when developed, communicated, and used appropriately, as they put all parties quite literally “on the same page” of hazard information. Although most volcanic hazard maps show similar types of content,such as hazard footprints, they vary greatly in input data, communication style,appearance, visual design and their purpose. Hazard maps used to communicate during volcanic activity sometimes vary from those used to produce during quiescence. These maps, known as crisis or short term maps, are crucial visual communication tools used within a wide variety of hazards (e.g. wildfires, earthquakes, flooding) and have been developed for recent volcanic events (e.g. Kilauea, Fuego). The hazard areas used on these maps have been informed by real time field data or based on historical scenarios. They need to be compiled, designed and updated rapidly in order to meet the demands and expectations of many different users. Additional information, such as evacuation centres, are also often used alongside hazard data, meaning there are unique design challenges. This session welcomes discussion around the development, use and effectiveness of all volcanic hazard maps. However, we encourage submissions that address techniques and frameworks used to develop rapid maps during a volcanic crisis and those willing to share their experiences regarding how hazard maps are interpreted and used by diverse audiences during volcanic activity.

S3.5 > Evaluation and quantification of errors and uncertainty in models and data to support volcanic hazard and risk assessment

Conveners

Errors and uncertainties are inherent components in any attempt to observe,measure and predict (‘model’) our volcanic environments and their impacts on society. Epistemic uncertainty arises from a lack of perfect knowledge of the physical system, the possibility of alternative models, and limitations in our ability to pragmatically describe the system. Aleatoric uncertainty is associated with the difficulty of measurements of the natural phenomenon, the scarcity of data,the limited repeatability of observations, and irreducible randomness of volcano behavior. While we can work to reduce both epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty,they can never be eliminated; thus, it is important to quantify them when conducting any volcanic hazard assessment. The presence of errors or uncertainties do not necessarily make any model or data invalid; rather, effective assessments of accuracy and uncertainty can (1) identify limitations, (2) support model calibration,validation and benchmarking, and (3) give confidence in measurements and predictions. Furthermore, well constrained measurements of differences between reality and modelled/measured systems can improve our understanding of volcanic processes, support critical assessment of risk and ensure decisions are made using the best available data and models.This session aims to bring together scientists and practitioners to improve our understanding of volcanoes, their hazards and risk through the measurement,analysis and quantification of errors or uncertainty in both models and data. We welcome submissions from all aspects of volcanic environments, hazards and risk that quantify, use, and account for uncertainty in numerical, statistical and experimental models, as well as field, laboratory and remote sensing data. This session is supported by the IAVCEI Commissions on Statistics in Volcanology and Volcanic Hazards and Risks.

Core connection between the proposed session and societal risk mitigation: Errors and uncertainties are present in all models and data of volcanic processes as well a sin assessments of hazards, risks and benefits to society. Despite their pervasiveness, their evaluation and quantification is sometimes limited in volcanic hazard and risk assessment. This session seeks to open discussions on error and uncertainty, highlighting the benefits that quantification of data/model errors and uncertainties can bring and demonstrate ways it can enhance decision making for risk mitigation. Examples of submissions we expect to this session include model validation and benchmarking studies, model averaging approaches to improve hazard estimates and techniques to measure error/uncertainty in field and laboratory data. This session will be most relevant to decision makers such as volcano observatories, government officials and civil protection authorities who need to make effective decisions despite the presence of errors and uncertainty.

S3.7 > How the arts and humanities can improve warnings of eruptions: innovation in engaging communities at risk

Conveners

How communities see their local volcano is often conditioned by a complex mixture of culture and natural heritage. Scientific ideas can become altered by selective filtering and can hinder confident responses to warnings of eruptions,especially at volcanoes reawakening after several generations in repose. Faded memories of eruptions can engender uncertainty in warnings and mistrust of official advice. Trust is improved by community engagement, which is enhanced by building on a community’s cultural and artistic frames of reference rather than relying on the science-based instructions conventionally issued by civil protection agencies. Instead of presuming that communities understand the science behind warnings, official advice may be received more readily when expressed as part of a community’s existing narrative of volcanic behaviour. This session invites anyone with relevant practical and research experience,including earth scientists, social scientists, science communicators, art-science collaborators, and civil protection officials to discuss how trust in warnings can be improved by engaging communities through artistic expression, education, celebration and conservation. Early-career researchers are especially welcome. Essential questions include: How can we make memories relevant to understanding the future? What new roles can museums, oral histories, and dramatic presentations play in raising understanding of warnings - and reducing risk - in local communities? Can volcanological understanding be improved by reinterpreting volcanic behaviour in terms of cultural history? Addressing these questions will provide an exceptional opportunity to share local experiences, establish a network of institutions and activities, and encourage a new generation of ‘inspirational ideas’ to design best practices for application in wider volcanic contexts.

