The European construction sector faces significant challenges due to seismic vulnerabilities and widespread energy inefficiency of its residential building stock. It becomes thus crucial to prioritize regions with higher needs for building performance upgrading using frameworks that encompass single and multi-sectoral indicators. Such integrated frameworks should combine seismic risk mitigation, energy efficiency, and socioeconomic factors, to create safer and more sustainable urban environments. In line with the European strategy, Portugal has committed to carbon neutrality by 2050 and has set ambitious targets for emissions reductions by 2030. This study performs a prioritization analysis on the mainland Portuguese residential building stock combining multiple indicators related to three macro sectors, namely seismic, energy, and socioeconomic vulnerability. Using a multidisciplinary approach and the most recently available building fragility models, data on energy use, and regional socioeconomic factors, this study highlights critical regions for resource allocation and targeted renovations. The results provide valuable insights for policymakers, aiming to strengthen community seismic resilience, reduce carbon emissions, and support equitable risk mitigation measures across different regions.
BernardoVCampos CostaACandeiasPCostaA (2022) Seismic vulnerability assessment and fragility analysis of pre-code masonry buildings in Portugal. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering20(11): 6229–6265.
3.
BournasDA (2018) Concurrent seismic and energy retrofitting of RC and masonry building envelopes using inorganic textile-based composites combined with insulation materials: A new concept. Composites Part B: Engineering148: 166–179.
4.
BrzevSScawthornCCharlesonAWAllenLGreeneMJaiswalKSilvaV (2013) GEM building taxonomy version 2.0. GEM Technical Report2: 188.
5.
BurtonCGSilvaV (2016) Assessing integrated earthquake risk in OpenQuake with an application to Mainland Portugal. Earthquake Spectra32(3): 1383–1403.
6.
CalviGMSousaLRuggeriC (2016) Energy efficiency and seismic resilience: A common approach. In: GardoniPLaFaveJ (eds) Multi-Hazard Approaches to Civil Infrastructure Engineering. Cham: Springer, pp. 165–208. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-29713-2_9
7.
CarusoMPinhoRBianchiFCavalieriFLemmoMT (2023) Multi-criteria decision-making approach for optimal seismic/energy retrofitting of existing buildings. Earthquake Spectra39(1): 191–217.
8.
CarvalhoBPFonsecaMPeraltaS (2023) Pobreza Energética em Portugal: Uma análise municipal. Juscimeira: Balanço Social.
9.
ClemettNCarofilisWGabbianelliGO’ReillyGMonteiroR (2023) Optimal combined seismic and energy efficiency retrofitting for existing buildings in Italy. Journal of Structural Engineering149(1): 1–16.
10.
CostaACSousaMLCarvalhoACoelhoE (2010) Evaluation of seismic risk and mitigation strategies for the existing building stock: Application of LNECloss to the metropolitan area of Lisbon. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering8(1): 119–134.
11.
CoutoRMucederoGBentoRMonteiroR (2024) A practice-oriented approach for seismic and energy performance upgrading of existing buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering28(15): 4380–4407.
12.
CrowleyHDabbeekJDespotakiVRodriguesDMartinsLSilvaVRomãoXPereiraNWeatherillGDanciuL (2021) European seismic risk model (ESRM20). EFEHR Technical Report2: V100.
13.
CrowleyHDespotakiVRodriguesDSilvaVToma-DanilaDRigaEKaratzetzouAFotopoulouSZugicZOzcebeSGambaP (2020) Exposure model for European seismic risk assessment. Earthquake Spectra36(Suppl. 1): 252–273.
14.
CrowleyHDespotakiVSilvaVDabbeekJRomãoXPereiraNCastroJMDaniellJVeliuEBilginHAdamCDeyanovaMAdemovićNAtalicJRigaEKaratzetzouABessasonBShendovaVTiganescuAToma-DanilaDZugicZAkkarSHancilarU (2021) Model of seismic design lateral force levels for the existing reinforced concrete European building stock. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering19: 2839–2865.
15.
DanciuLGiardiniDWeatherillGBasiliRNandanSRovidaABeauvalCBardPYPaganiMReyesCGSesetyanKVilanovaSCottonFWiemerS (2024) The 2020 European seismic hazard model: Overview and results. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences24(9): 3049–3073.
16.
DanciuLNandanSReyesCBasiliRWeatherillGBeauvalCRovidaAVilanovaSSesetyanKBardPYCottonFWiemerSGiardiniD (2021) The 2020 update of the European seismic hazard model: Model overview. EFEHR Technical Report1: v100.
17.
Decree–Law No95/2019 of 18 July (2019) Regime aplicável à reabilitação de edifícios ou frações autónomas (Regime applicable to the rehabilitation of buildings or autonomous fractions).’Republic Diary136: 35–45.
Eurostat (2024) Cooling and heating degree days by NUTS 3 region—annual data. DOI: 10.2908/NRG_CHDDR2_A.
24.
