News GEM Contributes to SIGMA‑3 General Assembly on Nuclear Seismic Safety By: Jul 7, 2025 Jun 3, 2025 Share Facebook LinkedIn GEM participated in the first General Assembly of the SIGMA‑3 project, held in Espoo, Finland, as part of an international effort to advance seismic hazard assessment in support of nuclear safety. SIGMA‑3 is a multi-year research initiative focused on improving the science and methods used to assess seismic hazard and ground motion, particularly for critical infrastructure such as nuclear power plants. The project is supported by a consortium of European and international industry and regulatory bodies. Representing GEM were Marco Pagani, Head of Seismic Hazard, along with Zainab Asaad and Fahrettin Kuran, PhD students from IUSS Pavia. GEM’s participation contributes to SIGMA‑3’s goal of strengthening site-specific hazard estimates, with a focus on improving approaches to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA), particularly in the Nordic region. GEM representatives contributed to technical discussions on methodologies and modelling, reinforcing the Foundation’s role in connecting academic research with real-world applications. Their input supports the ongoing refinement of hazard estimates for nuclear sites and promotes open, consistent frameworks for hazard modelling. Through its involvement, GEM is sharing open-source tools, data and expertise to help ensure that seismic risk modelling remains transparent, science-based and accessible. The collaboration highlights how GEM’s core values – openness, credibility and public good – align with the safety priorities of the nuclear energy sector. The next SIGMA‑3 General Assembly is scheduled for December 2025. GEM will continue to support the initiative’s progress toward more reliable seismic safety assessments for critical facilities. For more information, please visit: Sigma 3 Technical Program - sigma No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

Publications A township-level exposure model of residential buildings for mainland China Share Facebook LinkedIn Download 2021 | Peer-reviewed The exposure model is a key component of a seismic risk model, which captures the spatial distribution of population and built assets along with their structural characteristics and valuation that are required for seismic risk assessment. Current and available exposure models for China have various limitations that make them less suitable for use in risk assessment, including low spatial resolution of building inventory and the limited identification of key structural characteristics. This study describes the development of a residential buildings’ township-level exposure model for mainland China, containing information about the geographical distribution, structural characteristics, age, ductility, number of stories, number of dwellings, average built-up area, and replacement cost at the township level. This exposure model is intended to be used for risk assessment and to support emergency planning, risk management, and decisions. The geographical distribution’s detailed analysis of the building typologies, heights, and construction vintage at the national, regional, and provincial levels is provided to better aid in understanding country exposure. The results indicate that based on the method, flow, and data from the 6th National Population Census of the People's Republic of China, we can generate key information used for seismic risk analysis, representing a significant step toward a better understanding of risk due to seismic hazards in mainland China.

News GEM and Descartes Underwriting announce partnership aiming to revolutionize parametric approach to earthquake risk By: Nov 18, 2021 Share Facebook LinkedIn Photo credit: @rhidabels Unsplash.com By strengthening both organizations’ understanding of earthquake risk, the collaboration seeks to benefit the global earthquake risk management community while supporting fair and transparent parametric insurance structures Descartes’ experience from different specialized markets and expertise from its scientific team will aid model improvement and advance earthquake risk assessment at global, regional, and local levels 18 November, 2021 - Descartes Underwriting , the largest independent parametric insurance provider, has established a partnership with the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Foundation , an international public-private partnership committed to the development of open-source hazard and risk assessment software, tools and data. The GEM Foundation also centers on the application of science to understanding and managing earthquake risk on a global scale. The collaboration aims to accelerate the ‘data to resilience’ continuum by leveraging the state-of-the-art technology behind Descartes’ parametric insurance solutions and GEM’s open, transparent and collaborative approach to earthquake risk analysis at the global, regional, national and local levels. Earthquakes, which made up only 8% of all disasters in the last 20 years, are the deadliest of all sudden disaster events. The peril constitutes one of the top causes of economic disruption and of disaster deaths due to building collapse. Exposure impacts and global ripple effects have been further aggravated in the past decade, where less than one-fifth of all earthquake losses globally were covered by insurance. The collaboration between GEM and Descartes Underwriting seeks to increase the uptake of earthquake insurance and reduce the protection gap in underserved sectors and regions of the world. The joint partnership also supports continued development of fair and transparent parametric insurance structures that ultimately reduce basis risk and bolster resilience for policyholders. “This partnership will provide a framework for both organizations to work together in developing high resolution and scientifically robust earthquake hazard and risk data to meet the needs of public and private sectors for customized and more affordable earthquake insurance products. Our combined efforts can also contribute to better earthquake risk understanding worldwide and better earthquake insurance coverage.” – John Schneider, GEM Secretary General. GEM’s array of earthquake hazard, exposure and vulnerability models as well as OpenQuake software tools can be used to simulate the seismic behavior of buildings, lifelines and critical facilities. In particular, it allows for the assessment of the probability of earthquakes occurring, and the consequent physical damage and economic loss, essential information for implementing a wide range of risk reduction and transfer mechanisms, including parametric insurance. “Partnering with GEM marks a milestone for both organizations and plays a critical role in providing the next generation of earthquake parametric insurance to clients worldwide. Through frictionless and transparent payouts following seismic events, our joint efforts will be instrumental in reducing the earthquake protection gap around the globe” - says Kevin Dedieu, Co-founder and Head of R&D, Descartes Underwriting. About Descartes Underwriting Offering a new generation of technology-driven parametric insurance, Descartes collaborates with brokers to protect their corporate and public sector clients against the full spectrum of natural catastrophe and extreme weather exposures, including earthquake. Descartes’ covers are uniquely designed to supplement gaps left by traditional insurance, providing cost-effective and fully transparent products that guarantee liquidity via swift and direct payout. Born out of the conviction that climate change calls for a revolutionary approach to insurance, Descartes is structured as an MGA backed by a panel of tier-one risk carriers and can provide $200M USD in capacity per policy. Headquartered in Paris, Descartes Underwriting provides parametric solutions to clients globally from its offices based in Singapore, Sydney, New York, Houston, and London. For more information, please visit www.descartesunderwriting.com . Media Contact: Meg Chaperon -Senior Product Marketing & PR Officer, Descartes Underwriting meg.chaperon@descartesunderwriting.com About GEM Foundation GEM was formed in 2009 as a non-profit foundation in Pavia, Italy, funded through a public-private sponsorship with the vision to create a world that is resilient to earthquakes. GEM is funded by public and private institutions globally, and is advised by many international organizations ( https://www.globalquakemodel.org/partners ). GEM is also recognized by the UN as an NGO, operating under UN guidelines for a humanitarian organization. GEM’s mission is to become one of the world’s most complete sources of risk resources and a globally accepted standard for earthquake risk assessment. Further, GEM aims to ensure that its products are applied broadly in disaster risk management/reduction and its services are available and accessible to public, private and academic institutions worldwide. Media Contact: Jephraim Oro - Communications and Web Manager, GEM Foundation jephraim.oro@globalquakemodel.org No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