S3.8 > Mt. Baekdu volcano: Risk Perception and Preparedness (Volcanic risk: evaluation and mitigation)

Conveners

Mt. Baekdu (or Baekdu Mountain), also known as Paektu Mountain (in North Korea),and as Changbai Mountain (in China), is a potentially active volcano on the Chinese-North Korean border. With the summit at the altitude of 2,750 m, it is the highest mountain of the Changbai and Baekdudaegan ranges. Koreans hold a mythical quality for the volcano and its caldera lake, considering it to be their country’s spiritual home. A large crater lake, called Heaven Lake (Cheonji; 天池), is in the midst of caldera atop the mountain, formed by the VEI 7 “Millennium” eruption of AD946, which erupted about 100-150 km³ of tephra. This was one of the largest and the most violent eruptions in the last 5,000 years. Between 2002 and 2005, that tranquility came to a rumbling halt as a swarm of earthquakes shook the mountain’s slopes. Like a restless giant, though, whatever rumbled beneath the volcano rolled over and went back to sleep afterwards. It’s way too soon to judge whether future eruptions are possible, but the partially melted magma suggests that whatever is fueling Mount Baekdu’s outbursts is not quite yet done. And many scientists agrees on that an explosion on the scale of the volcano’s AD 946 outburst could be catastrophic.Preparedness is the key to mitigation of the disastrous effects of a super-eruption.We will discuss the geology, magma genesis, historic eruption records, monitoring the unrest and precursor of recent activities, preparedness and mitigation of the potential disasters in the near future.

Core connection between the proposed session and societal risk mitigation:

• Magma plumbing system, evolution and historic explosive eruption (VEI 7) of the Mt. Baekdu
  
• Monitoring the unrest and precursors of recent activities
  
• Potential impact from eruption including lahars, PDC and ash dispersion
  
• Preparedness and mitigation of the potential disasters in the near future.
  

S3.9 > Probabilistic volcanic hazard assessment: from numerical modeling to benefits for society

Conveners

In the last decades, the study of volcanic hazard in a probabilistic framework has become one of the most rapidly developing topics in volcanology, but also in decision making and education, in particular for risk mitigation issues. A number of tools (either methodological or numerical) have been developed to help scientists apply quantitative methods in different volcanic settings. Of paramount importance is then quantifying uncertainties (both aleatory, which reflects the intrinsic natural variability of eruptive processes, and epistemic uncertainty, due to our limited knowledge on such processes).In this scenario, numerical models can reproduce volcanic processes under different conditions and their impacts over a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, hence assisting a more focused use of sound statistical methods to assess volcanic hazards (e.g. sector collapses, lahars, pyroclastic flows, debris flows, lava flows, ballistic dispersal, gas dispersal). This session aims to collect contributions from numerical modeling to the evaluation of volcanic hazards through probabilistic techniques in order to highlight their applications in long and short-term PVHA. Since civil protection and researches have been focused on the public’s understanding of volcanic hazards, particular attention should be paid to education programs. Therefore, we also encourage contributions that discuss about applications of PVHA for education and civil protection purposes.

S3.10 > Volcanic risk analysis as a tool for crisis management

Conveners

History has shown that successful volcanic risk and crisis management strongly correlates with proactive risk reduction policies and practice being in place before a volcanic crisis begins. Such policies and practice should ideally be co-developed by scientists and stakeholders based on comprehensive understanding and analysis of the volcanic risk that encompass the characterization of elements at risk and the full spectrum of vulnerability types associated with volcanic hazards. Volcanic risk assessments and related products and services are useful for decision makers such as national and local civil protection organization authorities before the event (long term), during the event (short term) and after the event (long-term). The UN Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) recognizes that national and federal authorities have the primary role to reduce disaster risk; however local governments, communities, the private sector and other stakeholders need to be involved in the process. Hence, comprehensive and effective risk assessments and related products and services should be co-designed and co-produced by scientists and stakeholders to answer specific needs and to enhance preparedness for effective response (e.g. SFDRR Priority 4). We welcome contributions presenting innovative strategies and good practice on how volcanic risk assessments and related products and services facilitate real-time decision-making processes, improve emergency planning for future events, development of early warning systems and resilience action planning. Contributions describing the main challenges communicating risk to the public and local authorities are also invited.

