Project Name Products Europe Exposure Repository with the inventory of residential, commercial and industrial buildings in Europe Share Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn Description The Global Exposure Model is a mosaic of local and regional models with information regarding the residential, commercial, and industrial building stock at the smallest available administrative division of each country and includes details about the number of buildings, number of occupants, vulnerability characteristics, average built-up area, and average replacement cost. The dataset is developed and maintained by the GEM Foundation, using a bottom-up approach at the global scale, using national statistics, socio-economic data, and local datasets. This model allows the identification of the most common types of construction worldwide, regions with large fractions of informal construction, and areas prone to natural disasters with a high concentration of population and building stock. For the case of Europe, the exposure model is built upon the dataset developed by the European Facilities for Earthquake Hazard and Risk (EFEHR). The original information can be consulted in the repository for the European Seismic Risk Model (ESRM20) on this link . The Europe region of the model includes the information pertaining the following countries/territories: Albania, Andorra, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia_and_Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Isle_of_Man, Italy, Kosovo, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, North_Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United_Kingdom How to cite this work Yepes-Estrada, C., Calderon, A., Costa, C., Crowley, H., Dabbeek, J., Hoyos, M., Martins, L., Paul, N., Rao, A., Silva, V. (2023). Global Building Exposure Model for Earthquake Risk Assessment. Earthquake Spectra. doi:10.1177/87552930231194048 Available Versions An open version (v2023.1) of the model, aggregated at Administrative Level 1, is available for direct download under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. Users interested in this version can click the "Open Repository" button in the right panel to access the information. The full version for any country/territory, at the highest resolution available, can be requested by clicking on the "License Request", where a specific license will be provided, depending on the use case. License information The open version is available under a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license, which requires: *Attribution (you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made) *Non-commercial (you may not use the material for commercial purposes) *ShareAlike (derivatives created must be made available under the same license as the original) Any deviation from these terms incur in license infringement. For commercial use of the model, a specific license agreement must be made tailored to your use case, in such instance please click on "License Request". Share License CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Available resources Open Repository License Request Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn text Map View Search Popup title Close Country/Region Available Resources Country/Region Available Resources Country/Region Resource Url Search Found Country/Region Resource Url Preview Preview is not available. Search Found Country/Region Resource Url Preview Preview is not available. Search Found Country/Region Resource Url Preview Preview is not available. Related products Global Exposure Model Global Vulnerability Model Global Seismic Risk Map Country-Territory Seismic Risk Profiles Global Seismic Hazard Map Related publications European Seismic Risk Model 2020: Focus on Croatia Read More The European Seismic Risk Model 2020 (ESRM 2020) Read More Evaluation of Seismic Risk on UNESCO Cultural Heritage sites in Europe. International Journal of Architectural Heritage Read More For downloading or accessing detailed product information like PNG/PDF maps, datasets, license request, shapefiles and more, please switch to a desktop or laptop computer. Thank you for your understanding.

News GEM’s next journey: Turning GEM models into products useful for the insurance industry By: ​ ​ Jul 31, 2019 ​ Share Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn John Schneider (L), Malcolm Haylock, Luis Sousa, Michael Ewald and Dickie Whitaker during a panel discussion at Oasis-Swiss Re Conference, June 2019 The 4th Oasis Conference in conjunction with Swiss Re Institute John Schneider, GEM Secretary General represented GEM at the 4th Oasis Conference held on June 12, 2019 at Swiss Re Next Auditorium, Zurich, Switzerland. The event, organized by Oasis and Swiss Re Institute brought together some of the world’s best natural catastrophe (natcat) risk experts and modelers. The objective of the 1-day event was to learn more about the suite of available models, options to deploy Oasis, and how Oasis technology is developing. It also provided model providers an opportunity to demonstrate tools and models to participants. Discussions also focused on key issues in models, the need for transparency and the future of catastrophe risk modeling. Three GEM collaborators presented how they have applied GEM models, tools and data to their respective risk modelling activities. Michael Ewald, Swiss Re (a project partner and now a Sponsor) demonstrated how GEM’s OpenQuake is being integrated into their earthquake modeling approach, in particular the OQ Hazard Module (stochastic earthquake catalogue and ground motion prediction equations, or GMPEs). Luis Sousa, AIR Worldwide (a founding Governor Sponsor) showed the history of GEM-AIR collaboration, showing examples of how GEM data and model components have been used to inform the development of their own risk models in several areas around the world. Malcolm Haylock, Sunstone Risk Solutions, described his implementation of GEM’s OpenQuake model for Puerto Rico, a prototype that runs on the Oasis modeling platform Flamingo. http://www.sunstonerisk.com/gem/ John presented GEM data, models and other products that are currently available i.e. global earthquake ground shaking loss to buildings and population that the insurance sector can immediately use. John also mentioned that financial loss models in OASIS, Touchtone and Elements would become available over the coming months. In addition to the financial loss models, he mentioned that over the next three years, the capability of OpenQuake would be extended to cover multi-perils, while tools and models would include time dependence, secondary perils and critical infrastructure - components that are vital in the insurance industry. Daniel Martin Eckhart, Swiss Re Institute Advocate, in his summary of the event, mentioned on his blog John’s analogy of turning GEM models into products consumable by the industry: In a way it was John Schneider who found the perfect image for this moment in time – the image of a potato! He shared the journey of GEM (Global Earthquake Model) with a simple visual that showed how it went from farming the land to harvesting to now producing the potato (aka models). Said John: "I view the potato as something that's useful. We produce the best organic potato and it's useful to many people." But, he pointed out, the potato is bland and its real value appears when it is turned into other things. "What we have now is great, but it is not what the insurance industry is used to consuming. The next part of the GEM journey is turning the potato into French fries." The fries then stand for models that are useful (consumable) for the whole industry. Dickie Whitaker, OASIS Chief Operating Officer and Beat Aeberhardt closed the conference. Dickie highlighted the significant progress made, the increasing maturity of the Oasis code base and the sophistication of the work done over a short period of time. For more details on the 4thOasis Conference, read Daniel Eckhart’s blog here . No images found. GALLERY 1/3 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