News Integrating Science and Society: EPOS ON Project Kick-Off By: Oct 9, 2024 Sep 1, 2024 Share Facebook LinkedIn The European Plate Observing System-Optimisation and EvolutioN (EPOS ON) project , a collaborative initiative involving a consortium of 34 partners across 18 countries, kicked off on September 1, 2024, and is set to run for 36 months, concluding on August 31, 2027. Coordinated by EPOS ERIC , the project aims to support the optimisation and evolution of the EPOS Research Infrastructure (EPOS RI) by enhancing the interoperability, accessibility, and integration of various datasets for effective risk management and resilience against natural hazards. With funding support from the European Union (EU) under the Horizon Europe program, this collaborative project will be implemented across various geographic locations within Europe and may extend its partnerships to other regions globally, bringing together diverse expertise and resources to strengthen EPOS RI. Key outputs expected from EPOS ON project work packages (WP) include: WP2 Enhancing Services for Science - Integration of new services from various communities into the EPOS Data Portal , along with a framework to guide engagement with new research communities and enhanced FAIR (i.e. Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles for research. WP3 Contribution to Tackle Societal Challenges - Enhancement of existing EPOS services for improved risk management for natural hazards, supported by dialogue with the EU Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network (UCPKN). WP4 Strengthening Impact Through User Engagement - Implementation of the EPOS User Strategy to enhance engagement and training, complemented by targeted training materials for early-career researchers. WP5 Enlarging European and International Collaborations - Establishment of collaborative partnerships with relevant research infrastructures to promote synergies and expand global access to EPOS services and data. To achieve these outputs, a robust management framework will be developed to ensure effective coordination, communication, and monitoring of project activities across all work packages (WP1), along with the establishment of an evaluation and dissemination strategy to assess project impacts and share results with stakeholders and the wider scientific community (WP6). GEM's specific contributions to the project through WP3 include scientific products that support risk management: Data products and services for rapid post-event assessment: this includes the improvement of existing tools (e.g., European ShakeMap service) for rapid post-event assessment of earthquake impacts and associated secondary hazards (e.g. liquefaction), tools to predict population dynamics in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, and databases of damage-dependent seismic vulnerability models for European buildings. Support for the expansion of the existing European seismic risk services to include maps representing the environmental impact associated with earthquakes in terms of equivalent carbon dioxide (eCO2) emissions arising from damage and subsequent repair activities. In Work Package 5 (WP5), GEM will collaborate with EPOS in its mission to strengthen international partnerships, expanding the global reach and effectiveness of its data and services for a wide range of public and private stakeholders. “GEM is looking forward to working more closely with EPOS through this project, both to provide services and data that support earthquake risk assessment and mitigation, and to provide a strong connection between EPOS and GEM’s global public-private partnership” – Helen Crowley, GEM Secretary General. ## No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

Publications The GEM Faulted Earth Project Share Facebook LinkedIn Download 2015 | Report This is the final report of the GEM Faulted Earth Project (GFE), which was active between 2010 and 2013. GFE set out to build a global active fault database with a common set of strategies, standards and formats, to be placed in the public domain. Nearly 100 individuals from 43 institutions in 21 countries contributed to GFE by providing feedback on the database design and the compilation tool, as well as the documents describing them, contributing data and participating in several workshops.

Publications Evolution of the OpenQuake Engine: Enhanced capabilities, collaborative development, and global adoption Share Facebook LinkedIn Download 2025 | Peer-reviewed The OpenQuake Engine started being developed in 2010 and was publicly introduced in 2014 as an open-source software for seismic hazard and risk modeling, aiming to provide a transparent, flexible, and globally accessible platform to the earthquake engineering and hazard science communities. Over the subsequent decade, extensive advancements have significantly expanded its capabilities and enhanced its adoption worldwide. This article comprehensively reviews these developments, detailing the new computational workflows and features implemented in the OpenQuake Engine with an emphasis on the risk component, improvements in its computational efficiency and scalability, and its growing global application across diverse geographical and thematic contexts. Major improvements to the OpenQuake Engine include the earthquake-triggered landslide and liquefaction modules, the infrastructure risk and network connectivity analysis module, the post-event loss amplification module, the financial loss module for insured and reinsured loss calculations, the classical and event-based probabilistic damage calculators, and the site-amplification module. Additional features include the option to condition ground motion fields on station data in scenario calculations, ability to connect ShakeMap outputs to the OpenQuake Engine’s damage and loss calculators, the conditional spectra calculator, vector-valued PSHA, and extension of the risk calculators to volcanic hazards. Performance improvements and enhancements in documentation have been pivotal in strengthening the software’s usability across a variety of computational platforms and user groups. A core contribution of this article lies in compiling and synthesizing over a hundred studies conducted using the OpenQuake Engine, thereby illustrating its versatile application at national, regional, urban, and site-specific scales. Moreover, examples of its use in earthquake insurance pricing and parametric catastrophe bond design are highlighted, demonstrating its practical relevance to risk management and financial resilience. Reflections on lessons learned regarding the importance of open-source practices, robust documentation, sustained user engagement, and interdisciplinary collaboration are discussed to inform future development and maintenance of scientific software with global applications.

