ArticleEarth's future2022
Coupled Urban Change and Natural Hazard Consequence Model for Community Resilience Planning.
Article in Earth's future, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coupled Urban Change and Natural Hazard Consequence Model for Community Resilience Planning.Earth's future · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a new coupled urban change and hazard consequence model that considers population growth, a changing built environment, natural hazard mitigation planning, and future acute hazards. Urban change is simulated as an agent-based land market with six agent types and six land use types. Agents compete for parcels with successful bids leading to changes in both urban land use-affecting where agents are located-and structural properties of buildings-affecting the building's ability to resist damage to natural hazards. IN-CORE, an open-source community resilience model, is used to compute damages to the built environment. The coupled model operates under constraints imposed by planning policies defined at the start of a simulation. The model is applied to Seaside, Oregon, a coastal community in the North American Pacific Northwest subject to seismic-tsunami hazards emanating from the Cascadia Subduction Zone. Ten planning scenarios are considered including caps on the number of vacation homes, relocating community assets, limiting new development, and mandatory seismic retrofits. By applying this coupled model to the testbed community, we show that: (a) placing a cap on the number of vacation homes results in more visitors in damaged buildings, (b) that mandatory seismic retrofits do not reduce the number of people in damaged buildings when considering population growth, (c) polices diverge beyond year 10 in the model, indicating that many policies take time to realize their implications, and (d) the most effective policies were those that incorporated elements of both urban planning and enforced building codes.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.