News News Briefs December 2023: Institutional projects By: ​ ​ Dec 14, 2023 Dec 14, 2023 Share Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn ​ Institutional Projects SURA Project's Milestones The SURA project focused on enhancing OpenQuake's efficiency and developing a tailored rupture catalogue for Latin America. Improved computational efficiency now allows intricate risk calculations for vast regions with complex reinsurance schemes. Exporting loss curves based on Occurrence Exceedance Probability (OEP) and Aggregate Exceedance Probability (AEP) is now feasible. The curated rupture catalogue covers Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Mexico, and Panama, ensuring consistent magnitude-frequency distributions and loss estimations across countries with different hazard models. Colombia's National Earthquake Risk Model GEM collaborates with the Colombian Geological Survey (SGC) and 11 universities to develop Colombia's National Earthquake Risk Model (MNRS). GEM leverages its experience in urban, national, and regional risk modelling using the OpenQuake engine. MNRS integrates detailed residential exposure models and vulnerability functions for representative building classes, developed by local experts. Expected in 2024, the model will feature public data on human impact, building damage, and economic losses for probabilistic risk and earthquake scenarios. Central America's PSHA Model Development GEM's work in the FORCE project focuses on developing a Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment (PSHA) model for Central America. Key tasks involve developing datasets for seismic source characterisation, including a fault database derived from a block model encompassing the region. Advancements in homogenising the event catalogues and streamlining the workflow in the Modelling Building Toolkit (MBTK) are notable achievements within this initiative, aimed at enhancing seismic risk assessment capabilities in the region. FERMI: A Step Forward in Earthquake Source Modelling GEM's FERMI, replacing SHERIFS, revolutionises seismic hazard models' sub-fault to multi-fault earthquake source construction. Enhanced with superior performance and customisability, FERMI employs OQ-Engine functions, ensuring compatibility. In 2023, significant progress included a comprehensive system for enumerating potential multi-fault ruptures from a network, employing graph theory algorithms, while implementing filtering mechanisms based on plausibility for larger models. This breakthrough promises robust seismic modelling capabilities. No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

News Resilience is in our hand By: ​ ​ Jul 2, 2018 ​ Share Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn ​ In 2009 you wrote Peace of mind in earthquake country (together with Peter Yanev), which is considered “the bible about earthquake risks”. Why do you think it was so well received by the non-expert public? And based on that experience, how communication should change in order to facilitate a global “understanding of risk” (as suggested in the recent Sendai Framework 2015)? We wrote the book for non-technical people, following the lead from Peter’s 1974 First Edition. We tried to demystify earthquake engineering and make it tangible for everyone. The key is that there are really simple things that can be done to reduce risk, and we wanted to get that message across. In my mind, the key to achieving a ‘global understanding of risk’ is to use consistent simple language across industries, from policy to insurance to engineering – GEM could be a leader in establishing this common terminology. Often developing countries are lagging behind in the process of making their environment safer. To which extent are innovation, sustainability, and open source technology keywords to empower resilience in the most vulnerable regions? Risk for developing countries is usually understood and communicated at the regional level, rather than at the building-specific level. We have to get knowledge about individual risks into the hands of people that can do something about it. Regional planning and policy can only go so far. This is a great opportunity for GEM. Through technology and open source tools we are now better able to capture and communicate site-specific information, empowering the owners of that risk. This will drive resilience which will drive sustainability – what is the carbon footprint of a major earthquake? The positive cycle of encouraging insurance coverage for buildings in order to spread the risk and make premiums more affordable often disregards incentives to take measures for loss prevention. How do you think insurance schemes should address the issue of prevention?This touches on one of the greatest opportunities in earthquake risk reduction. Earthquake insurance is generally priced on the mean, with significant cross-subsidization. The good risks pay for the bad, and there is little incentive for improvement at the building level. (If home prices were based on the neighborhood mean, the incentives to put in that new kitchen would certainly change!). Again, this is a great opportunity for GEM. If we can connect risk at the building scale to portfolio exposure and therefore insurance pricing, we can create financial incentives for resilience. Retrofitting costs are unaffordable in many countries of the world. Which can be the solution for this problem? Can open data in some way ease this process?Open data, at the building-level scale, will empower people to do something. Data on the overall risk at the regional level helps, but we really need to find a way to inform people as to their risk, not the average risk profile for their city. Business continuity is crucial in the post-earthquake phase and securing your buildings and installations is critical. Can you give me a measure of the cost-benefit ratio of retrofitting a working environment? The opportunity here is to balance business continuity costs with insurance and real estate costs. It makes no sense to view these disciplines in isolation, although this is often the case. Business continuity and insurance costs should reflect more resilient construction and this reduction in costs should incentivize better real estate standards. Looking at these disciplines together, I have rarely seen payback periods greater than 3 years for major retrofit or resilient design enhancements. How do you think private sector, and specifically engineering companies like ARUP, can play a role in risk reduction? Engineering companies typically understand risk at the building-scale. Modeling and insurance companies typically understand risk at the portfolio scale. Engineers need to get better at portfolio analysis to have greater impact (and insurers need to get better at building analysis) and Arup is heading in that direction. In 2013 ARUP was the first engineering firm to join GEM. Can you make a round-up of the past 2 years of collaboration?It has been a fantastic opportunity for Arup to be a supporter of GEM, and for me personally to be involved in such an important effort. What I mentioned in 2013 still holds, “by combining our global engineering expertise with seismological and financial aspects of the model, we will help quantify the benefits of risk mitigation, help create financial incentives for earthquake resiliency and thus save lives”. How can the engineering sector benefit from open source software like the OpenQuake-Engine or specific tools destined to structural assessment, retrofitting and reconstruction?GEM can help the engineering sector perform portfolio analysis based on their detailed understanding of earthquake risk at the building scale. This will incentivize risk-differentiated insurance pricing, which will incentive resilience. Andrew Thompson ran the Global Catastrophe Risk & Insurance practice at Arup, and represented Arup on the governing board of GEM from 2013 - 2015. He recently left Arup to start a technology company that quantifies earthquake risk at the building scale to help insurers better manage their portfolio exposure. Andrew holds a master’s degree in structural engineering from the University of California, Berkeley. No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