License Request Form You have chosen to get more information about: Papua New Guinea Hazard Hazard Please check the link below to see if this product already meets your your requirements before submitting your request for a license. Thank you. DOWNLOAD THE OPEN VERSION Summary of steps to obtain a license for the requested product. Fill in the application form below. Click Submit. Please check your email Inbox or Spam folder for the summary of your request. You will then be contacted by the GEM Product Manager with either a request for more information, or a request to sign the license. If you do not hear from us within 2 weeks, please send an email to product@globalquakemodel.org . REQUEST DETAILS A. Requesting party information First Name Last Name Role/Job Email Business type Business type Other business Sector Sector Other sector B. License agreement signatory information The signatory must be someone who is authorised to sign license agreements on your behalf such as your immediate supervisor, manager or legal officer. If you’re a PhD student, the signatory must be your adviser or a university officer in charge of license agreements or similar legal documents. Full Name of Signatory Position Company Email of Signatory Organisation name Complete Address C. Purpose of request GEM is able to offer products for free because of the support of our project partners, national collaborators and institutional sponsors. All of GEM’s products are freely available for public good, non-commercial use, but with different license restrictions. In most cases we release products under an open license (e.g., CC BY-SA or CC BY-NC-SA), which permits (re)distribution. In this case, we are granting access under a more restricted license that forbids distribution or disclosure and requires signing by GEM and the licensee in order to better assure accountability for the confidentiality of the information. In order for GEM to properly assess your request, please answer the following questions below. 1. Explain briefly how will the GEM product be used e.g. project, research including the expected results and the foreseen public benefit. 2. Will you be able to share the results of your work with GEM? YES NO 3. Will you be able to provide feedback to GEM on the quality and usefulness of this product via a survey? YES NO C. Privacy Policy By submitting this form, you consent to the processing of your personal data in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). We are committed to safeguarding your information and ensuring it is only used for the purpose outlined in this form. You have the right to access, rectify, or delete your data at any time. For more information, please refer to our Privacy Policy. I agree Words: 0 Email us at product@globalquakemodel.org if you're experiencing problems submitting your application. Thank you. Submit Thanks for submitting! You will be contacted as soon as possible Incomplete data. Please fill in all required fields. Thank you.

Publications Methods for assessing the significance and importance of differences between probabilistic seismic hazard Share Facebook LinkedIn Download 2024 | Peer-reviewed When new seismic hazard estimates are published it is natural to compare them to existing results for the same location. This type of comparison routinely indicates differences amongst hazard estimates obtained with the various models. The question that then arises is whether these differences are scientifically significant, given the large epistemic uncertainties inherent in all seismic hazard estimates, or practically important, given the use of hazard models as inputs to risk and engineering calculations. A difference that exceeds a given threshold could mean that building codes may need updating, risk models for insurance purposes may need to be revised, or emergency management procedures revisited. In the current literature there is little guidance on what constitutes a significant or important difference, which can lead to lengthy discussions amongst hazard modellers, end users and stakeholders. This study reviews proposals in the literature on this topic and examines how applicable these proposals are, using, for illustration purposes, several sites and various seismic hazard models for each site, including the two European Seismic Hazard Models of 2013 and 2020. The implications of differences in hazard for risk and engineering purposes are also examined to understand how important such differences are for potential end users of seismic hazard models. Based on this, we discuss the relevance of such methods to determine the scientific significance and practical importance of differences between seismic hazard estimates and identify some open questions. We conclude that there is no universal criterion for assessing differences between seismic hazard results and that the recommended approach depends on the context. Finally, we highlight where additional work is required on this topic and that we encourage further discussion of this topic.

A milestone in global earthquake risk assessment Project Name Products Global Seismic Risk Map A milestone in global earthquake risk assessment Share Facebook LinkedIn Description The Global Seismic Risk Map (v2023.1) poster comprises three global maps, and a ranking of the top 15 countries according to five risk metrics. The main map presents the geographic distribution of average annual loss (AAL) of the built-up area due to ground shaking in the residential, commercial and industrial building stock. It does not consider the effects of tsunamis, liquefaction, landslides, and fires following earthquakes. These results are an update of the global maps released in 2018, as described in Silva et al. (2020) and are based on the best available and publicly accessible datasets and models, which have been collected, curated and maintained in collaboration between local experts and GEM Foundation scientists. The underlying dataset used to create the main map can be requested as a shapefile for use in research and public-good applications without cost, or for a licensing fee in the case of commercial applications. In addition to the AAL of the built-up area depicted in the poster, the underlying dataset also includes estimates of average annual economic losses, number of buildings lost, population left homeless and fatalities. How to cite this work V. Silva, A. Calderon, M. Caruso, C. Costa, J. Dabbeek, M.C. Hoyos, Z. Karimzadeh, L. Martins, N. Paul, A. Rao, M. Simionato, C. Yepes-Estrada, H. Crowley, K. Jaiswal (2023). Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Seismic Risk Map (version 2023.1), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409623 Available Versions A PDF poster, as well as a set of high-resolution PNGs with each of the risk metrics calculated globally, is available for direct download under a CC BY-SA license. If your use case does not meet the open license requirements, or if you are interested in obtaining the underlying dataset as a shapefile, please submit a request in our system by clicking on the "License Request", where a specific license will be provided, depending on the use case. Additionally, users interested in the previous version of the Global Map (v2018) can access the previous poster on this link . License information The open version is available under a Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 license, which requires: *Attribution (you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made) *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 dataset, a specific license agreement must be made tailored to your use case, in such instance please click on "License Request". Share License CC BY-SA 4.0 Available resources Geoviewer PNG Poster Download Documentation License Request Acknowledgements Contributors Facebook LinkedIn Map View Search Popup title Close Country/Region Available Resources Afghanistan Exposure Africa Exposure Alaska Exposure Albania Exposure Algeria Exposure American Samoa Exposure Andorra Exposure Angola Exposure Anguilla Exposure Antigua and Barbuda Exposure Arabia Exposure Argentina Exposure Armenia Exposure Aruba Exposure Australia Exposure Austria Exposure Azerbaijan Exposure Bahamas Exposure Bahrain Exposure Bangladesh Exposure Barbados Exposure Belarus Exposure Belgium Exposure Belize Exposure Benin Exposure Bhutan Exposure Bolivia Exposure Bosnia and Herzegovina Exposure Botswana Exposure Brazil Exposure British Virgin Islands Exposure Brunei Exposure Bulgaria Exposure Burkina Faso Exposure Burundi Exposure Cambodia Exposure Cameroon Exposure Canada Exposure Cape Verde Exposure Caribbean Central America Exposure Cayman Islands Exposure Central African Republic Exposure Central Asia Exposure Chad Exposure Chile Exposure China Exposure Colombia Exposure Comoros Exposure Congo Exposure Conterminous US Exposure Cook Islands Exposure Costa Rica Exposure Croatia Exposure Cuba Exposure Cyprus Exposure Czechia Exposure Democratic Republic of the Congo Exposure Denmark Exposure Djibouti Exposure Dominica Exposure Dominican Republic Exposure East Asia Exposure Ecuador Exposure Egypt Exposure El Salvador Exposure Equatorial Guinea Exposure Eritrea Exposure Estonia Exposure Eswatini Exposure Ethiopia Exposure Europe Exposure Fiji Exposure Finland Exposure France Exposure French Guiana Exposure Gabon Exposure Gambia Exposure Georgia Exposure Germany Exposure Ghana Exposure Gibraltar Exposure Greece Exposure Grenada Exposure Guadeloupe Exposure Guam Exposure Guatemala Exposure Guinea Exposure Guinea Bissau Exposure Guyana Exposure Haiti Exposure Hawaii Exposure Honduras Exposure Hong Kong Exposure Hungary Exposure Iceland Exposure India Exposure Indonesia Exposure Iran Exposure Iraq Exposure Ireland Exposure Isle of Man Exposure Israel Exposure Italy Exposure Ivory Coast Exposure Jamaica Exposure Japan Exposure Jordan Exposure Kazakhstan Exposure Kenya Exposure Kiribati Exposure Kosovo Exposure Kuwait Exposure Kyrgyzstan Exposure Laos Exposure Latvia Exposure Lebanon Exposure Lesotho Exposure Liberia Exposure Libya Exposure Liechtenstein Exposure Lithuania Exposure Luxembourg Exposure Macao Exposure Madagascar Exposure Malawi Exposure Malaysia Exposure Mali Exposure Malta Exposure Marshall Islands Exposure Martinique Exposure Mauritania Exposure Mauritius Exposure Mexico Exposure Micronesia Exposure Middle East Exposure Moldova Exposure Monaco Exposure Mongolia Exposure Montenegro Exposure Montserrat Exposure Morocco Exposure Mozambique Exposure Myanmar Exposure Namibia Exposure Nauru Exposure Nepal Exposure Netherlands Exposure New Caledonia Exposure New Zealand Exposure Nicaragua Exposure Niger Exposure Nigeria Exposure Niue Exposure North Africa Exposure North America Exposure North Asia Exposure North Korea Exposure North Macedonia Exposure North and South Korea Exposure Northeast Asia Exposure Northern Mariana Islands Exposure Northwest Asia Exposure Norway Exposure Oceania Exposure Oman Exposure Pacific Islands Exposure Pakistan Exposure Palau Exposure Palestine Exposure Panama Exposure Papua New Guinea Exposure Paraguay Exposure Peru Exposure Philippines Exposure Poland Exposure Portugal Exposure Puerto Rico Exposure Qatar Exposure Romania Exposure Russia Exposure Rwanda Exposure Saint Kitts and Nevis Exposure Saint Lucia Exposure Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Exposure Samoa Exposure Sao Tome and Principe Exposure Saudi Arabia Exposure Senegal Exposure Serbia Exposure Seychelles Exposure Sierra Leone Exposure Singapore Exposure Slovakia Exposure Slovenia Exposure Solomon Islands Exposure Somalia Exposure South Africa Exposure South America Exposure South Asia Exposure South Korea Exposure Country/Region Available Resources Afghanistan Vulnerability Africa Vulnerability Alaska Vulnerability Albania Vulnerability Algeria Vulnerability American Samoa Vulnerability Andorra Vulnerability Angola Vulnerability Anguilla Vulnerability Antigua and Barbuda Vulnerability Arabia Vulnerability Argentina Vulnerability Armenia Vulnerability Aruba Vulnerability Australia Vulnerability Austria Vulnerability Azerbaijan Vulnerability Bahamas Vulnerability Bahrain Vulnerability Bangladesh Vulnerability Barbados Vulnerability Belarus Vulnerability Belgium Vulnerability Belize Vulnerability Benin Vulnerability Bhutan Vulnerability Bolivia Vulnerability Bosnia and Herzegovina Vulnerability Botswana Vulnerability Brazil Vulnerability British Virgin Islands Vulnerability Brunei Vulnerability Bulgaria Vulnerability Burkina Faso Vulnerability Burundi Vulnerability Cambodia Vulnerability