This study presents a comprehensive open probabilistic seismic risk model for India. The proposed model comprises a nationwide residential and non-residential building exposure model, a selection of analytical seismic vulnerability functions tailored for Indian building classes, and the open implementation of an existing probabilistic seismic hazard model for India. The vulnerability of the building exposure is combined with the seismic hazard using the stochastic (Monte Carlo) event-based calculator of the OpenQuake engine to estimate probabilistic seismic risk metrics such as average annual economic losses and the exceedance probability curves at the national, state, district, and subdistrict levels. The risk model and the underlying datasets, along with the risk metrics calculated at different scales, are intended to be used as tools to quantitatively assess the earthquake risk across India and also compare with other countries to develop risk-informed building design guidelines, for more careful land-use planning, to optimize earthquake insurance pricing, and to enhance general earthquake risk awareness and preparedness.
AckerleyN (2016) An Open Model for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment on the Indian Subcontinent. Pavia: Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori.
AECOM (2014) The Blue Book – Property and Construction Handbook, International Edition 2014 (ed. SkeltonM). Los Angeles, CA: AECOM Technology Corporation.
4.
AhmadNAliQAshrafMAlamBKhanAN (2012) Seismic vulnerability of the Himalayan half-dressed rubble stone masonry structures, experimental and analytical studies. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences12(11): 3441–3454.
5.
AlbiniPMussonRMWRovidaANLocatiMGomez CaperaAAViganòD (2014) The global earthquake history. Earthquake Spectra30(2): 607–624.
6.
AliQKhanANAshrafMAhmedAAlamBAhmadNJavedMRahmanSFahimMUmarM (2013) Seismic performance of stone masonry buildings used in the Himalayan belt. Earthquake Spectra29(4): 1159–1181.
7.
AliQSchacherTAshrafMAlamB (2012) In-plane behavior of the Dhajji-Dewari structural system (wooden braced frame with masonry infill). Earthquake Spectra28(3): 835–858.
8.
AllenTIWaldDJ (2007) Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site-conditions () and amplification around the globe. Open-File Report 2007–1357, April. Reston, VA: U.S. Geological Survey.
9.
Arcadis (2016) India Construction Cost Handbook. Bengaluru, India: Langdon & Seah Consulting India Pvt Ltd.
10.
Ashish LindholmCDParvezIAKuhnD (2016) Probabilistic earthquake hazard assessment for Peninsular India. Journal of Seismology20(2): 629–653.
11.
BhaskerRMenonA (2017) Towards an appropriate seismic vulnerability assessment model in India. 16th world conference on earthquake engineering, Santiago, 8–13 January.
12.
BhatiaSCKumarMRGuptaHK (1999) A probabilistic seismic hazard map of India and adjoining regions. Annals of Geophysics42(6): 1153–1164.
BrzevSScawthornCRCharlesonAWAllenLGreeneMJaiswalKSSilvaV (2013) GEM building taxonomy version 2.0. GEM Technical Report, November. Pavia: Global Earthquake Model Foundation.
15.
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (2002) IS 1893: 2002—Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures. Part 1—General Provisions and Buildings (Fifth Revision). New Delhi, India: Bureau of Indian Standards.
16.
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (2016) IS 1893: 2016—Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures. Part 1—General Provisions and Buildings (Sixth Revision). New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards.
17.
Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) (2018) Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4): Population Count, Revision 11. Palisades, NY: CIESIN—Columbia University; NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC).
18.
ChopraSKumarDRastogiBKChoudhuryPYadavRBS (2013) Estimation of seismic hazard in Gujarat region, India. Natural Hazards65(2): 1157–1178.
19.
Construction Industry Development Council (CIDC) (2019) Construction cost indices July 2019. New Delhi, India. Available at: http://www.cidc.in/cci-new-2019.html (accessed 25 July 2019).
20.
DasSGuptaIDGuptaVK (2006) A probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of Northeast India. Earthquake Spectra22(1): 1–27.
21.
