Rapid response tools for operational management of seismic crisis on a border area: case-study of the Pyrenees
Résumé
The Pyrenees are a 400-km-long mountain range located in southwest Europe along the French–Spanish border, and constitute one of the most earthquake-prone regions of mainland France and Spain.
At the “observational” level, the Pyrenean region is monitored by several seismological networks on both sides of the French -Spanish border, counting in total around 120 seismic stations (of different types). Thanks to a progressive decrease of constraints associated to real-time seismology (generalization of low-cost robust data-transfer technologies, continuous increasing of data storage capacities, etc.), a growing proportion of these stations are progressively called to evolve toward real-time data transmission. Moreover, a recent project called “SISPyr” (www.sispyr.eu), involving the main owners of Pyrenean seismic stations, has notably allowed the establishment of a real-time pooling process of Pyrenean seismological data resulting in an improvement of the coverage of the massif.
At the “operational” level also, each country has its own civil protection organization as well as specific earthquake crisis plans. However, big earthquakes in the Pyrenees can impact the two (or the three) borders. Moreover, systemic cross-border interactions are multiples (transport network, energy lifelines, hospitals access, cross-border populations, etc.).
Rapid response overview
Experience of past earthquakes as well as "earthquake" civil-protection’s exercises underlines the need for crisis managers to have at their disposal rapid-response tools able to assess consequences caused by earthquakes, even for moderate events. SisPyr partnership has developed tools to meet these operational needs, in order to automatically and quickly (15 min) produce maps of seismic ground-motions. These “Shakemaps” integrate both seismological real-time data coming from observatories and internet citizen data (web-questionnaires). Exploratory tracks are also being considered in order to enrich the information feedback from the field by using techniques of "crowd-sourcing", thanks to the use of distributed "citizen" sensors or of social-networks.
To go further in taking account operational requirements related to the management of seismic crisis, work is being done in order to provide the authorities with a quick assessment of the human tolls (potential victims or damages, needs for shelters) that may control their actions, structured within reports dedicated to civil-protection teams.
Need for geospatial ICT support
Multi-actors context
Pyrenean region disposes of several seismological networks on both sides of the Franco-Spanish border: CEA-LDG, OMP and BRGM for the French part (with stations belonging to the Seismic Monitoring National Network – RéNaSS, and to the French Permanent Accelerometric network – RAP), and the Spanish and the Catalan seismological surveys (respectively IGN and ICGC) for the Spanish part. It is also to notice the presence of a broad-band station in Andorra managed by Andorran Studies Institute (IEA). In case of earthquake, several of these institutes produce their own assessment of magnitude/location, while alert itself is assigned in France to CEA-LDG, and in Spain to IGN. At the same time, in case of great earthquakes, international organizations like JRC and CSEM (Europe), and even USGS (US), produces information bulletins, which are not really followed by national/regional crisis management community. Moreover in France Internet citizen data (macroseismic intensities) are collected by another institution, BCSF. In Spain these citizen data are collected both by ICGC and IGN.
The Sispyr’s Shakemap system is triggered by alerts coming from IGN (disregarding ones coming from CEA-LDG), and uses IGN, ICGC, OMP and BRGM seismic data, as well as IGN, ICGC and BCSF citizen data.
Input data interoperability
Due to the multiplicity of data-producers, question of interoperability of input data is critical. Regarding real-time collection of instrumental data, different protocols are used (NAQS, Seedlink and Scream!), corresponding to well-known or accepted “standards” in the scientific community. In any case, the goal was to converge to shakemaps needed input files format and standards.
Output data
Shakemaps produces intensity maps, as image format or kmz files. This restitution format is not really adapted to crisis managers which work with own GIS platforms. Otherwise, intensity maps are still quite difficult to be interpreted in local-regional crisis management centers, for people which are not familiar with seismic risk. Thus, the incoming step is to produce automatically a “human tolls bulletins” estimating the level of the earthquake according to estimated potential victims or no-shelters populations. These bulletins follow a “light color code”. Red color signification for USGS, European Commission, Spanish and French Civil protection would be the same? Which coherence with other natural risks? (cf. discussions about natural risks zones maps in INSPIRE).
Limits
-Is Web diffusion of bulletins and maps well adapted for crisis management community?
-How communicate in understandable and interoperable way information about outputs’ uncertainties? This issue also questions the notion of responsibility of broadcasters of these data with respect to crisis managers?
-In case of significant earthquake, international organizations produce information bulletins, which are not really followed by national/regional crisis management community.
-Input data interoperability: de facto standards are used, but are they international or own?
-Output data: how to allow reuse of outputs?