Cameroon Vulnerability Canada Vulnerability Cape Verde Vulnerability Caribbean Central America Vulnerability Cayman Islands Vulnerability Central African Republic Vulnerability Central Asia Vulnerability Chad Vulnerability Chile Vulnerability China Vulnerability Colombia Vulnerability Comoros Vulnerability Congo Vulnerability Conterminous US Vulnerability Cook Islands Vulnerability Costa Rica Vulnerability Croatia Vulnerability Cuba Vulnerability Cyprus Vulnerability Czechia Vulnerability Democratic Republic of the Congo Vulnerability Denmark Vulnerability Djibouti Vulnerability Dominica Vulnerability Dominican Republic Vulnerability East Asia Vulnerability Ecuador Vulnerability Egypt Vulnerability El Salvador Vulnerability Equatorial Guinea Vulnerability Eritrea Vulnerability Estonia Vulnerability Eswatini Vulnerability Ethiopia Vulnerability Europe Vulnerability Fiji Vulnerability Finland Vulnerability France Vulnerability French Guiana Vulnerability Gabon Vulnerability Gambia Vulnerability Georgia Vulnerability Germany Vulnerability Ghana Vulnerability Gibraltar Vulnerability Greece Vulnerability Grenada Vulnerability Guadeloupe Vulnerability Guam Vulnerability Guatemala Vulnerability Guinea Vulnerability Guinea Bissau Vulnerability Guyana Vulnerability Haiti Vulnerability Hawaii Vulnerability Honduras Vulnerability Hong Kong Vulnerability Hungary Vulnerability Iceland Vulnerability India Vulnerability Indonesia Vulnerability Iran Vulnerability Iraq Vulnerability Ireland Vulnerability Isle of Man Vulnerability Israel Vulnerability Italy Vulnerability Ivory Coast Vulnerability Jamaica Vulnerability Japan Vulnerability Jordan Vulnerability Kazakhstan Vulnerability Kenya Vulnerability Kiribati Vulnerability Kosovo Vulnerability Kuwait Vulnerability Kyrgyzstan Vulnerability Laos Vulnerability Latvia Vulnerability Lebanon Vulnerability Lesotho Vulnerability Liberia Vulnerability Libya Vulnerability Liechtenstein Vulnerability Lithuania Vulnerability Luxembourg Vulnerability Macao Vulnerability Madagascar Vulnerability Malawi Vulnerability Malaysia Vulnerability Mali Vulnerability Malta Vulnerability Marshall Islands Vulnerability Martinique Vulnerability Mauritania Vulnerability Mauritius Vulnerability Mexico Vulnerability Micronesia Vulnerability Middle East Vulnerability Moldova Vulnerability Monaco Vulnerability Mongolia Vulnerability Montenegro Vulnerability Montserrat Vulnerability Morocco Vulnerability Mozambique Vulnerability Myanmar Vulnerability Namibia Vulnerability Nauru Vulnerability Nepal Vulnerability Netherlands Vulnerability New Caledonia Vulnerability New Zealand Vulnerability Nicaragua Vulnerability Niger Vulnerability Nigeria Vulnerability Niue Vulnerability North Africa Vulnerability North America Vulnerability North Asia Vulnerability North Korea Vulnerability North Macedonia Vulnerability North and South Korea Vulnerability Northeast Asia Vulnerability Northern Mariana Islands Vulnerability Northwest Asia Vulnerability Norway Vulnerability Oceania Vulnerability Oman Vulnerability Pacific Islands Vulnerability Pakistan Vulnerability Palau Vulnerability Palestine Vulnerability Panama Vulnerability Papua New Guinea Vulnerability Paraguay Vulnerability Peru Vulnerability Philippines Vulnerability Poland Vulnerability Portugal Vulnerability Puerto Rico Vulnerability Qatar Vulnerability Romania Vulnerability Russia Vulnerability Rwanda Vulnerability Saint Kitts and Nevis Vulnerability Saint Lucia Vulnerability Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Vulnerability Samoa Vulnerability Sao Tome and Principe Vulnerability Saudi Arabia Vulnerability Senegal Vulnerability Serbia Vulnerability Seychelles Vulnerability Sierra Leone Vulnerability Singapore Vulnerability Slovakia Vulnerability Slovenia Vulnerability Solomon Islands Vulnerability Somalia Vulnerability South Africa Vulnerability South America Vulnerability South Asia Vulnerability South Korea Vulnerability Country/Region Resource Url Afghanistan Risk Profile Africa Risk Profile Alaska Risk Profile Albania Risk Profile Algeria Risk Profile American Samoa Risk Profile Andorra Risk Profile Angola Risk Profile Anguilla Risk Profile Antigua and Barbuda Risk Profile Arabia Risk Profile Argentina Risk Profile Armenia Risk Profile Aruba Risk Profile Australia Risk Profile Austria Risk Profile Azerbaijan Risk Profile Bahamas Risk Profile Bahrain Risk Profile Bangladesh Risk Profile Barbados Risk Profile Belarus Risk Profile Belgium Risk Profile Belize Risk Profile Benin Risk Profile Bhutan Risk Profile Bolivia Risk Profile Bosnia and Herzegovina Risk Profile Botswana Risk Profile Brazil Risk Profile British Virgin Islands Risk Profile Brunei Risk Profile Bulgaria Risk Profile Burkina Faso Risk Profile Burundi Risk Profile Cambodia Risk Profile Cameroon Risk Profile Canada Risk Profile Cape Verde Risk Profile Caribbean Central America Risk Profile Cayman Islands Risk Profile Central African Republic Risk Profile Central Asia Risk Profile Chad Risk Profile Chile Risk Profile China Risk Profile Colombia Risk Profile Comoros Risk Profile Congo Risk Profile Conterminous US Risk Profile Cook Islands Risk Profile Costa Rica Risk Profile Croatia Risk Profile Cuba Risk Profile Cyprus Risk Profile Czechia Risk Profile Democratic Republic of the Congo Risk Profile Denmark Risk Profile Djibouti Risk Profile Dominica Risk Profile Dominican Republic Risk Profile East Asia Risk Profile Ecuador Risk Profile Egypt Risk Profile El Salvador Risk Profile Equatorial Guinea Risk Profile Eritrea Risk Profile Estonia Risk Profile Eswatini Risk Profile Ethiopia Risk Profile Europe Risk Profile Fiji Risk Profile Finland Risk Profile France Risk Profile French Guiana Risk Profile Gabon Risk Profile Gambia Risk Profile Georgia Risk Profile Germany Risk Profile Ghana Risk Profile Gibraltar Risk Profile Greece Risk Profile Grenada Risk Profile Guadeloupe Risk Profile Guam Risk Profile Guatemala Risk Profile Guinea Risk Profile Guinea Bissau Risk Profile Guyana Risk Profile Haiti Risk Profile Hawaii Risk Profile Honduras Risk Profile Hong Kong Risk Profile Hungary Risk Profile Iceland Risk Profile India Risk Profile Indonesia Risk Profile Iran Risk Profile Iraq Risk Profile Ireland Risk Profile Isle of Man Risk Profile Israel Risk Profile Italy Risk Profile Ivory