Options
Loughlin, Susan C.
Loading...
Preferred name
Loughlin, Susan C.
3 results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- PublicationOpen AccessSurveying volcanic crises exercises: From open-question questionnaires to a prototype checklist(2023)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ;Volcanic crisis exercises are usually run to test response capabilities, communication protocols, and decision-making procedures by agencies with responsibilities to cope with scenarios of volcanic unrest with inherent uncertainty, such as volcano observatories and/or civil protection authorities. During the last decades, the use of questionnaires has been increased to evaluate people’s knowledge on volcanic hazards and their perception of risk, to better understand their preparedness to respond to emergency measures plans. In this paper, we present a study carried out within the European Network of Observatories and Research Infrastructures for Volcanology project (EUROVOLC) focused on extracting information on the experience gained during volcanic-crisis exercises by the project’s participants and beyond. An open-ended question questionnaire was firstly distributed for a survey within the project community. Through the results obtained, we developed a user-friendly online multi-choice questionnaire that was submitted to the volcanological communities within and outside EUROVOLC. Analyzing the answers to the online questionnaire, we extracted a prototype checklist for guiding the design of such exercises in the future. Our results confirm this type of survey as a very useful tool for gathering information on participants’ experience and knowledge, able to understand which data and information may be useful when designing exercises for scientists, emergency managers and decision makers. In particular, the main lessons learnt regard the need i) to increase training activities involving people exposed to volcanic hazards and media, ii) to improve external communication tools (between players and public/media), equipment and protocols and iii) to better define decision-makers’ needs.47 9 - PublicationOpen AccessVolcano observatory best practices (VOBP) workshops - a summary of findings and best-practice recommendations(2019)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;We summarize major findings and best-practice recommendations from three Volcano Observatory Best Practices (VOBP) workshops, which were held in 2011, 2013 and 2016. The workshops brought together representatives from the majority of the world’s volcano observatories for the purpose of sharing information on the operation and practice of these institutions and making best practice recommendations. The first workshop focused on eruption forecasting, the second on hazard communication, and the third on long-term hazard assessment. Subsequent VOBP workshops will address additional issues of broad interest to the international volcano observatory community. The objective of VOBP is to develop synergy among volcano hazards programs and their observatories internationally, so as to more rapidly and broadly advance the field of applied volcanology. Each of the workshop summaries presented here include best practice recommendations for consideration by the world’s volcano observatories.251 19 - PublicationOpen AccessThe European Volcano Observatories and their use of the aviation colour code system(2024)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;Volcano observatories (VOs) around the world are required to maintain surveillance of their volcanoes and inform civil protection and aviation authorities about impending eruptions. They often work through consolidated procedures to respond to volcanic crises in a timely manner and provide a service to the community aimed at reducing the potential impact of an eruption. Within the International Airways Volcano Watch (IAVW) framework of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), designated State Volcano Observatories (SVOs) are asked to operate a colour coded system designed to inform the aviation community about the status of a volcano and the expected threats associated. Despite the IAVW documentation defining the different colour-coded levels, operating the aviation colour code in a standardised way is not easy, as sometimes, different SVOs adopt different strategies on how, when, and why to change it. Following two European VOs and Volcanic Ash Advisory Centres (VAACs) workshops, the European VOs agreed to present an overview on how they operate the aviation colour code. The comparative analysis presented here reveals that not all VOs in Europe use this system as part of their operational response, mainly because of a lack of volcanic eruptions since the aviation colour code was officially established, or the absence of a formal designation as an SVO. We also note that the VOs that do regularly use aviation colour code operate it differently depending on the frequency and styles of eruptions, the historical eruptive activity, the nature of the unrest, the monitoring level, institutional norms, previous experiences, and on the agreement they may have with the local Air Transport Navigation providers. This study shows that even though the aviation colour code system was designed to provide a standard, its usage strongly depends on the institutional subjectivity in responding to volcano emergencies. Some common questions have been identified across the different (S)VOs that will need to be addressed by ICAO to have a more harmonised approach and usage of the aviation colour code277 12