Multi-Risk Pathways
SUMMARY
Multi-risk pathways consist of sequences of risk management interventions to confront changing risks into the future. The exploration of multi-risk pathways helps introduce flexibility and robustness into disaster risk management adaptation strategies, all the while recognising the complexity of the multi-sector, multi-hazard system being managed. They achieve this through analysis of the interactions and interdependencies between multiple sector-based strategies and highlighting how these strategies may enhance, inhibit, advance or delay each other. By identifying overlapping risks across the different sector-based strategies, more synergistic strategies may be negotiated and implemented.
Dynamic Adaptive
Policy Pathways for Multi-Risk approach
We refer to the risk-informed decision-making approach by which multi-risk pathways are developed as Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways for Multi-Risk, or DAPP-MR. The approach complements the MYRIAD-EU Framework for individual, multi-, and systematic risk analysis. It uses the information generated through the six steps of the framework to formulate multi-risk pathways and adaptive plans to address long-term disaster risk reduction challenges.
A staged approach
DAPP-MR offers a practical way to break the full complexity of systems down into manageable, iterative stages, gradually increasing the level of complexity being considered as one progresses through the stages.
STAGE 1
Risks are analysed and pathways formulated for individual sectors and single hazards
STAGE 2
Interactions, synergies and trade-offs are identified between individual sector’s management of multiple hazards
STAGE 3
Interactions, synergies and trade-offs are identified across multiple sectors’ management of multiple hazards
Tools and methods
You can explore pathways using a variety of tools and methods. The approach rests upon sound processes of collaborative systems analysis. Storylines help explore pathways in a qualitative sense through examination of both past and potential future events. More quantitative analyses may also be carried out using computational tools and methods, such as those developed to help understand Multi-Risk Dynamics and generate Multi-Hazard and Multi-Risk Scenarios.
Relationship to the MYRIAD-EU Framework
DAPP-MR is a planning process that occurs around the Framework’s risk analysis procedures. The approach seeks to stage the risk analysis across the three iterations outlined above. Although presented as sequential iterations, much of the informing risk analysis work for all stages can occur in parallel.
In each of the three stages of the pathways analysis, the approach takes the list of available risk management options defined for both the present and future system states (Framework step 5), before sequencing these to formulate alternative DRM pathways that adapt to the conditions as they continually change (step 7). These are then evaluated against their generated co-benefits and trade-offs to determine one’s preferred pathways. At the end of each stage, the next stage’s iteration commences, until a complete set of synthesised multi-sector, multi-risk pathways emerges. These are then elaborated through the design of the final multi-risk adaptive plan (step 8), before moving on to its implementation (step 9) and monitoring (step 10).
Important considerations for the formulation of pathways within each step of the framework for risk analysis include:
STEP 1 – Finding a system definition
The specification of boundary conditions for the ensuring risk analysis and pathways formulation activities during each DAPP-MR stage. Key considerations here include:
- the geographic scale of the assessment
- the hazards, exposed sectors and vulnerable elements of concern
- the key (uncertain, exogenous) drivers of risk within the system
- the planning time horizon
- the overarching risk reduction objective(s) to be achieved for each sector and the system as a whole
- the criteria by which one will evaluate any trade-offs present between alternative pathways that achieve risk reduction objectives
Refer to the main page on Step 1 for further information.
Tools: collaborative systems analysis, storyline approach, applicable Multi-Risk Dynamics tools/methods, applicable MYRIAD-EU software
STEP 2 – Characterisation of direct risk
The definition of relevant metrics for characterising and managing direct risks account for the impacts of physical contact with the hazards during each DAPP-MR stage. It is important to ensure that these metrics are (i) sensitive to the uncertain drivers of risk (to be specified in step 6), (ii) will be impacted by the risk management options (identified in step 5) and (iii) are appropriate to the scale of the system and its challenges (defined in step 1). It is typically against these “core” direct risk metrics that pathways are formulated, however this ultimately depends on the evaluation of direct and indirect risks (step 4). Refer to the main page on Step 2 for further information.
Tools: collaborative systems analysis, storyline approach, applicable Multi-Risk Dynamics tools/methods, applicable MYRIAD-EU software
STEP 3 – Characterisation of indirect risk
The definition of relevant metrics for characterising and managing indirect risks account for any additional risks experienced due to interdependencies present in the system during each DAPP-MR stage. As with direct risks, these metrics should also be sensitive to the uncertain drivers of risk (step 6), be impacted by (a different set of) risk management options (step 5) and be appropriate to the scale of the system and its challenges (step 1). Depending on the evaluation of direct and indirect risks (step 4), pathways may also be formulated to address indirect risks in addition to direct risks. Refer to the main page on Step 3 for further information.
Tools: collaborative systems analysis, storyline approach, applicable MYRIAD-EU software
STEP 4 – Evaluation of direct and indirect risk
The evaluation and prioritisation of risks to be managed by the risk management options and pathways during each DAPP-MR stage. Refer to the main page on Step 4 for further information.
Tools: collaborative systems analysis, storyline approach, applicable MYRIAD-EU software
STEP 5 – Defining risk management options
The identification and assessment of alternative risk management options to address the prioritised risks during each DAPP-MR stage. Note that when identifying options, we distinguish between those which will measurably impact the risk reduction metrics specified in steps 2 and 3, and those that more support or enable the options available to directly reduce risks. For example, flood protection measures are supported by improved coordination and governance arrangements between multiple government agencies responsible for different elements of DRM. This second set of actions will be considered in step 8.