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), and International Association for Earthquake Engineering (IAEE) (2019) World Housing Encyclopedia. An Encyclopedia of Housing Construction in Seismically Active Areas of the World. Available at: https://www.world-housing.net (accessed 15 May 2019).
22.
GiacomoDDi EngdahlERStorchakDA (2018) The ISC-GEM earthquake catalogue (1904–2014): Status after the extension project. Earth System Science Data10: 1877–1899.
23.
HaldarPSinghY (2009) Seismic performance and vulnerability of Indian code designed RC frame buildings. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology46(1): 29–45.
24.
HaldarPSinghYPaulDK (2012) Effect of URM infills on seismic vulnerability of Indian code designed RC frame buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration11(2): 233–241.
25.
HayesGPMooreGLPortnerDEHearneMFlammeHFurtneyMSmoczykGM (2018) Slab2, a comprehensive subduction zone geometry model. Science61(6410): 58–61.
HussainSNisarAKhazaiBDellowGAliQAliSMKhanM (2006) The Kashmir earthquake of October 8, 2005: Impacts in Pakistan. EERI Special Earthquake Report, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. Oakland, CA, December.
IyengarRNSharmaDSiddiquiJM (1999) Earthquake history of India in medieval times. Indian Journal of History of Science34(3): 181–237.
30.
JainSK (1998) Indian earthquakes: An overview. Indian Concrete Journal72(11): 555–561.
31.
JainSK (2016) Earthquake safety in India: Achievements, challenges and opportunities. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering14(5): 1337–1436.
32.
JaiswalKSSinhaR (2007) Probabilistic seismic-hazard estimation for Peninsular India. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America97(1B): 318–330.
33.
JaiswalKSWaldDJ (2008) Creating a global building inventory for earthquake loss assessment and risk management. Open-File Report, 2008–1160, pp. 103, October. Denver, CO: U.S. Geological Survey.
34.
LahiriAJenaPRRaoRKSenTK (2001) Economic consequences of the Gujarat earthquake. Economic and Political Weekly36(16): 1319–1332.
35.
LangDHKumarASulaymanovSMeslemA (2018) Building typology classification and earthquake vulnerability scale of Central and South Asian building stock. Journal of Building Engineering15: 261–277.
36.
LangDHSinghYPrasadJSR (2012) Comparing empirical and analytical estimates of earthquake loss assessment studies for the city of Dehradun, India. Earthquake Spectra28(2): 595–619.
37.
MahajanAKThakurVCSharmaMLChauhanM (2009) Probabilistic seismic hazard map of NW Himalaya and its adjoining area, India. Natural Hazards53(3): 443–457.
38.
MartinsLSilvaV (2020) Development of a fragility and vulnerability model for global seismic risk analyses. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. Epub ahead of print 8 June. DOI: 10.1007/s10518-020-00885-1.
39.
MistryRDongWShahH (eds) (2001) Interdisciplinary Observations on the January 2001 Bhuj, Gujarat Earthquake. Singapore: World Seismic Safety Initiative and Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative.
40.
NathSKAdhikariMDDevarajNMaitiSK (2015) Seismic vulnerability and risk assessment of Kolkata City, India. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences15(6): 1103–1121.
41.
NathSKThingbaijamKKS (2011) Peak ground motion predictions in India: An appraisal for rock sites. Journal of Seismology15(2): 295–315.
42.
NathSKThingbaijamKKS (2012) Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of India. Seismological Research Letters83(1): 135–149.
NathSKThingbaijamKKSMaitiSKNayakA (2012) Ground-motion predictions in Shillong region, northeast India. Journal of Seismology, 16(3): 475–488.
45.
National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) (2011) Development of probabilistic seismic hazard map of India. Technical Report, 16 March. New Delhi, India: National Disaster Management Authority.
46.
National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) (2013) Catalogue of Building Typologies in India. 15 September. New Delhi, India: National Disaster Management Authority.
47.
National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) (2016) National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP). May. New Delhi, India: National Disaster Management Authority.