S3.11 > The path from volcanic hazard to risk analysis

Conveners

Volcanic risk analysis is very complex given the interaction of multiple hazards,vulnerability dimensions and exposure acting dynamically over space and time with the potential of high impact on society. Additionally, the uncertainties associated both with the hazards and the effects of cascading hazards and impacts require accurate description.This theory is fine, but the reality at many active volcanoes is very different. The data needed to fully analyse risk (or even exposed elements) can be insufficiently or inaccurately catalogued or even totally lacking, and risk is dynamic, constantly shifting during the course of unrest, eruption and post-eruption time period. In addition, no comprehensive methods for vulnerability and risk assessment are widely accepted and, while some models identify individual interactions between volcanic hazard and physical vulnerability, the limited analyses on multiple dimensions of vulnerability obscures our understanding of the real volcanic risk.The UN Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 recognizes that a better understanding of risk in all its dimensions is needed for effective risk reduction (e.g. SFDRR Priority 1). The need for a new generation of approaches to volcanic risk analysis is clear.We welcome contributions presenting strategies for the assessment of exposure,vulnerability and risk; discussing ways of identifying and characterizing elements at risk; combining hazard, exposure and vulnerability; presenting vulnerability and risk assessment in a multi-hazard setting; describing how to benefit from local knowledge through participatory risk assessment; and showing how dynamic vulnerability and risk assessments should be carried out to implement useful mitigation measures.

S3.12 > International Risk Communication to mitigate Transboundary effect caused by Volcanic Eruption

Conveners

This session focuses on international risk communication to mitigate direct/indirect effects caused by massive volcanic eruption. The 2010 Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajokull eruption caused huge international air traffic disturbances, and left large economic and social impact to international community. Disaster management system or volcano monitoring systems are generally established and developed based on each country’s own regulation and purposes, however, the experience demonstrated necessity to develop international risk communication to mitigate transboundary effect caused by eruption. After 2010 eruption several new efforts were started. In Iceland, Catalogue of Icelandic Volcano was newly developed as an open-access web resource in English to share on-time eruption information with international community. In order to improve disaster response for volcanic eruption, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) revised International Volcanic Ash Contingency Plan for North Atlantic (NAT) and European (EUR) Region, and annual Volcanic Ash Exercises (VOLCEX) are conducted. This session discusses how to improve international risk communication system to share information of volcanic eruption from different research disciplines such as disaster management, volcanology, environmental politics.

S3.13 > Volcanic ashfall, gas and acid rain impacts: current and future research and resources in support of preparedness, assessment and mitigation

Conveners

Special accommodations: This session has been developed in collaboration with and is intended to pair with the Ashfall/Gas/Acid Rain Workshop proposed by Carol Stewart et al.

Understanding volcanic impacts and how to reduce or manage their effects forms a cornerstone of volcanic disaster risk reduction. Multi-volcanic hazards occurring simultaneously and/or sequentially can be challenging to assess and manage the likely impacts. Volcanic ash, gas and acid rain are hazards which often occur together and collectively have the largest footprint of all volcanic phenomena: they are most likely to affect the greatest number of people. It maybe difficult to attribute specific impacts to just one of these three phenomena; recent experience highlights the need to consider these collectively.This session aims to explore how science can improve management of volcanic impacts through field and laboratory-based assessment of impacts and mitigation measures, and the translation and application of this knowledge into volcanic risk management approaches. This includes exploring how to assess impacts from long-duration, multiple and cascading hazards across complex systems as well as the longer term effects of disruption. We invite volcano scientists, city and emergency managers, environmental monitoring agencies and health professionals to work together to:

• Share current knowledge and new research concerning impacts and mitigation resources for ash, gas and acid rain
  
• Share case studies of recent eruptions where civil authorities grappled with the combined impact of ash, gas, and acid rain, exploring key lessons and implications for best practice 
  

This session is sponsored by the IAVCEI Cities and Volcanoes Commission, International Volcanic Health Hazard Network, and the Volcanic Ashfall Impacts Working Group, and will pair with the post-conference Ash/Gas/Acid Rain workshop.Core connection with societal risk mitigation: Volcanic ash, gas and acid rain often occur together and collectively have the largest footprint of all volcanic phenomena: they are the most likely to affect the greatest number of people. Effective mitigation of ash, gas and acid rain impacts is a cornerstone of volcanic disaster risk reduction.

S3.14 > Emergency planning tools in inhabited volcanic risk areas

Conveners

S3.15 > Creating “volcano-ready” communities: communicating for resilience and response

Conveners

S3.17 > Strategies and tools for communicating geohazards and georisks, raising public awareness and enhancing preparedness to natural disasters

Conveners

S3.18 > Application of geological mapping in volcanic areas for hazard assessment, geothermal potential evaluation and ore geology

Conveners

S3.19 > Innovative and cutting-edge techniques for geological exploration, data collection and teaching in onshore and offshore volcanic areas

Conveners