PUBLICATIONS Papers, articles and reports are released as part of GEM's advancing science & knowledge-sharing initiatives. Selected reports and other materials produced by the international consortia on global projects, working groups and regional collaborations can also be found below. Share Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn Featured Publications Development of a global seismic risk model ​ GEM Strategic Plan and Roadmap to 2030 ​ Improving Post-Disaster Damage Data Collection to Inform Decision-Making Final Report ​ Anchor 1 Publications List 0 ​ Sort by Title: A-Z Z-A List Gallery Title Reference Year Type Topic Earthquake Models: Jan 2021 Release (brochure) 2021 Brochure Integrated Risk Global building exposure model for earthquake risk assessment 2023 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Development of a global seismic risk model 2020 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk GEM Strategic Plan and Roadmap to 2030 2022 Brochure GEM New Statistical Perspectives on Bath's Law and Aftershock Productivity 2022 Peer-reviewed Hazard A hybrid ML-physical modelling approach for efficient approximation of tsunami waves at the coast for probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment 2022 Peer-reviewed Hazard Exploring benefit cost analysis to support earthquake risk mitigation in Central America 2022 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk The adolescent years of seismic risk assessment 2022 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Exposure forecasting for seismic risk estimation: Application to Costa Rica 2021 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Investment in Disaster Risk Management in Europe Makes Economic Sense 2021 Report Physical Risk HAZARD INFORMATION PROFILES Supplement to : UNDRR-ISC Hazard Definition & Classification Review - Technical Report 2021 Report Physical Risk Regional based exposure models to account for local building typologies 2021 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Significant Seismic Risk Potential From Buried Faults Beneath Almaty City, Kazakhstan, Revealed From High-Resolution Satellite DEMs 2021 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Seismic vulnerability modelling of building portfolios using artificial neural networks 2021 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Development of a fragility and vulnerability model for global seismic risk analyses 2020 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk A Building Classification System for Multi-hazard Risk Assessment 2022 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Development of a uniform exposure model for the African continent for use in disaster risk assessment 2022 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Seismic loss dynamics in three Asian megacities using a macro-level approach based on socioeconomic exposure indicators 2022 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Guía para profesores para el desarrollo de un curso introductorio de riesgo sísmico 2022 User manual Physical Risk Material didáctico para sensibilizar a la comunidad sobre el riesgo sísmico. Aplicación para el Área Metropolitana del Valle de Aburrá (AMVA) 2022 Report Physical Risk Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) Training Manual 2021 User manual Hazard Evaluación de Riesgo Sísmico para Santiago de los Caballeros 2022 Report Physical Risk Evaluación de Riesgo Sísmico para Santiago de Cali 2022 Report Physical Risk Evaluación de Riesgo Sísmico para el Distrito Metropolitano de Quito 2022 Report Physical Risk Earthquake-induced liquefaction and landslides in Cali, Colombia 2022 Report Physical Risk Scenario selection for representative earthquakes in Quito, Cali and Santiago de los Caballeros 2022 Report Hazard Executive summary Urban seismic risk assessment for the cities of Quito, Cali and Santiago de los Caballeros 2022 Report Physical Risk Tipologías constructivas en Quito, Cali and Santiago de los Caballeros 2021 Report Physical Risk Seismic hazard analysis at the urban scale 2021 Report Hazard Seismic Hazard Results (rock and soil conditions) 2021 Report Hazard Modelo Probabilístico de Amenaza Sísmica para la República Dominicana 2022 Report Hazard Probabilistic seismic hazard model for the Dominican Republic 2022 Report Hazard PSHA Models and Datasets for Urban Hazard Assesment 2022 Report Hazard Executive Summary 2022 Report GEM TREQ Executive Summary 2022 Report GEM Modelo Probabilístico de Amenaza Sísmica para la República Dominicana 2022 Report Hazard Probabilistic seismic hazard model for the Dominican Republic 2022 Report Hazard Exposure forecasting for seismic risk estimation: Application to Costa Rica 2021 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Vulnerability modellers toolkit, an open‑source platform for vulnerability analysis 2021 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Global Exposure Database for Multi-Hazard Risk Analysis-Multi-hazard Exposure Taxonomy 2018 Report Exposure Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis model for the Philippines 2020 Peer-reviewed Hazard Earthquake Models: Oct 2020 Release (brochure) 2020 Brochure Integrated Risk Africa Earthquake Model: brochure 2019 Brochure Integrated Risk The Development Impact of Risk Analytics 2020 Report Integrated Risk GEM's 2018 global hazard and risk models 2020 Peer-reviewed GEM Colombia Seismic Model 2020 Report Hazard Potential impact of earthquakes during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic 2020 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk The GEM Global Active Faults Database 2020 Peer-reviewed Hazard The 2018 version of the Global Earthquake Model: Hazard component 2020 Peer-reviewed Hazard European Seismic Risk Model 2020: Focus on Croatia 2020 Report Physical Risk The European Seismic Risk Model 2020 (ESRM 2020) 2019 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Resilience Performance Scorecard - (RPS) Methodology 2017 Report Social Vulnerability GAR - Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2019 2019 Report Integrated Risk Assessing Seismic Hazard and Risk Globally for an Earthquake Resilient World 2019 Peer-reviewed Integrated Risk Extensible Data Schemas for Multiple Hazards, Exposure and Vulnerability Data 2019 Peer-reviewed Exposure Improving Post-Disaster Damage Data Collection to Inform Decision-Making Final Report 2018 Report Exposure Report on the workshop for the participatory evaluation of earthquake risk and resilience in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 2017 Report Social Vulnerability Combining USGS ShakeMaps and the OpenQuake-engine for damage and loss assessment 2019 Peer-reviewed Exposure Evaluation of Seismic Risk on UNESCO Cultural Heritage sites in Europe. International Journal of Architectural Heritage 2018 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Development of a Probabilistic Earthquake Loss Model for Iran, Bulleting of Earthquake Engineering 2017 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Exploring the impact of spatial correlations and uncertainties for portfolio analysis in probabilistic seismic loss estimation 2014 Peer-reviewed Physical risk The Global Earthquake Model Physical Vulnerability Database 2016 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Earthquake Loss Estimation for the Kathmandu Valley 2016 Conference paper Physical risk Seismic Risk Assessment in Nepal 2015 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Critical Issues in Earthquake Scenario Loss Modeling, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2016 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Critical Issues on Probabilistic Earthquake Loss Assessment. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2017 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Assessing Integrated Earthquake Risk in OpenQuake with an Application to Mainland Portugal Burton CG, Silva V. Assessing Integrated Earthquake Risk in OpenQuake with an Application to Mainland Portugal. Earthquake Spectra. 2016;32(3):1383-1403. doi:10.1193/120814EQS209M 2015 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Exploring the seismic risk of the unreinforced masonry building stock in Antioquia, Colombia. Natural Hazard 2017 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Development of a Fragility Model for the Residential Building Stock in South America, Earthquake Spectra 2016 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Modelling the Residential Building Inventory in South America for Seismic Risk Assessment, Earthquake Spectra 2017 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Assessing the impact of earthquake scenarios in transportation networks: the Portuguese mining factory case study. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Costa, C., Silva, V. & Bazzurro, P. Assessing the impact of earthquake scenarios in transportation networks: the Portuguese mining factory case study. Bull Earthquake Eng 16, 1137–1163 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0243-2 2017 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Assessment of earthquake damage considering the characteristics of past events in South America. Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics 2017 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Earthquake loss assessment of precast RC industrial structures in Tuscany (Italy), Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2017 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Probabilistic Seismic Risk Assessment for Costa Rica. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, . 2018 Peer-reviewed Physical risk Global Geodetic strain rate model 2014 Report Hazard Global historical earthquake archive and catalogue (1000-1903) 2013 Report Hazard Guidelines for Analytical Vulnerability Assessment-Low/Mid-Rise 2014 User manual Physical Risk Guidelines for component-based analytical vulnerability assessment of buildings and nonstructural elements 2014 User manual Physical Risk Guidelines for Empirical Vulnerability Assessment 2014 User manual Physical Risk Integrated Risk Modelling Toolkit Manual 2018 User manual Integrated Risk Introduction to the GEM Earthquake Consequences Database (GEMECD) 2014 Report Physical Risk ISC-GEM Global instrumental earthquake catalogue (1900-2009) 2012 Report Hazard Likelihood- and residual-based evaluation of medium-term earthquake forecast models for California 2014 Peer-reviewed Hazard User guide Android mobile tool for field data collection 2014 User manual Physical Risk User guide Field sampling strategies for estimating building inventories 2014 User manual Physical Risk User guide Geospatial tools for building footprint and homogenous zone extraction from imagery 2014 User manual Physical Risk User guide Windows tool for field data collection and management 2014 User manual Physical Risk User Needs Assessment for the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) 2010 Report GEM A transparent and data-driven global tectonic regionalisation model for seismic hazard assessment. - Geophysical Journal International Yen-Shin Chen, Graeme Weatherill, Marco Pagani, Fabrice Cotton, A transparent and data-driven global tectonic regionalization model for seismic hazard assessment, Geophysical Journal International, Volume 213, Issue 2, May 2018, Pages 1263–1280, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggy005 2018 Peer-reviewed Hazard A summary of hazard datasets and guidelines supported by the Global Earthquake Model during the first implementation phase PAGANI, Marco et al. A summary of hazard datasets and guidelines supported by the Global Earthquake Model during the first implementation phase. Annals of Geophysics, [S.l.], v. 58, n. 1, apr. 2015. ISSN 2037-416X. 2015 Peer-reviewed Hazard Appraising the PSHA earthquake source models of Japan, New Zealand, and Taiwan Marco Pagani, Ken Xiansheng Hao, Hiroyuki Fujiwara, Matthew Gerstenberger, Kuo‐Fong Ma; Appraising the PSHA Earthquake Source Models of Japan, New Zealand, and Taiwan. Seismological Research Letters 2016;; 87 (6): 1240–1253. doi: https://doi.org/10.1785/0220160101 2016 Peer-reviewed Hazard Assessing global earthquake risks: the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) initiative H. Crowley, R. Pinho, M. Pagani, N. Keller, 30 - Assessing global earthquake risks: the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) initiative, Editor(s): S. Tesfamariam, K. Goda, In Woodhead Publishing Series in Civil and Structural Engineering, Handbook of Seismic Risk Analysis and Management of Civil Infrastructure Systems, Woodhead Publishing, 2013, Pages 815-838, ISBN 9780857092687, https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857098986.5.815. 2014 Book chapter GEM Assessing seismic hazard of the East African Rift: a pilot study from GEM and AfricaArray Poggi, V., Durrheim, R., Tuluka, G.M. et al. Assessing seismic hazard of the East African Rift: a pilot study from GEM and AfricaArray. Bull Earthquake Eng 15, 4499–4529 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0152-4 2017 Peer-reviewed Hazard Back to Normal report 2017 Report Integrated Risk Beyond Button Pushing report 2017 Report Physical Risk Can we test for the maximum possible earthquake magnitude? 2014 Peer-reviewed Hazard Celebrating achievements and way forward 2013 Brochure GEM Compilation and critical review of GMPEs for the GEM-PEER Global GMPEs Project 2012 Peer-reviewed Hazard Data Interchange Formats for the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) 2010 Report OpenQuake Defining a consistent strategy to model ground-motion parameters for the GEM-PEER Global GMPEs Project 2012 Peer-reviewed Hazard Development and Application of OpenQuake, an Open Source Software for Seismic Risk Assessment 2012 Peer-reviewed OpenQuake Development of the OpenQuake engine, the Global Earthquake Model's open-source software for seismic risk assessment 2013 Peer-reviewed OpenQuake Earthquake Model for the European-Mediterranean Region for the purpose of GEM1 2010 Report Hazard End-to-end demonstration of the inventory data capture tools (IDCT) 2014 User manual Physical Risk Exploring earthquake databases for the creation of magnitude-homogeneous catalogues: tools for application on a regional and global scale 2016 Peer-reviewed Hazard Exposure Data Development for the Global Earthquake Model: Inventory Data Capture Tools (IDCT) 2012 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk GEM 2009/2010 report 2nd edition 2009 Report GEM GEM brochure 2013 Brochure GEM GEM building taxonomy version 2.0 2013 Report Physical Risk GEM IT Review 2010 2013 Report OpenQuake GEM-PEER Task 3 Project: Selection of a Global Set of Ground Motion Prediction Equations 2013 Report Hazard GEM: a Participatory Framework for Open, State-of-the-Art Models and Tools for Earthquake Risk Assessment 2012 Peer-reviewed GEM GEM: For a safer and earthquake resilient future (brochure) 2019 Brochure GEM GEM1 Best Practices for Using Macroseismic Intensity and Ground Motion Intensity Conversion