Coast Risk Profile Jamaica Risk Profile Japan Risk Profile Jordan Risk Profile Kazakhstan Risk Profile Kenya Risk Profile Kiribati Risk Profile Kosovo Risk Profile Kuwait Risk Profile Kyrgyzstan Risk Profile Laos Risk Profile Latvia Risk Profile Lebanon Risk Profile Lesotho Risk Profile Liberia Risk Profile Libya Risk Profile Liechtenstein Risk Profile Lithuania Risk Profile Luxembourg Risk Profile Macao Risk Profile Madagascar Risk Profile Malawi Risk Profile Malaysia Risk Profile Mali Risk Profile Malta Risk Profile Marshall Islands Risk Profile Martinique Risk Profile Mauritania Risk Profile Mauritius Risk Profile Mexico Risk Profile Micronesia Risk Profile Middle East Risk Profile Moldova Risk Profile Monaco Risk Profile Mongolia Risk Profile Montenegro Risk Profile Montserrat Risk Profile Morocco Risk Profile Mozambique Risk Profile Myanmar Risk Profile Namibia Risk Profile Nauru Risk Profile Nepal Risk Profile Netherlands Risk Profile New Caledonia Risk Profile New Zealand Risk Profile Nicaragua Risk Profile Niger Risk Profile Nigeria Risk Profile Niue Risk Profile North Africa Risk Profile North America Risk Profile North Asia Risk Profile North Korea Risk Profile North Macedonia Risk Profile North and South Korea Risk Profile Northeast Asia Risk Profile Northern Mariana Islands Risk Profile Northwest Asia Risk Profile Norway Risk Profile Oceania Risk Profile Oman Risk Profile Pacific Islands Risk Profile Pakistan Risk Profile Palau Risk Profile Palestine Risk Profile Panama Risk Profile Papua New Guinea Risk Profile Paraguay Risk Profile Peru Risk Profile Philippines Risk Profile Poland Risk Profile Portugal Risk Profile Puerto Rico Risk Profile Qatar Risk Profile Romania Risk Profile Russia Risk Profile Rwanda Risk Profile Saint Kitts and Nevis Risk Profile Saint Lucia Risk Profile Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Risk Profile Samoa Risk Profile Sao Tome and Principe Risk Profile Saudi Arabia Risk Profile Senegal Risk Profile Serbia Risk Profile Seychelles Risk Profile Sierra Leone Risk Profile Singapore Risk Profile Slovakia Risk Profile Slovenia Risk Profile Solomon Islands Risk Profile Somalia Risk Profile South Africa Risk Profile South America Risk Profile South Asia Risk Profile South Korea Risk Profile Search Found Country/Region Resource Url Afghanistan Exposure Africa Exposure Alaska Exposure Albania Exposure Algeria Exposure American Samoa Exposure Andorra Exposure Angola Exposure Anguilla Exposure Antigua and Barbuda Exposure Arabia Exposure Argentina Exposure Armenia Exposure Aruba Exposure Australia Exposure Austria Exposure Azerbaijan Exposure Bahamas Exposure Bahrain Exposure Bangladesh Exposure Barbados Exposure Belarus Exposure Belgium Exposure Belize Exposure Benin Exposure Bhutan Exposure Bolivia Exposure Bosnia and Herzegovina Exposure Botswana Exposure Brazil Exposure British Virgin Islands Exposure Brunei Exposure Bulgaria Exposure Burkina Faso Exposure Burundi Exposure Cambodia Exposure Cameroon Exposure Canada Exposure Cape Verde Exposure Caribbean Central America Exposure Cayman Islands Exposure Central African Republic Exposure Central Asia Exposure Chad Exposure Chile Exposure China Exposure Colombia Exposure Comoros Exposure Congo Exposure Conterminous US Exposure Cook Islands Exposure Costa Rica Exposure Croatia Exposure Cuba Exposure Cyprus Exposure Czechia Exposure Democratic Republic of the Congo Exposure Denmark Exposure Djibouti Exposure Dominica Exposure Dominican Republic Exposure East Asia Exposure Ecuador Exposure Egypt Exposure El Salvador Exposure Equatorial Guinea Exposure Eritrea Exposure Estonia Exposure Eswatini Exposure Ethiopia Exposure Europe Exposure Fiji Exposure Finland Exposure France Exposure French Guiana Exposure Gabon Exposure Gambia Exposure Georgia Exposure Germany Exposure Ghana Exposure Gibraltar Exposure Greece Exposure Grenada Exposure Guadeloupe Exposure Guam Exposure Guatemala Exposure Guinea Exposure Guinea Bissau Exposure Guyana Exposure Haiti Exposure Hawaii Exposure Honduras Exposure Hong Kong Exposure Hungary Exposure Iceland Exposure India Exposure Indonesia Exposure Iran Exposure Iraq Exposure Ireland Exposure Isle of Man Exposure Israel Exposure Italy Exposure Ivory Coast Exposure Jamaica Exposure Japan Exposure Jordan Exposure Kazakhstan Exposure Kenya Exposure Kiribati Exposure Kosovo Exposure Kuwait Exposure Kyrgyzstan Exposure Laos Exposure Latvia Exposure Lebanon Exposure Lesotho Exposure Liberia Exposure Libya Exposure Liechtenstein Exposure Lithuania Exposure Luxembourg Exposure Macao Exposure Madagascar Exposure Malawi Exposure Malaysia Exposure Mali Exposure Malta Exposure Marshall Islands Exposure Martinique Exposure Mauritania Exposure Mauritius Exposure Mexico Exposure Micronesia Exposure Middle East Exposure Moldova Exposure Monaco Exposure Mongolia Exposure Montenegro Exposure Montserrat Exposure Morocco Exposure Mozambique Exposure Myanmar Exposure Namibia Exposure Nauru Exposure Nepal Exposure Netherlands Exposure New Caledonia Exposure New Zealand Exposure Nicaragua Exposure Niger Exposure Nigeria Exposure Niue Exposure North Africa Exposure North America Exposure North Asia Exposure North Korea Exposure North Macedonia Exposure North and South Korea Exposure Northeast Asia Exposure Northern Mariana Islands Exposure Northwest Asia Exposure Norway Exposure Oceania Exposure Oman Exposure Pacific Islands Exposure Pakistan Exposure Palau Exposure Palestine Exposure Panama Exposure Papua New Guinea Exposure Paraguay Exposure Peru Exposure Philippines Exposure Poland Exposure Portugal Exposure Puerto Rico Exposure Qatar Exposure Romania Exposure Russia Exposure Rwanda Exposure Saint Kitts and Nevis Exposure Saint Lucia Exposure Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Exposure Samoa Exposure Sao Tome and Principe Exposure Saudi Arabia Exposure Senegal Exposure Serbia Exposure Seychelles Exposure Sierra Leone Exposure Singapore Exposure Slovakia Exposure Slovenia Exposure Solomon Islands Exposure Somalia Exposure South Africa Exposure South America Exposure South Asia Exposure South Korea Exposure Preview Preview is not available. Search Found Country/Region Resource Url Afghanistan Vulnerability Africa Vulnerability Alaska Vulnerability Albania Vulnerability Algeria Vulnerability American