Publications Site Effects in Parametric Ground Motion Models for the GEM-PEER Global GMPEs Project Share Facebook LinkedIn Download 2012 | Peer-reviewed We review site parameters used in ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) for various tectonic regimes and describe procedures for estimation of site parameters in the absence of site-specific data. Most modern GMPEs take as the principal site parameter the average shear wave velocity in the upper 30 m of the site (Vs30) either directly or as the basis for site classification into categories. Three GMPEs developed for active regions also use basin depth parameters. We review estimation procedures for Vs30 that utilize surface geology, terrain-based site categories, ground slope, or combinations of these. We analyze the relative efficacy of those procedures using a profile data set from California assembled in a recent NGA project. The results indicate that no single procedure is most effective and that prediction dispersion is lower for young sediments than for stiff soils or rock.

License Request Form You have chosen to get more information about: Europe 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.

News Will measuring losses to natural disasters really tell us about changes in risk? By: Jul 2, 2018 Share Facebook LinkedIn Two years ago, in March 2015, representatives of 187 countries met in Sendai, Japan to agree to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction for the period 2015 to 2030. Last month, on February 2nd, the UN General Assembly approved seven global targets to reduce risk from natural disasters, and agreed to a set of indicators for measuring global progress toward these targets. The indicators for Targets A, B, and C aim to reduce by 2030 mortality, affected people, and economic loss, respectively. The targets will be to reduce impacts in a relative sense, so that mortality and affected people will be measured per 100,000 population; and economic loss will be measured in relation to gross domestic product. Global Target D aims to reduce risk to critical infrastructure, including health and educational facilities. In the article “How can the world reduce losses for the poor?” Robert Glasser, UNISDR, states that the measurement of the indicators introduces a “major degree of accountability” for the seven global targets, but will the proposed measurement of disaster losses actually be useful for monitoring changes in risk? The answer is yes and no. Why the Sendai indicators are not enoughWhile measuring these indicators will be quite useful, it is highly unlikely that this monitoring process alone will allow the world to accurately measure the actual reduction in risk, particularly for rare, high impact events, such as major earthquakes, cyclones and volcanic eruptions. For instance, Munich Re estimates that worldwide the average annual deaths for the past ten years from all natural disasters was about 60,000 people, while last year accounted for only 8,600 deaths. Yet, in the 2004 Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami, more than 230,000 people died in a single event. With such a high variation in annual losses at the global scale, there is little chance that monitoring such variation alone will give us an accurate picture of risk at a global scale, and certainly not at a national or urban scale. An alternative way of more accurately measuring riskBy the end of 2018, GEM will have produced a global earthquake risk model, which will provide a baseline at national level for earthquake hazard and risk globally. Moreover, the model and all of the tools and data underlying the model will be available openly, freely and transparently for the public good. This information can and should be used to monitor risk. Since risk is a function of hazard, vulnerability and exposure, the trends in these variables measured over time will allow us to determine the extent to which we are meeting the global targets for risk reduction. Moreover, this will be possible not only at the global level, but also at the national and even urban/local levels. Changes in exposure will be necessary to determine how the distribution of population, assets and investments are evolving spatially and temporally. Similarly, measuring vulnerability will be critical to understand how social, physical and economic factors are evolving and contributing to changing risk. Changes in the physical risk to schools, hospitals and other vulnerable building types can be estimated at local to global levels by collecting exposure and vulnerability information and tracking retrofits and new construction over time. One approach would be to collect information on the ratios of numbers of buildings constructed above and below building code standards, such as for unreinforced masonry, the building class most vulnerable to earthquake damage and casualties. Trends could be tracked to estimate changes in risk in terms of potential physical and economic loss. Finally, disaster mitigation could be incentivized by providing tools to demonstrate the cost-benefits of retrofitting or replacing these and other vulnerable buildings in high-risk areas. Thus, the information in risk models can be used to both track changes in risk as well as to identify cost-effective opportunities for risk mitigation and reduction activities. GEM’s contribution to disaster risk reductionGEM is very well placed to assist in the process of informing the recently agreed Sendai targets by working with countries to develop national earthquake hazard models, by assisting in collecting and analyzing vulnerability and exposure data, and by combining this information into a risk modeling and monitoring framework at national and urban levels. This would be accomplished by further developing partnerships in developing countries to increase their capacity to assess and manage earthquake risks. GEM is also developing tools that can be used in both developing and developed countries to assess the costs and benefits of mitigating and/or reducing these risks. With continued investment over time, these and other risk models, tools and data can be further developed to provide much needed support to achieving the goals of the Sendai Framework. No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