Equations for Hazard and Loss Models in GEM1 2010 Report Hazard GEM1 Executive Summary 2010 Report GEM GEM1 Hazard: Description of Input Models, Calculation Engine and Main Results 2010 Report Hazard GEM1 report on the review of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) software as a basis for development of the OpenQuake Engine 2010 Report Hazard GEM1 Seismic Risk Report 2010 Report OpenQuake GEM1: OpenGEM System Design Document 2010 Report OpenQuake Global Earthquake Model: Community-Based Seismic Risk Assessment 2011 Book chapter GEM Global Exposure Database-Scientific Features 2014 Report Physical Risk Prospective evaluation of global earthquake forecast models: Two years of observations support merging smoothed seismicity with geodetic strain rates. Seismological Research Letters 2018 Peer-reviewed Hazard Modeling distributed seismicity for probabilistic seismic_hazard analysis: Implementation and insights with the OpenQuake engine 2014 Peer-reviewed Hazard OpenQuake engine manual 2018 User manual OpenQuake OpenQuake engine installation guide 2018 User manual OpenQuake OpenQuake Engine: An Open Hazard (and Risk) Software for the Global Earthquake Model 2014 Peer-reviewed Hazard OpenQuake Ground Motion Toolkit - UserGuide 2014 User manual Hazard OpenQuake Hazard component testing procedures 2014 Report Hazard OpenQuake Hazard Modeller's Toolkit - UserGuide 2017 User manual Hazard OpenQuake Underlying Hazard Science 2014 Report Hazard OpenQuake Underlying Risk Science 2013 Report Physical Risk Participatory Evaluation of Earthquake Risk and Resilience in Lalitpur Sub-Metropolitan City 2014 Report Social Vulnerability Probabilisitic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Issues and Challenges from the GEM Perspective 2016 Peer-reviewed Hazard Prospective and retrospective evaluation of five-year earthquake forecast models for California 2017 Peer-reviewed Hazard Remote Sensing for Building Inventory Generation: GEM-Driven Global Solutions 2011 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Risk Modeler's toolkit 2015 User manual Physical Risk Seismic fragility and vulnerability assessment using simplified methods for the Global Earthquake Model 2013 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk Selection of a Global Set of GMPEs for the GEM-PEER Global GMPEs Project 2012 Peer-reviewed Hazard Selection of ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) for GEM1* 2010 Report Hazard Site Effects in Parametric Ground Motion Models for the GEM-PEER Global GMPEs Project 2012 Peer-reviewed Hazard Sub-Saharan Africa Geodetic Strain Rate Model 1.0 2015 Report Hazard The GED4GEM Project: Development of a Global Exposure Database for the Global Earthquake Model Initiative 2012 Peer-reviewed Physical Risk The GEM Faulted Earth Project 2015 Report Hazard The hazard component of OpenQuake: The calculation engine of the Global Earthquake Model 2012 Peer-reviewed Hazard The Hazard Component of the GEM Modeller's Toolkit: A Framework for the Preparation and Analysis of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard (PSHA) Input Tools 2012 Peer-reviewed Hazard The OpenQuake Engine Brochure V1 2012 Brochure OpenQuake Understanding GEM's potential beneficiaries 2012 Report GEM Earthquake Models: Jan 2021 Release (brochure) Type: Brochure The GEM (Global Earthquake Model) Foundation develops hazard and risk models for the calculation of human and economic losses due to earthquakes. These models are important for a wide range of risk management applications, including standards for the design of buildings and infrastructure, insurance/risk transfer, national risk assessments, as well as public risk awareness and education. Global building exposure model for earthquake risk assessment Type: Peer-reviewed The global building exposure model is a mosaic of local and regional models with information regarding the residential, commercial, and industrial building stock at the smallest available administrative division of each country and includes details about the number of buildings, number of occupants, vulnerability characteristics, average built-up area, and average replacement cost. We aimed for a bottom-up approach at the global scale, using national statistics, socio-economic data, and local datasets. This model allows the identification of the most common types of construction worldwide, regions with large fractions of informal construction, and areas prone to earthquakes with a high concentration of population and building stock. The mosaic of exposure models presented herein can be used for the assessment of probabilistic seismic risk and earthquake scenarios. Information at the global, regional, and national levels is available through a public repository (https://github.com/gem/global_exposure_model), which will be used to maintain, update and improve the models. Development of a global seismic risk model Type: Peer-reviewed The Development of a Global Seismic Risk Model was a mammoth undertaking that involved hundreds of people and for the first time presented a detailed view of seismic risk at the global scale. For some developing countries, this was the first time that a seismic risk map was produced, and the associated country profiles are being used by the local authorities. GEM Strategic Plan and Roadmap to 2030 Type: Brochure GEM was founded in 2009 with the purpose of improving the global knowledge of earthquake risk and contributing to the reduction of risk worldwide. In 13 years, GEM has become widely known for its global effort to improve the state of practice of earthquake hazard and risk assessment and for its contribution to improving the state of knowledge of earthquake risk. New Statistical Perspectives on Bath's Law and Aftershock Productivity Type: Peer-reviewed The well-established Bath’s law states that the average magnitude difference between a mainshock and its strongest aftershock is roughly 1.2, independently of the size of the mainshock. The main challenge in calculating this value is the bias introduced by missing data points when the strongest aftershock is below the observed cut off magnitude. Ignoring missing values leads to a systematic error, because the data points removed are those with particularly large magnitude differences ∆M. The error is minimized, if we restrict the statistics to mainshocks at least two magnitude units above the cut-off, but then the sample size is strongly reduced. This work provides an innovative approach for modelling ∆M by adapting methods for time-to-event data, which often suffers from incomplete observation (censoring). In doing so, we adequately account for unobserved values and estimate a fully parametric distribution of the magnitude differences ∆M for M ą 6 mainshocks. Results show that magnitude differences are best modeled by the Gompertz distribution, and that larger ∆M are expected at increasing depths and higher heat flows. A simulation experiment suggests that ∆M is mainly driven by the number and the magnitude distribution of aftershocks. Therefore, in a second study, we modelled the variation of aftershock productivity in a stochastically declustered local catalog for New Zealand, using a generalized additive model approach. Results confirm that aftershock counts can be better modelled by a Negative Binomial than a Poisson distribution. Interestingly, there is indication that triggered earthquakes trigger themselves two to three times more aftershocks than comparable A hybrid ML-physical modelling approach for efficient approximation of tsunami waves at the coast for probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment Type: Peer-reviewed This work investigates a novel approach combining numerical modelling and machine learning, aimed at developing an efficient procedure that can be used for large scale tsunami hazard and risk