GkatzogiasKCrowleyHVeljkovicAPohorylesDNorlenHTsionisGBournasD (2022) Prioritising EU regions for building renovation: Seismic risk, energy efficiency, socioeconomic vulnerability. Luxembourg City: Publications Office of the European Union.
HallegatteSWalshB (2021) Natural Disasters, Poverty, and Inequality: New Metrics for Fairer Policies. World Bank Group. In: LaurentEZwicklK (eds) The Routledge Handbook of the Political Economy of the Environment. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367814533
27.
IlicJMBentoRCattariS (2020) 3DGIS representation for supporting seismic mitigation policies at urban scale: The case study of Lisbon. Journal of Cultural Heritage45(2): 265–278.
LopesGCSilvaVCostaCVicenteROliveiraCS (2024) Advancing the understanding of earthquake risk in Portugal. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering22: 5379–5401.
Mahbubur RahmanMSadequr RahmanMJerinT (2023) Social vulnerability to earthquake disaster: Insights from the people of 48th ward of Dhaka South City, Bangladesh. Environmental Hazards22(2): 116–135.
32.
ManfrediVMasiA (2018) Seismic strengthening and energy efficiency: Towards an integrated approach for the rehabilitation of existing RC buildings. Buildings8(3): 36.
33.
ManfrediVMasiANicodemoGDigrisoloA (2023) Seismic fragility curves for the Italian RC residential buildings based on non-linear dynamic analyses. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering21: 2173–2214.
34.
MariniAPassoniCBelleriAFeroldiFPretiMMetelliGRivaPGiurianiEPlizzariG (2022) Combining seismic retrofit with energy refurbishment for the sustainable renovation of RC buildings: A proof of concept. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering26(7): 2475–2495.
35.
MartinsLSilvaV (2021) Development of a fragility and vulnerability model for global seismic risk analyses. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering19: 6719–6745.
MucederoGMonteiroR (2024) An integrated regional prioritisation framework for seismic and energy-efficiency performance upgrading of residential buildings. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction103: 104341.
39.
MucederoGPerroneDMonteiroR (2023) Seismic risk assessment of masonry-infilled RC building portfolios: Impact of variability in the infill properties. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering21: 957–995.
40.
MucederoGPerroneDMonteiroR (2024) Fragility and vulnerability models for poorly-detailed infilled buildings accounting for building-to-building and masonry infill variability. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction111: 104668.
OliveiraCCostaA (1984) Updating seismic hazard maps. Proceedings of the Eight World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (8th WCEE), SAN FRANCISCO, CA, 21–28 July. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
43.
OzkulaGDowellRKBaserTLinJ-LNumanogluO-VIlhanOOlgunCGHuangC-WUludagTD (2023) Field reconnaissance and observations from the February 6, 2023, Turkey earthquake sequence. Natural Hazards119: 663–700.
44.
PaganiMMonelliDWeatherillGDanciuLCrowleyHSilvaVHenshawPButlerLNastasiMPanzeriLSimionatoMViganoD (2014) OpenQuake engine: An open hazard (and risk) software for the global earthquake model. Seismological Research Letters85(3): 692–702.
45.
PohorylesDAMadutaCBournasDAKourisLA (2020) Energy performance of existing residential buildings in Europe: A novel approach combining energy with seismic retrofitting. Energy and Buildings223: 110024.
46.
Presidência do Conselho de Ministros (2024) Resolução do Conselho de Ministros n.o 11/2024, de 8 de janeiro. Diário da República N.o 5/2024: SrieI I of 2024-01-08.
47.
ReinosoEJaimesMAEstevaL (2018) Estimation of life vulnerability inside buildings during earthquakes. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering14(8): 1140–1152.
48.
ReisAHelenoLMonteiroSOliveiraNS (2024) Sustainability assessment of building rehabilitation solutions: The mid 70s Portuguese building. In: GalvãoJRdCSBritoPNevesFdSAlmeidaHdAMouratoSdJMNobreC (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Water Energy Food and Sustainability (ICoWEFS 2023). Cham: Springer, pp. 555–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48532-9_51
49.
RennertKErricksonFPrestBCRennelsLNewellRGPizerWKingdonCWingenrothJCookeRParthumBSmithDCromarKDiazDMooreFCMüllerUKPlevinRJRafteryAEŠevčíkováHSheetsHStockJHTanTWatsonMWongTEAnthoffD (2022) Comprehensive evidence implies a higher social cost of CO2. Nature610: 687–692.
50.
RomãoXPereiraNCastroJMCrowleyHSilvaVMartinsLDe MaioF (2021) European Building Vulnerability Data Repository (v2.1). Geneva: Zenodo.
51.
RostiADel GaudioCRotaMDi LudovicoMPennaAVerderameGM (2021) Empirical fragility curves for Italian residential RC buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering19(8): 3165–3183.
52.
