1 / 39

Interreg IIIB Measure 3: Co-operation in the field of natural risks

Interreg IIIB Measure 3: Co-operation in the field of natural risks. METEORISK - An Alpine wide project to enhance collaboration between weather services michael.staudinger@zamg.ac.at. John Kenneth Galbraith: convential wisdom. (The Affluent Society 1958)

wlori
Télécharger la présentation

Interreg IIIB Measure 3: Co-operation in the field of natural risks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interreg IIIB Measure 3: Co-operation in the field of natural risks METEORISK - An Alpine wide project to enhance collaboration between weather services michael.staudinger@zamg.ac.at

  2. John Kenneth Galbraith: convential wisdom • (The Affluent Society 1958) • “We associate truth with convenience, with what most closely accords with self-interest and personal well-being or promises best to avoid awkward effort or unwelcome dislocation of life. We also find highly acceptable what contributes most to self-esteem.” • Economic and social behavior, are complex, and to comprehend their character is mentally tiring. Therefore we adhere, as through to a raft, to those ideas which represent our understanding.”

  3. convential wisdom – weather risks? Basis for a risk analysis: which groups are familiar with these risks: Thunderstorms / floodings / storms / heat waves . . . . • tourists • local population • professionals (mountain guides, civil protection)

  4. convential wisdom – weather risks? • risk analysis • which groups are familiar with these risks: • Thunderstorms / floodings / storms / heat waves • tourists • local population • professionals (mountain guides, civil protection) very extreme events often surprise all groups!

  5. What and how should warnings be? • Warnings often fail to reach the people concerned • Reactions to warnings are not appropriate

  6. What and how should warnings be? • Warnings often fail to reach the people concerned • distribution too low due to technical & organisational handicaps • false alarm rate too high • unclear systems (danger levels) • Reactions to warnings are not appropriate

  7. What and how should warnings be? • Warnings often fail to reach the people concerned • unclear systems (services involved, danger levels) • false alarm rate too high • distribution too low due to technical & organisational handicaps • Reactions to warnings are not appropriate • no emotional impact • no clear advice • no „know how“ about the consequences of extreme situations

  8. What and how should warnings be?

  9. Is everybody neutral? • False alarm rate & probability of detection (Haechler 2003) POD 1 x x x (future) x x x x x x (now) x x x FAR 1

  10. Is everybody neutral? • False alarm rate & probability of detection POD 1 XXX (media, other services) XXX x x x (future) x x x x x x (now) x x x FAR 1

  11. Why and how should Weather services cooperate? • Fractioned producers / users in Europe and the Alps • unproportional high number of user live in boarder aereas and hear warnings from neighbouring services • Coordinated warnings reduce the FAR and increase the POD • Commonly used warning systems draw more public attention • Communities in certain areas (like the Alps) develop strong common sense about natural dangers (conventional wisdom)

  12. Is language a problem? • Yes! e.g. • 12 words in order of arousal strength (Wolgater and Silver 95) • Note • Notice • Prevent • Alert • Alarm • Harmful • Warning • Urgent • Severe • Poison • Fatal • Deadly

  13. What and how should warnings be? • Suggestions: • danger levels as uniform as possible (Alpine, EU wide)

  14. What and how should warnings be? • Suggestions: • danger levels as uniform as possible (Alpine, EU wide) • danger levels damage orientated (earthquake scales)

  15. What and how should warnings be? • Suggestions: • danger levels as uniform as possible (Alpine, EU wide) • danger levels damage orientated (earthquake scales) • distribution responding to customer preferences and possibilities

  16. What and how should warnings be? • Suggestions: • danger levels as uniform as possible (Alpine, EU wide) • danger levels damage orientated (earthquake scales) • distribution responding to customer preferences and possibilities • parallel to the warnings structured PR work and offers for learning

  17. What and how should warnings be? • Suggestions: • danger levels as uniform as possible (Alpine, EU wide) • danger levels damage orientated (earthquake scales) • distribution responding to customer preferences and possibilities • parallel to the warnings structured PR work and offers for learning • clear interfaces with other services in case of indirect meteorological dangers

  18. What could METEORISK contribute? • Homogenisation of forecasting work (warning levels etc.) • Seminars and real time exchange of forecaster Know How • Densification of observation network • Common interpretation of model output • Improved information of civil protection authorities • Improved information of the public

  19. Forecasting extreme weather Society/ / Behaviour Severe weather phenomena in e.g. 24h Weather service Observations Forecasts Civ. prot. / other services authorities / media recommendations

  20. coping with extreme weather Society Damages / Behaviour Severe weather phenomena present Weather service Observations Forecasts Civ. prot. / other services authorities / media recommendations

  21. Standardisation of alarm levels

  22. Common observational network

  23. Visualisation software

  24. Exchange of CERAD - external radar data

  25. forecasters discussion forum

  26. forecasters discussion forum

  27. Comparison of model behaviour (P. Bertolotto)

  28. GIS tool SOLUTION 1 METEORISK SOLUTION 2 SOLUTION 3

  29. GIS tool

  30. Statistical tool Rain: ~2378 Snow: ~1643 Shortrain: ~ 420

  31. Statistical tool

  32. Statistical tool 1 day period

  33. Statistical tool 1 day period 15 day period

  34. Homogenisation of forecasting work

  35. Internal – external communication Questions / problems: • How can individually structured weather services be coordinated? • How can user requirements be integrated? (civil prot. – media – public) • PR work is necessary inside and outside the net • warnings (alert levels) have to be clear and concise enough

  36. Internal – external communication • was it all worth it? The enemy of conventional wisdom is not ideas, but the march of events (K. Galbraith 1958)

  37. Internal – external communication • Answers • METEORISK brought more attention to individual weather services and the meteorological community • links to NMS proved to be succesful • homogenized individual informations for different user groups were feasible

  38. Resume

  39. Resume make best use of all the data!

More Related