Samoa Vulnerability Andorra Vulnerability Angola Vulnerability Anguilla Vulnerability Antigua and Barbuda Vulnerability Arabia Vulnerability Argentina Vulnerability Armenia Vulnerability Aruba Vulnerability Australia Vulnerability Austria Vulnerability Azerbaijan Vulnerability Bahamas Vulnerability Bahrain Vulnerability Bangladesh Vulnerability Barbados Vulnerability Belarus Vulnerability Belgium Vulnerability Belize Vulnerability Benin Vulnerability Bhutan Vulnerability Bolivia Vulnerability Bosnia and Herzegovina Vulnerability Botswana Vulnerability Brazil Vulnerability British Virgin Islands Vulnerability Brunei Vulnerability Bulgaria Vulnerability Burkina Faso Vulnerability Burundi Vulnerability Cambodia Vulnerability Cameroon Vulnerability Canada Vulnerability Cape Verde Vulnerability Caribbean Central America Vulnerability Cayman Islands Vulnerability Central African Republic Vulnerability Central Asia Vulnerability Chad Vulnerability Chile Vulnerability China Vulnerability Colombia Vulnerability Comoros Vulnerability Congo Vulnerability Conterminous US Vulnerability Cook Islands Vulnerability Costa Rica Vulnerability Croatia Vulnerability Cuba Vulnerability Cyprus Vulnerability Czechia Vulnerability Democratic Republic of the Congo Vulnerability Denmark Vulnerability Djibouti Vulnerability Dominica Vulnerability Dominican Republic Vulnerability East Asia Vulnerability Ecuador Vulnerability Egypt Vulnerability El Salvador Vulnerability Equatorial Guinea Vulnerability Eritrea Vulnerability Estonia Vulnerability Eswatini Vulnerability Ethiopia Vulnerability Europe Vulnerability Fiji Vulnerability Finland Vulnerability France Vulnerability French Guiana Vulnerability Gabon Vulnerability Gambia Vulnerability Georgia Vulnerability Germany Vulnerability Ghana Vulnerability Gibraltar Vulnerability Greece Vulnerability Grenada Vulnerability Guadeloupe Vulnerability Guam Vulnerability Guatemala Vulnerability Guinea Vulnerability Guinea Bissau Vulnerability Guyana Vulnerability Haiti Vulnerability Hawaii Vulnerability Honduras Vulnerability Hong Kong Vulnerability Hungary Vulnerability Iceland Vulnerability India Vulnerability Indonesia Vulnerability Iran Vulnerability Iraq Vulnerability Ireland Vulnerability Isle of Man Vulnerability Israel Vulnerability Italy Vulnerability Ivory Coast Vulnerability Jamaica Vulnerability Japan Vulnerability Jordan Vulnerability Kazakhstan Vulnerability Kenya Vulnerability Kiribati Vulnerability Kosovo Vulnerability Kuwait Vulnerability Kyrgyzstan Vulnerability Laos Vulnerability Latvia Vulnerability Lebanon Vulnerability Lesotho Vulnerability Liberia Vulnerability Libya Vulnerability Liechtenstein Vulnerability Lithuania Vulnerability Luxembourg Vulnerability Macao Vulnerability Madagascar Vulnerability Malawi Vulnerability Malaysia Vulnerability Mali Vulnerability Malta Vulnerability Marshall Islands Vulnerability Martinique Vulnerability Mauritania Vulnerability Mauritius Vulnerability Mexico Vulnerability Micronesia Vulnerability Middle East Vulnerability Moldova Vulnerability Monaco Vulnerability Mongolia Vulnerability Montenegro Vulnerability Montserrat Vulnerability Morocco Vulnerability Mozambique Vulnerability Myanmar Vulnerability Namibia Vulnerability Nauru Vulnerability Nepal Vulnerability Netherlands Vulnerability New Caledonia Vulnerability New Zealand Vulnerability Nicaragua Vulnerability Niger Vulnerability Nigeria Vulnerability Niue Vulnerability North Africa Vulnerability North America Vulnerability North Asia Vulnerability North Korea Vulnerability North Macedonia Vulnerability North and South Korea Vulnerability Northeast Asia Vulnerability Northern Mariana Islands Vulnerability Northwest Asia Vulnerability Norway Vulnerability Oceania Vulnerability Oman Vulnerability Pacific Islands Vulnerability Pakistan Vulnerability Palau Vulnerability Palestine Vulnerability Panama Vulnerability Papua New Guinea Vulnerability Paraguay Vulnerability Peru Vulnerability Philippines Vulnerability Poland Vulnerability Portugal Vulnerability Puerto Rico Vulnerability Qatar Vulnerability Romania Vulnerability Russia Vulnerability Rwanda Vulnerability Saint Kitts and Nevis Vulnerability Saint Lucia Vulnerability Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Vulnerability Samoa Vulnerability Sao Tome and Principe Vulnerability Saudi Arabia Vulnerability Senegal Vulnerability Serbia Vulnerability Seychelles Vulnerability Sierra Leone Vulnerability Singapore Vulnerability Slovakia Vulnerability Slovenia Vulnerability Solomon Islands Vulnerability Somalia Vulnerability South Africa Vulnerability South America Vulnerability South Asia Vulnerability South Korea Vulnerability Preview Preview is not available. Search Found Country/Region Resource Url Afghanistan Risk Profile Africa Risk Profile Alaska Risk Profile Albania Risk Profile Algeria Risk Profile American Samoa Risk Profile Andorra Risk Profile Angola Risk Profile Anguilla Risk Profile Antigua and Barbuda Risk Profile Arabia Risk Profile Argentina Risk Profile Armenia Risk Profile Aruba Risk Profile Australia Risk Profile Austria Risk Profile Azerbaijan Risk Profile Bahamas Risk Profile Bahrain Risk Profile Bangladesh Risk Profile Barbados Risk Profile Belarus Risk Profile Belgium Risk Profile Belize Risk Profile Benin Risk Profile Bhutan Risk Profile Bolivia Risk Profile Bosnia and Herzegovina Risk Profile Botswana Risk Profile Brazil Risk Profile British Virgin Islands Risk Profile Brunei Risk Profile Bulgaria Risk Profile Burkina Faso Risk Profile Burundi Risk Profile Cambodia Risk Profile Cameroon Risk Profile Canada Risk Profile Cape Verde Risk Profile Caribbean Central America Risk Profile Cayman Islands Risk Profile Central African Republic Risk Profile Central Asia Risk Profile Chad Risk Profile Chile Risk Profile China Risk Profile Colombia Risk Profile Comoros Risk Profile Congo Risk Profile Conterminous US Risk Profile Cook Islands Risk Profile Costa Rica Risk Profile Croatia Risk Profile Cuba Risk Profile Cyprus Risk Profile Czechia Risk Profile Democratic Republic of the Congo Risk Profile Denmark Risk Profile Djibouti Risk Profile Dominica Risk Profile Dominican Republic Risk Profile East Asia Risk Profile Ecuador Risk Profile Egypt Risk Profile El Salvador Risk Profile Equatorial Guinea Risk Profile Eritrea