These options serve as the main building blocks for the DRM pathways. Refer to the main page on Step 5 for further information.
Tools: collaborative systems analysis, storyline approach, applicable Multi-Risk Dynamics tools/methods
STEP 6 – Accounting for future system state
Recognising that risks will continue to change in time due to uncertain drivers (identified in step 1), this step involves the specification of a set of future scenarios for the identified sectors and risks, against which the pathways will be assessed during each DAPP-MR stage. These scenarios should encompass the plausible range of each of the prioritised uncertain risk drivers and should measurably impact each of the prioritised core risk metrics selected in step 4. Refer to the main page on Step 6 for further information.
Tools: collaborative systems analysis, storyline approach, applicable MYRIAD-EU software
From Risk Analysis to Multi-Risk Pathways
DAPP-MR requires four additional steps to move beyond the framework’s risk analysis to the design and implementation of a future-focussed, adaptive DRM strategy. DAPP-MR therefore constitutes a complete adaptive policy analysis process.
Important considerations for the formulation of pathways within each step of the framework for risk analysis include:
STEP 7 – Formulate and evaluate pathways
Using the outputs from the risk analysis, pathways are formulated according to DAPP-MR’s three-stage approach. In Stage 1, the available risk management options are assessed for their risk reduction effectiveness, costs, implementation constraints (e.g. lead-time), social acceptability, and potential levels of future regret (i.e. what are the chances one will regret having implemented the action in the future?).
Pathways are formulated for each sector and risk, with priority in the short term given to those exhibiting lower regret and fewer implementation constraints. Higher regret options, or those that may take some time to implement or build the necessary social support are left open for the mid-longer term if needed to address future risks.
An adaptation pathways map demonstrates the different options available to address risks in time as conditions change. The horizontal lines represent the extent of the effectiveness of each action in terms of risk reduction. In this example, the current situation reaches its limit of effectiveness (or Adaptation Tipping Point, ATP) in the very near-term, at which point one can choose from four actions (A, B, C, D), each with varying levels of effectiveness. A possible pathway would be to commence with Action C, before extending its viability by combining it with Action B once it reaches its adaptation tipping point. Alternatively, one could also switch to action A or Action C at that point instead. All these pathways would effectively manage risks against the specified time horizon (100 years) in all scenarios. A scorecard evaluates the comparative benefits and trade-offs of the different pathways.
Alternative pathways are formulated according to competing stakeholder perspectives or values, and these are evaluated against the set of evaluation criteria (specified in step 1) to identify and compare the co-benefits and trade-offs generated. Evaluations can range from simple scorecard approaches to more extensive cost-benefit analyses, subject to data and resources availability. Preferred pathways consisting of short-term actions to be implemented and longer-term options to leave open for the future are then prioritised.
In Stages 2 & 3, the various preferred single-sector, single-risk pathways and their evaluations are updated as needed following analysis of the interdependencies or interactions present between options to manage multiple risks across multiple sectors. These interactions may lead to actions within each sector-based pathway being enhanced, inhibited, advanced or delayed.
Potential interaction effects across multiple pathways: (a) actions selected in one pathway delaying the adaptation limit (or ATP) being reached in another, (b) two selected actions creating new opportunities (or OTP) being established, (c) accelerating adaptation limits being reached, and (d) actions inhibiting others (Schlumberger et al, 2022).
Tools: pathways maps, interaction matrices, CIrcle-type analyses, storyline approach, scorecards, multi-criteria decision analysis, cost-benefit analysis, real options analysis
STEP 8 – Design the adaptive plan
The adaptive plan is elaborated by identifying and specifying the necessary preparatory, supporting and enabling activities required for its implementation. These guarantee the viability of the plan into the future. Common activities that are included in this step include:
- Planning any further studies, additional research, planning or design needed for the interventions included in the plan
- Identifying land reservation needs for any (future) infrastructure
- Identifying any regulatory or legislative changes
- Devising clear governance mechanisms and sustainable institutions to implement, manage and monitor the plan
- Planning public outreach and capacity development activities
- Establishing compensation funds for those negatively impacted by the DRM plan
An implementation plan is also formulated, encompassing the logistics, governance mechanisms, and financing and (future) assurance arrangements necessary to enact the plan. Similarly, a monitoring plan is established that specifies the set of timely, reliable, and measurable indicators to assess conditions in the system and signal when subsequent actions in the plan are to be implemented or become feasible. Signals may include, for example, trends or events in the physical environment, human-induced trends or events, or changing societal values and perceptions of risk.
Steps 9 & 10 – Implementation and monitoring
With the conclusion of the preceding step, the plan is ready for implementation and can proceed to the next phase of its realisation. Short-term interventions can be further detailed and designed, their financing arranged, governance relationships established, and the implementation and monitoring plans enacted. Any supporting actions are also implemented at this time, or subjected to further preparation, as required. Signalling information begins to be collected, and actions are started, altered, stopped, or expanded in response to the continued monitoring.
Stakeholder engagement
As with any policy analysis process, DAPP-MR is intended to be carried out with high levels of stakeholder engagement. This is to not only facilitate collaborative systems analysis and decision-making, but also provide important opportunities for capacity building and risk awareness-raising. In MYRIAD-EU, the implementation of both the framework and DAPP-MR has occurred with high levels of stakeholder engagement in each of the pilots. See the below examples of how multi-risk DRM pathways have been developed in each of the five pilot regions.