studies. Probabilistic tsunami hazard and risk assessment are vital tools to understand the risk of tsunami and mitigate its impact, guiding the risk reduction and transfer activities. Such large-scale probabilistic tsunami hazard and risk assessment require many numerically intensive simulations of the possible tsunami events, involving the tsunami phases of generation, wave propagation and inundation on the coast, which are not always feasible without large computational resources like HPCs. In order to undertake such regional PTHA for a larger proportion of the coast, we need to develop concepts and algorithms for reducing the number of events simulated and more rapidly approximate the simulation results needed. This case study for a coastal region of Japan utilizes a limited number of tsunami simulations from submarine earthquakes along the subduction interface to generate a wave propagation database at different depths, and fits these simulation results to a machine learning model to predict the water depth or velocity of the tsunami wave at the coast. Such a hybrid ML-physical model can be further coupled with an inundation scheme to compute the probabilistic tsunami hazard and risk for the onshore region. Exploring benefit cost analysis to support earthquake risk mitigation in Central America Type: Peer-reviewed We performed benefit-cost analysis to identify optimum retrofitting interventions for the two most vulnerable building typologies in Central America, unreinforced masonry and adobe, considering the direct costs due to building damage and the indirect costs associated with the injured and fatalities. We reviewed worldwide retrofitting techniques, selected those that could be applied in the region for these building types, and derived vulnerability functions considering the impact of each retrofitting intervention in the strength, stiffness, and ductility of the structures. Probabilistic seismic risk analyses were performed considering the original configuration of each building class, as well as the retrofitted version. We calculated average annual losses to estimate the annual savings due to the different structural interventions, and benefit cost ratios were estimated based on the associated cost of each retrofitting technique. Based on the benefit-cost analyses, for a 50-year time horizon and a 4% discount rate, retrofitting these building classes could be economically viable along the western coast of Central America. The adolescent years of seismic risk assessment Type: Peer-reviewed Vitor Silva reflects on the current position of seismic risk assessment compared to its hazard counterpart, and posits that this discipline is expected to become common practice in disaster risk management, providing decision makers with valuable information not just about the current threat, but also how the impact of future disasters is expected to evolve. The growth of seismic risk assessment into its adult years will allow a more efficient design and implementation of risk mitigation measures. ultimately contributing to its main and only goal: the reduction of the human and economic losses caused by earthquakes. Exposure forecasting for seismic risk estimation: Application to Costa Rica Type: Peer-reviewed This study proposes a framework to forecast the spatial distribution of population and residential buildings for the assessment of future disaster risk. The approach accounts for the number, location, and characteristics of future assets considering sources of aleatory and epistemic uncertainty in several time-dependent variables. The value of the methodology is demonstrated at the urban scale using an earthquake scenario for the Great Metropolitan Area of Costa Rica. Hundreds of trajectories representing future urban growth were generated using geographically weighted regression and multiple-agent systems. These were converted into exposure models featuring the spatial correlation of urban expansion and the densification of the built environment. The forecasted earthquake losses indicate a mean increase in the absolute human and economic losses by 2030. However, the trajectory of relative risk is reducing, suggesting that the long-term enforcement of seismic regulations and urban planning are effectively lowering seismic risk in the case of Costa Rica. Investment in Disaster Risk Management in Europe Makes Economic Sense Type: Report The physical, financial, and social impacts of disasters in Europe are growing and will continue to grow unless urgent actions are taken. In the European Union (EU), during the period from 1980 to 2020, natural disasters affected nearly 50 million people and caused on average an economic loss of roughly €12 billion per year (EEA, 2020). The impacts of flood, wildfire, and extreme heat are increasing rapidly, and climate damages could reach €170 billion per year according to conservative estimates for a 3 scenario unless urgent action is taken now (Szewczyk, et al., 2020). Earthquakes, while rare, have a devastating impact on the ageing buildings and infrastructure of Europe that were constructed prior to modern codes; in Bucharest, for example, nearly 90% of the population lives in multifamily buildings with pre-modern building codes3 (Simpson & Markhvida, 2020). Within the EU, the top-five countries with the highest annual average loss to earthquake are Cyprus, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, and Croatia, and for floods the top-five countries are Romania, Slovenia, Latvia, Bulgaria, and Austria.4 However, disasters do not affect everyone equally: poor, elderly, very young, and marginalized populations are most affected and least able to recover. In Romania, Greece, Croatia, and Bulgaria, for example, the socio-economic resilience of the poor is on average less than 30% of the national average (World Bank, 2020). Moreover, the local and regional administrations in the poorer and more disadvantaged areas have the least capacity to design and implement resilience investments. Filter by publication type: Book chapter Conference paper Brochure Peer-reviewed Report User manual Reset 1 2 3 4 5 1 ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 15

openquake OpenQuake (OQ) - comprised of the engine, platform and tools - caters to a variety of users, from modellers and researchers to emergency planners - OpenQuake is used for a wide range of purposes for disaster risk reduction and management. OQ Data & Tools OQ Training OQ Tutorials OQ Engine OQ Platform Anchor 1 Get started with the OQ Engine: read on below or visit our OQ GitHub website . The OpenQuake Engine is the Global Earthquake Model Foundation’s (GEM) state-of-the-art, open-source software collaboratively developed for earthquake hazard and risk modelling. It runs on operating systems such as Linux, macOS and Windows; and can be deployed on laptops, desktops, standalone servers and multi-node clusters. The functionality to analyze hazard and risks at specific site, city, country or regional level makes the OpenQuake Engine a powerful and dynamic tool for assessing the potential impacts of earthquakes at any location in the world. Instructions For modellers, researchers, scientists and engineers 01 Download the latest user manual . 