Risk Profile Estonia Risk Profile Eswatini Risk Profile Ethiopia Risk Profile Europe Risk Profile Fiji Risk Profile Finland Risk Profile France Risk Profile French Guiana Risk Profile Gabon Risk Profile Gambia Risk Profile Georgia Risk Profile Germany Risk Profile Ghana Risk Profile Gibraltar Risk Profile Greece Risk Profile Grenada Risk Profile Guadeloupe Risk Profile Guam Risk Profile Guatemala Risk Profile Guinea Risk Profile Guinea Bissau Risk Profile Guyana Risk Profile Haiti Risk Profile Hawaii Risk Profile Honduras Risk Profile Hong Kong Risk Profile Hungary Risk Profile Iceland Risk Profile India Risk Profile Indonesia Risk Profile Iran Risk Profile Iraq Risk Profile Ireland Risk Profile Isle of Man Risk Profile Israel Risk Profile Italy Risk Profile Ivory Coast Risk Profile Jamaica Risk Profile Japan Risk Profile Jordan Risk Profile Kazakhstan Risk Profile Kenya Risk Profile Kiribati Risk Profile Kosovo Risk Profile Kuwait Risk Profile Kyrgyzstan Risk Profile Laos Risk Profile Latvia Risk Profile Lebanon Risk Profile Lesotho Risk Profile Liberia Risk Profile Libya Risk Profile Liechtenstein Risk Profile Lithuania Risk Profile Luxembourg Risk Profile Macao Risk Profile Madagascar Risk Profile Malawi Risk Profile Malaysia Risk Profile Mali Risk Profile Malta Risk Profile Marshall Islands Risk Profile Martinique Risk Profile Mauritania Risk Profile Mauritius Risk Profile Mexico Risk Profile Micronesia Risk Profile Middle East Risk Profile Moldova Risk Profile Monaco Risk Profile Mongolia Risk Profile Montenegro Risk Profile Montserrat Risk Profile Morocco Risk Profile Mozambique Risk Profile Myanmar Risk Profile Namibia Risk Profile Nauru Risk Profile Nepal Risk Profile Netherlands Risk Profile New Caledonia Risk Profile New Zealand Risk Profile Nicaragua Risk Profile Niger Risk Profile Nigeria Risk Profile Niue Risk Profile North Africa Risk Profile North America Risk Profile North Asia Risk Profile North Korea Risk Profile North Macedonia Risk Profile North and South Korea Risk Profile Northeast Asia Risk Profile Northern Mariana Islands Risk Profile Northwest Asia Risk Profile Norway Risk Profile Oceania Risk Profile Oman Risk Profile Pacific Islands Risk Profile Pakistan Risk Profile Palau Risk Profile Palestine Risk Profile Panama Risk Profile Papua New Guinea Risk Profile Paraguay Risk Profile Peru Risk Profile Philippines Risk Profile Poland Risk Profile Portugal Risk Profile Puerto Rico Risk Profile Qatar Risk Profile Romania Risk Profile Russia Risk Profile Rwanda Risk Profile Saint Kitts and Nevis Risk Profile Saint Lucia Risk Profile Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Risk Profile Samoa Risk Profile Sao Tome and Principe Risk Profile Saudi Arabia Risk Profile Senegal Risk Profile Serbia Risk Profile Seychelles Risk Profile Sierra Leone Risk Profile Singapore Risk Profile Slovakia Risk Profile Slovenia Risk Profile Solomon Islands Risk Profile Somalia Risk Profile South Africa Risk Profile South America Risk Profile South Asia Risk Profile South Korea Risk Profile Preview Preview is not available. Related products OpenQuake Engine Country-Territory Seismic Risk Profiles Global Exposure Model Global Seismic Hazard Map Related publications Development of a global seismic risk model 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.

License Request Form You have chosen to get more information about: New Zealand Hazard Hazard Please check the link below to see if this product already meets your your requirements before submitting your request for a license. Thank you. DOWNLOAD THE OPEN VERSION Summary of steps to obtain a license for the requested product. Fill in the application form below. Click Submit. Please check your email Inbox or Spam folder for the summary of your request. You will then be contacted by the GEM Product Manager with either a request for more information, or a request to sign the license. If you do not hear from us within 2 weeks, please send an email to product@globalquakemodel.org . REQUEST DETAILS A. Requesting party information First Name Last Name Role/Job Email Business type Business type Other business Sector Sector Other sector B. License agreement signatory information The signatory must be someone who is authorised to sign license agreements on your behalf such as your immediate supervisor, manager or legal officer. If you’re a PhD student, the signatory must be your adviser or a university officer in charge of license agreements or similar legal documents. Full Name of Signatory Position Company Email of Signatory Organisation name Complete Address C. Purpose of request GEM is able to offer products for free because of the support of our project partners, national collaborators and institutional sponsors. All of GEM’s products are freely available for public good, non-commercial use, but with different license restrictions. In most cases we release products under an open license (e.g., CC BY-SA or CC BY-NC-SA), which permits (re)distribution. In this case, we are granting access under a more restricted license that forbids distribution or disclosure and requires signing by GEM and the licensee in order to better assure accountability for the confidentiality of the information. In order for GEM to properly assess your request, please answer the following questions below. 1. Explain briefly how will the GEM product be used e.g. project, research including the expected results and the foreseen public benefit. 2. Will you be able to share the results of your work with GEM? YES NO 3. Will you be able to provide feedback to GEM on the quality and usefulness of this product via a survey? YES NO C. Privacy Policy By submitting this form, you consent to the processing of your personal data in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). We are committed to safeguarding your information and ensuring it is only used for the purpose outlined in this form. You have the right to access, rectify, or delete your data at any time. For more information, please refer to our Privacy Policy. I agree Words: 0 Email us at product@globalquakemodel.org if you're experiencing problems submitting your application. Thank you. Submit Thanks for submitting! You will be contacted as soon as possible Incomplete data. Please fill in all required fields. Thank you.