RovaiE (1994) The social geography of disaster recovery: Differential community response to the North Coast earthquakes. Yearbook of the Association of Pacific Coast Geographers56(1): 49–74.
53.
RSA (1983) Regulamento de Segurança e Acções para Estruturas de Edifícios e Pontes. Decreto-Lei n.o 235/83. Lisbon: Diário da República.
54.
RSCCS (1958) Regulamento de Segurança das Construções Contra os Sismos, Decreto-Lei n.o 41658 de 31 de Maio de 1958. Lisbon: Diário da República.
55.
RSEP (1961) Regulamento de Solicitações em Edifícios e Pontes (RSEP). Decreto No 44041 de 18 de Novembro. Diário do Governo. Lisbon: Diário da República.
56.
Ruiz-PinillaJGAdamJMPérez-CárcelRYusteJMoraguesJJ (2016) Learning from RC building structures damaged by the earthquake in Lorca, Spain, in 2011. Engineering Failure Analysis68: 76–86.
57.
SarchiLVarumHMonteiroRSilveiraD (2018) Seismic behavior of two Portuguese adobe buildings: Part II —numerical modeling and fragility assessment. International Journal of Architectural Heritage12(6): 936–950.
58.
SilvaVCrowleyHVarumHPinhoR (2015a) Seismic risk assessment for mainland Portugal. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13(2): 429–457.
59.
SilvaVCrowleyHVarumHPinhoRSousaL (2015b) Investigation of the characteristics of Portuguese regular moment-frame RC buildings and development of a vulnerability model. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13(5): 1455–1490.
60.
SimõesAGBentoRLagomarsinoSLourençoPB (2019) Seismic assessment of nineteenth and twentieth centuries URM buildings in Lisbon: Structural features and derivation of fragility curves. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering18: 645–672.
61.
SousaL (2016) Development of Innovative Methodologies for the Treatment of Uncertainties in the Earthquake Loss Assessment of Building Portfolios. Porto: Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto.
62.
SousaML (2006) Risco sísmico em Portugal continenal. Lisboa: Instituto Superior Técnico.
63.
SousaML (2007) Hierarquização das regiões de Portugal continental em função do seu risco sísmico. Sísmica 2007 - 7o Congresso de sismologia e engenharia sísmica (pp. 1–12).
64.
SousaMLCostaAC (2016) Evolution of earthquake losses in Portuguese residential building stock. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering14(7): 2009–2029.
65.
SousaMLOliveiraCSCostaAC (2006) Caracterização do Parque Habitacional de Portugal Continental para estudos de Risco Sísmico (in portuguese). Revista Portuguesa de Engenharia de Estruturas55: 35–50.
66.
TakeuchiTYasudaKIwataM (2006) Studies on integrated building facade engineering with high-performance structural elements. IABSE Symposium Report92(4): 33–40.
67.
TakeuchiTYasudaKIwataM (2009) Seismic retrofitting using energy dissipation Façades. In: ATC and SEI conference on improving the seismic performance of existing buildings and other structures, San Francisco, CA, 9 December. DOI: 10.1061/41084(364)91.
68.
TavaresAOMendesJMBastoE (2011) Percepção dos riscos naturais e tecnológicos, confiança institucional e preparação para situações de emergência: O caso de Portugal continental. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais93: 167–193.
69.
VarelaLCorreiaAAGuerreiroL (2024) Influence of masonry infill walls on the seismic response of existing RC frames buildings—application to Portugal. In: 18th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (WCEE2024), Milan, Italy, 30 June–5 July, pp. 1–12.
70.
VerderameGMDe LucaFRicciPManfrediG (2011) Preliminary analysis of a soft-storey mechanism after the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics40: 925–944.
71.
VicenteRFerreiraTMMaioRA (2015) Seismic risk mitigation of old urban centres: characterizationand seismic vulnerability assessment of the Ribeirinha neighborhood of Faro, Portugal. Territorium283–290. DOI:10.14195/1647-7723_22_22
72.
VilanovaSPFonsecaJFBD (2007) Probabilistic seismic-hazard assessment for Portugal. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America97(5): 1702–1717.
73.
WoessnerJLaurentiuDGiardiniDCrowleyHCottonFGrünthalGValensiseGArvidssonRBasiliRDemirciogluMBHiemerSMelettiCMussonRWRovidaANSesetyanKStucchiM and The Share Consortium (2015) The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model: Key components and results. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13: 3553–3596.
74.
XofiMFerreiraTMDominguesJCSantosPPPereiraSOliveiraSCReisEZêzereJLGarciaRACLourençoPB (2024) On the seismic vulnerability assessment of urban areas using census data: The Lisbon metropolitan area as a pilot study area. Journal of Earthquake Engineering28(1): 242–265.
75.
Yepes-EstradaCCalderonACostaCCrowletHDabbeekJHoyosMCMartinsLPaulNRaoASilvaV (2023) Global building exposure model for earthquake risk assessment. Earthquake Spectra39(4): 2212–2235.