02 Download the latest version of the 03 Follow the installation guide here . OpenQuake Engine For developers 01 Follow the instructions here . Related Documentation OpenQuake engine manual OpenQuake engine installation guide OpenQuake Engine: An Open Hazard (and Risk) Software for the Global Earthquake Model OpenQuake Ground Motion Toolkit - UserGuide OpenQuake Hazard component testing procedures OpenQuake Hazard Modeller's Toolkit - UserGuide OpenQuake Underlying Hazard Science OpenQuake Underlying Risk Science Join the OpenQuake Forum Check OQ Engine's Project Status here. OpenQuake Engine Key Features HAZARD Classical PSHA*: hazard curves, hazard maps, uniform hazard spectra (UHS), disaggregation Event-based hazard : stochastic earthquake event sets and ground motion fields, hazard curves, hazard maps Scenario hazard: single event - stochastically generated ground motion fields ​ Additional features: 5 typologies for modeling seismic sources 100+ GMPEs implemented and tested Tools for harmonizing catalogs, creating seismogenic input files, analyzing strong motions and GMPEs ​ PHYSICAL RISK Classical PSHA-based: asset-specific loss exceedance curves, average annual loss, loss maps, building typology disaggregation ​ ​ Event-based risk: event loss tables, loss exceedance curves - asset specific and aggregated, average annual loss, loss maps, loss disaggregation Scenario hazard: loss statistics, loss maps ​ Scenario damage: collapse maps, damage distribution per asset and building typology Single software Combines hazard and risk in a single software Compatibility Compatible with various existing hazard, vulnerability and exposure models Calculations Calculates scenario and probabilistic hazard and risk analysis Different Scales Supports calculations at different scales Uncertainties Accounts for wide spectrum of uncertainties Typologies Large set of source typologies for modelling faults as well as distributed seismicity Logic Tree Logic tree support (representing epistemic uncertainty) Explicit Uncertainty Explicit representation of uncertainty, including separation of epistemic from aleatory Pre-computed data Runs risk calculations for precomputed hazard curves and ground motion fields OQ Engine Calculators and Outputs OQ Platform The OpenQuake Platform is a website that allows the community to explore, manipulate and visualize the datasets and models and to use tools that GEM produces. The platform also allows users to contribute, share and discuss new findings and results with the GEM community. Share your outputs - datasets, maps, models - to the GEM OpenQuake community through the Platform. The OpenQuake Platform hosts a number of national, regional and global models. Follow the instructions below to access data from GEM and the OQ community. For users who only need outputs such as datasets, layers or maps, you can simply register for free and browse the Platform for the data that you need. To start sharing your data, follow the instructions below. Sign in or register here . Click Layers > Upload Layers Create maps based on GEM’s existing datasets or create one based on your uploaded Layer. Click Maps > Create Maps Save and Publish your map to share with the OpenQuake community. To start browsing and downloading data, follow the instructions below. Sign in or register here . In the Search box, type the name of the map or dataset you’re looking for. Look for your item from the search results, click to Download. To customize or create your own maps, click Maps > Create Maps Click the Add Layer icon and select from the available layers from the dropdown list. Save and Publish your map. Download your map. Sign in Register Openquake: Tools and Data GEM works on a wide range of open-source source (software) tools to allow you to calculate, share and explore earthquake risk. Most of these are already embedded in the platform , but others are released as stand-alone applications. All 0 Software Building Classification Tool (v.2017) License: AGPL Version: ​ The 'Building classification tool' aims to create a detailed inventory of the most frequent building typologies in the world. Software Catalogue Toolkit (v.2018) License: AGPL Version: ​ Open source toolkit for the compilation and harmonisation of earthquake catalogues. Software GEM's IRMTK QGIS plugin (v.2020) License: AGPL Version: ​ This QGIS plugin allows users to drive OpenQuake Engine calculations of physical hazard and risk, and to load the corresponding outputs as QGIS layers. Software GMPE Strong Motion Modeller's Toolkit (v.2020) License: AGPL Version: ​ Python and OpenQuake-based Toolkit for Analysis of Strong Motions and Interpretation of GMPEs Software Glossary for GEM Taxonomy (v.2018) License: AGPL Version: ​ An online tool that explains around 400 terms contained in the GEM Building Taxonomy v 2.0 and nearly 700 images. Product Group Sub Product Group Product Type License Type Building Classification Tool (v.2017) Building Classification Tool (v.2017) Software AGPL Catalogue Toolkit (v.2018) Catalogue Toolkit (v.2018) Software AGPL GEM's IRMTK QGIS plugin (v.2020) GEM's IRMTK QGIS plugin (v.2020) Software AGPL GMPE Strong Motion Modeller's Toolkit (v.2020) GMPE Strong Motion Modeller's Toolkit (v.2020) Software AGPL Glossary for GEM Taxonomy (v.2018) Glossary for GEM Taxonomy (v.2018) Software AGPL Hamlet: Hazard Model Evaluation and Testing (v.2020) Hamlet: Hazard Model Evaluation and Testing (v.2020) Software AGPL Hazard Modeller's Toolkit (v.2020) Hazard Modeller's Toolkit (v.2020) Software AGPL IDCT Direct Observation Tool (v.2018) IDCT Direct Observation Tool (v.2018) Software AGPL OpenQuake TaxTweb Software AGPL OpenQuake OpenQuake Engine Latest Software AGPL OpenQuake Risk Input Preparation Toolkit Software AGPL OpenQuake OpenQuake Engine 3.11 Software AGPL OpenQuake Vulnerability Modellers ToolKit Software AGPL OpenQuake OpenQuake Platform Software AGPL Openquake OpenQuake Model Building Toolkit Software AGPL Risk Modeller's Toolkit (v.2020) Risk Modeller's Toolkit (v.2020) Software AGPL Sort by Order by View: Table Blocks 1 2 3 4 1 ... 1 2 3 4 ... 4 Openquake: Training The OpenQuake online training is designed for an audience with a diverse background and expertise and covers the main concepts of earthquake risk assessment, along with the basic features of the engine. The training activities have been tailored for beginner users, and are divided into four modules that cover different types of calculations using the OpenQuake-engine. ​Each module is approached from a technical and practical perspective. It includes a theoretical introduction, followed by step-by-step examples that help to consolidate the concepts, as well as exploring the OpenQuake tools for each type of calculation. ​ Modules Module I: OpenQuake introduction https://www.training.openquake.org/oq-introduction Module II: Earthquake scenarios https://www.training.openquake.org/eq-scenarios Module III: Classical PSHA https://www.training.openquake.org/psha Module IV: Event-based analysis https://www.training.openquake.org/event-based Openquake: Tutorials OQ Engine Video Tutorials on seismic hazard and risk analysis available in English and Spanish. English https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J46boursIRc&list=PL08aqbvcszvQxT_HMoSk0XisLw1twc3V4 Español https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rbDm-wiwbw&list=PL08aqbvcszvT6YG353CnIyL9d7gdZblBX OpenQuake - Software Installation and Demos OpenQuake Introduction - A software for Seismic Hazard and Risk Assessment OpenQuake - Ground Motion Fields: Theoretical Background OpenQuake - Scenario Damage and Loss: Theoretical Background OpenQuake - Scenario Damage and Loss: Hands-on exercise OpenQuake - Classical PSHA: Theoretical Background OpenQuake - Classical PSHA: Hands-on Exercise OpenQuake - Event-based Risk: Theoretical Background OpenQuake - Event-Based Risk: Hands-on Exercise ​ OpenQuake - Volcanic Risk Scenarios: Theory and Hands-On Exercise https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leF4aQXGdjk&t=1013s Learn the basics to perform volcanic risk scenarios using the OpenQuake engine. In this video we cover the main components of a seismic risk model and discuss how their modelling assumptions and products may be useful for volcanic risk assessment. We include a hands-on exercise using the software to calculate volcanic risk and the QGIS OpenQuake plug-in to export and visualize results, like total losses and loss maps for the El Ruiz Volcano.