News Canada joins GEM as Public Sponsor By: Jul 2, 2018 Share Facebook LinkedIn Canada’s ‘coalition of the willing’ led by Natural Resources Canada - with members Public Safety Canada, Insurance Bureau of Canada, Defence Research and Development Canada, Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction, Canadian Institute of Planners and indigenous community - joins GEM as Public Sponsor. GEM Governing Board officially welcomed Canada as its newest member earlier this month. The partnership is expected to contribute to the assessment of earthquake risk using OpenQuake in support of disaster risk reduction (DRR) planning in Canada. Phil Hill, official representative, expressed excitement and is looking forward to a fruitful collaboration especially in including indigenous population in GEM’s future tools development and risk models for Canada. A National Steering Committee composed of government, academia and private stakeholders with support from an Expert Working Group will implement GEM in Canada. Canada is the 12th member of GEM from the government sector – joining Italy, Australia, UK, Germany, USA, Japan, New Zealand, Switzerland, Norway, Taiwan and Nepal. No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

Global Earthquake Maps GEM GLOBAL MOSAIC OF RISK MODELS Partners and Contributors VIEW Anchor 1 The GEM Foundation is grateful for the support and reviews provided by local experts, as listed below. 1 2 3 4 5 1 ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 ... 100 I'm Whiskers Gray Gray I'm Fluffy Gray Gray I'm Ginger Orange Gray 1 2 3 4 5 1 ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 ... 100

Repository with the inventory of residential, commercial and industrial buildings in Europe Project Name Products Europe Exposure Repository with the inventory of residential, commercial and industrial buildings in Europe Share Facebook 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 LinkedIn text 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 Global Exposure Model Country-Territory Seismic Risk Profiles Global Seismic Risk Map 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 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 Local solutions to global problems: reducing disaster risk through collaboration and openness By: Oct 12, 2021 Share Facebook LinkedIn TREQ Team meeting with engineers of the Municipality of Quito, Ecuador. The 2021 edition of IDDR Day focuses on ‘International cooperation for developing countries to reduce their disaster risk and disaster losses.’ - the sixth of the Sendai Seven targets. GEM’s work over the past decade in developing countries has accelerated the assessment of risk and incorporation of risk-based decisions into planning and sustainable development by merging the interests of public and private sectors, and collaborating with local governments. John Schneider, GEM Secretary General, underscores GEM’s collaborative and inclusive approach by saying that “GEM develops trust with local partners and stakeholders through projects that provide technical support and training on the use and application of GEM models, tools and methodologies. We ensure that local scientists, experts and local decision-makers are involved from the start.” Most recently, GEM’s Training and Communication for Earthquake Risk Assessment or TREQ Project, funded by USAID, has demonstrated this by GEM working together with local partners in building the capacity for urban earthquake risk assessment in Quito, Ecuador; Cali, Colombia; and Santiago de los Caballeros, Dominican Republic. Building on the success of GEM’s previous collaborative efforts in the South America Risk Assessment project (SARA 2013-2016) and Central America and the Caribbean Risk Assessment project (CCARA 2017-2018), the TREQ team, in collaboration with local experts, has updated the hazard and risk models of the pilot cities using more detailed hazard and risk information. Since 2020, the TREQ team has trained in using OpenQuake for urban earthquake hazard and risk assessments ( ). The project also produced training and educational materials that are being adapted for university courses through the project’s The results* of the TREQ project will be released openly, and will be of interest to a wide-range of users – from risk analysts, emergency planners and managers to researchers, modelers and the public at large. The analysis methods and collaboration approach set the foundation for enhancing earthquake hazard and risk assessment for other cities and urban areas in Central and South America, and may be extended worldwide to cities at risk and in need of assistance. “The TREQ project has served as a venue for thorough discussion and developing skills in the hazard and risk assessment fields in the region. Working groups established in the cities have facilitated the sharing of data, knowledge, methodologies and results between the local partners and GEM scientists. Over the past two years, we have mutually learned from our diverse backgrounds and experiences.” Catalina Yepes, GEM Project Manager on the importance of local collaboration in disaster risk reduction. For other examples of GEM’s collaborative work in disaster risk reduction in developing countries, check the following links below: - - - - - - More information on UNDRR International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction can be found at . ----- * While most of the models and datasets will be available, there will be some limitations due to privacy considerations of local governments. No images found. GALLERY 1/0 Gallery VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS

License Request Form You have chosen to get more information about: China Financial Loss Model Financial Loss 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.

License Request Form You have chosen to get more information about: Country-Territory Seismic Risk Profiles Risk 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.

News GEM partners with the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team to map the city of San Jose, Costa Rica for multi-hazard risk assessment By: Jul 2, 2018 Share Facebook LinkedIn More than 30 students and interested parties participated in the mapathon workshop facilitated by the University of Costa Rica (UCR) on the 29th of May to help digitise building footprints for 17 districts of the capital of San Jose, Costa Rica using OpenStreetMap tools. “It is fantastic to see so many participants with different background coming up together to do something that will benefit the entire community. These results can help understand the drivers of seismic risk in the city, but are also useful for other hazards such as floods or volcanoes” Vitor Silva, GEM Seismic Risk Coordinator. The event is part of a larger collaboration between the Global Earthquake Model (GEM), the University of Costa Rica and USAID, to support the development of a digital map of San Jose, Costa Rica. No images found. GALLERY 1/0 VIDEO RELATED CONTENTS