48.
National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) (2010) Housing Condition and Amenities in India 2008-09. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. Vol. NSS Report. New Delhi, India: National Sample Survey Office.
49.
PaganiMGarcia-PelaezJGeeRJohnsonKPoggiVStyronRWeatherillGSimionatoMViganòDDanciuLMonelliD (2018) Global Seismic Hazard Map. Pavia: Global Earthquake Model Foundation.
50.
PaganiMMonelliDWeatherillGADanciuLCrowleyHSilvaVHenshawPButlerLNastasiMPanzeriLSimionatoMViganòD (2014) OpenQuake engine: An open hazard (and risk) software for the global earthquake model. Seismological Research Letters85(3): 692–702.
51.
PorterKAFieldEHMilnerKR (2017) Trimming a hazard logic tree with a new model-order-reduction technique. Earthquake Spectra33(3): 857–874.
52.
PrasadJSRSinghYKayniaAMLindholmCD (2009) Socioeconomic clustering in seismic risk assessment of urban housing stock. Earthquake Spectra25(3): 619–641.
Registrar General & Census Commissioner India (RGCCI) (2011) Houselisting and Housing Census Data, 2011. New Delhi, India: Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner—Government of India.
55.
SilvaVAmo-OduroDCalderonADabbeekJDespotakiVMartinsLRaoASSimionatoMViganòDYepes-EstradaCAcevedoACrowleyHHorspoolNJaiswalKJourneayMPittoreM (2020) Development of a global seismic risk model. Earthquake Spectra36(S1):372–394.
56.
SilvaVCrowleyHPaganiMMonelliDPinhoR (2013) Development of the OpenQuake engine, the Global Earthquake Model’s open-source software for seismic risk assessment. Natural Hazards72(3): 1409–1427.
57.
SilvaVYepes-EstradaCDabbeekJBrzevS (2018) GED4ALL: Global Exposure Database for Multi-Hazard Risk Analysis — Multi-Hazard Exposure Taxonomy. Pavia, Italy: Global Earthquake Model Foundation.
58.
SinghYLangDHPrasadJSRDeoliyaR (2013) An analytical study on the seismic vulnerability of masonry buildings in India. Journal of Earthquake Engineering17(3): 399–422.
59.
SinhaRGoyalAShindeRMMeenaM (2012) An earthquake risk management master plan for Mumbai: Risk assessment and its mitigation. In: 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, 24–28 September, Lisbon.
60.
SinhaRGoyalAShindeRMMeenaMSapreA (2014) Typology of buildings in India for seismic vulnerability assessment. 10th U.S. national conference on earthquake engineering, Anchorage, 21–25 July.
61.
SitharamTGKolathayarS (2013) Seismic hazard analysis of India using areal sources. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences62: 647–653.
62.
StorchakDAGiacomoDDi BondárIEngdahlERHarrisJRLeeWHKVillaseñorABormannP (2013) Public release of the ISC–GEM global instrumental earthquake catalogue (1900–2009). Seismological Research Letters84(5): 810–815.
63.
StyronRTaylorMOkoronkwoK (2010) Database of active structures from the Indo-Asian collision. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union91(20): 181–182.
64.
ThingbaijamKKSNathSK (2011) A seismogenic source framework for the Indian subcontinent. Seismic Microzonation Manual – Appendix II, pp. 155–175. New Delhi, India: Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India. Available at: https://www.moes.gov.in/writereaddata/files/seismic_mcrozonation_manual.pdf.
65.
TurnerTownsend (2017) International Construction Market Survey 2017. Leeds, UK: Turner & Townsend Partners LLP.
66.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) (2015) Making Development Sustainable: The Future of Disaster Risk Management. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 (GAR15). Geneva: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.
67.
YadavRBSTripathiJNRastogiBKChopraS (2008) Probabilistic assessment of earthquake hazard in Gujarat and adjoining region of India. Pure and Applied Geophysics165(9–10): 1813–1833.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