Frequently Asked Questions Welcome to GEM's FAQ section, offering insights on sponsorship, participation, intellectual property rights, licensing, and trademarks. This resource aims to address common queries and assist in better understanding GEM's operations and engagement opportunities. Explore our FAQs for clear guidance on various aspects of involvement with us. Share Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn How to sponsor and participate 1. What kind of institution is GEM? The GEM Foundation (Italian registered name “Fondazione GEM”) is a non-profit foundation regulated by Italian law and based in Pavia (hosted by EUCENTRE). 2. How can my company or institution collaborate with GEM? The first and most complete option is to become a GEM sponsor (for more details, please see the following FAQ). If this is not possible for any reason, you can consider starting a specific project and then signing an institutional collaboration agreement. “Institutional” means that the object of the collaboration must fall within the institutional aims of the GEM Foundation, which are described in detail in art. 2 of the statute. Our legal team can provide you with an agreement template for institutional collaborations. 3. How can my company or institution become a sponsor of GEM? As provided in art. 3 of GEM Statute, to become a GEM sponsor you should submit your application to the GEM Governing Board, specifying the sponsorship category, the Sponsorship duration, and the name of the designated member of the Governing Board. Should the Governing Board accept the new sponsorship application, the candidate will have to sign a sponsorship agreement through which they commit to: respect the Statute and the GEM Foundation rules and regulations; disburse the annual contribution in support of the Foundation’s activities set by the Governing Board for the specific participant category to which they belong. Our legal team can provide you with a sponsorship agreement for your specific category. 4. Can GEM support my company or institution just as a consultant or a service provider? Yes, it is possible but is not our preferred approach. Italian law does not prohibit non-profit organizations from doing business as a commercial entity. However, this approach is less in line with our core values and mission. Commercial activities are also more expensive for GEM to carry out due to increased administrative overheads and taxes. For these reasons, GEM undertakes commercial activities only where doing so benefits the community as a whole. GEM reinvests any surplus revenue from commercial projects for use in institutional activities. 5. Which categories of sponsors are available? The GEM Statute includes three macro-categories of sponsors: a. Governor: they are voting sponsors and need to pay a financial contribution … b. Advisor: they are non-voting sponsors and need to pay a financial contribution … c. Associates: they are non-voting sponsors and do not need to pay any financial contribution; they may nominate a delegate to attend Governing Board meetings (without voting right). ​ How to use intellectual property rights and licensing 6. What are the main GEM Foundation intellectual products? As part of its institutional activities, the GEM Foundation produces software, datasets, hazard models, scientific and informative articles, research reports, slides presentation, infographics, maps and pictures. As is well known, these types of materials are protected by intellectual property rights and, except where otherwise specified, the GEM Foundation is the sole rights holder. 7. What is GEM's approach to product rights and licensing? The GEM Foundation adopts an open approach to the management of rights on its products and supports the spread of phenomena such as free software/open source software, open access, open data. With a few limited exceptions, all intellectual products by the GEM Foundation are released with open licenses, such as the Free Software Foundation licenses for software and the Creative Commons licenses for creative contents, datasets and models. Every file that is released on our websites is accompanied by the corresponding license. From time to time, please check the license applied. If in doubt, you can contact licensing@globalquakemodel.org . ​ 8. How to use GEM intellectual products? What types of licenses can be applied? In order to perform analyses using the OpenQuake engine, one needs both the engine software and a model. In order to use a model one must respect both software and data licenses. a. Software, AGPL The software license used by GEM, the GNU AGPL, allows users to use the software for any purpose, including commercial purposes, without having to request a specific permission and without needing to become active supporters of our projects. The AGPL does restrict (re)distribution and integration of the software - in particular it is not permitted to link AGPL software with closed-source software systems, even if this linkage is performed via a network. Users are permitted to modify AGPL software, however, users must remember to release any derived/modified versions openly under the terms of the AGPL. In essence this means that GEM software must remain open and cannot be made into closed products without permission. b. Data and Models The Creative Commons licenses applied to our creative contents, datasets and models, allow users to freely use and modify (by making derivative works) our products and require that the authorship of GEM Foundation is always correctly attributed and in some cases impose some additional restrictions on use. GEM models and datasets are distributed with either the CC BY-SA license which allows commercial use or the CC BY-NC-SA license which prohibits commercial use. Both are Share-Alike licenses; this means that the product and any modified or derived products may only be (re)distributed under the terms of the same license. In essence this means that GEM models must remain open and cannot be made into closed products without permission. ​ c. Other content (slides, images, articles) Some content is distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND license which prohibits both commercial use and the creation of derived products; this means that you are free to redistribute the content but you may not modify or make commercial use of the content. Content published in peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings or other publications may have a different license, please check before using. GEM Foundation registered trademarks The GEM Foundation has two registered trademarks: GEM Global Earthquake Model (see graphics) and OQ OpenQuake (see graphics). They have been registered in the following countries: European Union, United States, Switzerland, Australia, Turkey, Japan. More details about the usage of our trademarks are available below. ​ 9. What are the rules and policies applicable to Marks owned by GEM Foundation? In addition to the generally applicable rules, there are a few specific rules that we ask everyone to follow when using trademarks owned by GEM Foundation. ​ Use the full form of any trademarks (e.g., “GEM Global Earthquake Model”) in the first reference in all documents of mass communication, including marketing collateral and web pages. You may then use any abbreviated or short form references (e.g. “GEM”) within the same the document where the full form has already been used. Do not use GEM Foundation trademarks in a manner that would disparage GEM Foundation or its projects (e.g., untruthful advertising, false/misleading promotional materials, etc.). Do not use a GEM Foundation logo on the cover of a book or magazine without written permission from GEM Foundation. Do not use GEM Foundation trademarks more prominently than your own company, product or service name. Do not use a logo of GEM Foundation on posters, brochures, signs, websites, or other marketing materials to promote your events, products or services without written permission from GEM Foundation. Do not attempt to claim or assert any ownership rights in any mark of GEM Foundation and do not attempt to register any GEM Foundation trademark as a trademark, trade name, domain name, or “doing business as” name, alone or (unless specifically licensed) in combination with your own trademarks. DOs and DON'Ts on the use of GEM logos and links GEM Foundation marks have been created and their use is expressly permitted for a specific purpose. ​ DON'T : Do not use logos or names of GEM Foundation in any commercial or marketing context other than as expressly permitted in this policy unless you have obtained explicit written permission from GEM Foundation to do so. ​ DO : Do use our trademarks for private and personal use to make t-shirts, stickers, and caps for yourself and your friends (meaning people from whom you don’t receive anything of value in return) in a manner that is consistent with the preservation of the goodwill and value of the mark. DO : You are also allowed to use a trademark or logo of GEM Foundation as a link to the home page of the applicable project or to a web page on GEM Foundation web site that is relevant to the reference so long as the link is in a manner that is consistent with the preservation of the goodwill and value of the mark. ​ DO : The link and all other usage of a logo of GEM Foundation shall be done using the official versions of GEM Foundation logos obtained from GEM Foundation or its projects.

Please fill in the form below to download or view the document. Thank you. Philippines Product Additional Requests Sector I have read and agree to comply with the license terms of this product, and the conditions of products use. Reset fields Submit Download Thank you. Please click Download to get your item. Provide feedback to GEM on the use and impact of the product e.g. feedback survey. Share with GEM where the product was used i.e. research, publications or projects.

Please fill in the form below to download or view the document. Thank you. Alaska Product Additional Requests Sector I have read and agree to comply with the license terms of this product, and the conditions of products use. Reset fields Submit Download Thank you. Please click Download to get your item. Provide feedback to GEM on the use and impact of the product e.g. feedback survey. Share with GEM where the product was used i.e. research, publications or projects.

Please fill in the form below to download or view the document. Thank you. Sub-Saharan Africa Product Additional Requests Sector I have read and agree to comply with the license terms of this product, and the conditions of products use. Reset fields Submit Download Thank you. Please click Download to get your item. Provide feedback to GEM on the use and impact of the product e.g. feedback survey. Share with GEM where the product was used i.e. research, publications or projects.