The risk-return tradeoff in optimizing regional earthquake mitigation investment

Earthquakes are low probability-high consequence events, regional earthquake mitigation is therefore a risky investment. Despite its importance, the risk-return tradeoff is often not examined explicitly in regional earthquake risk management resource allocation decisions. This paper introduces a stochastic optimization model developed to help decision-makers understand the risk-return tradeoff in regional earthquake risk mitigation, and to help state and local governments comply with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requirement that they develop a mitigation plan. Taking advantage of the special structure of the optimization, Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition is used as the solution method. A case study for Central and Eastern Los Angeles illustrates an application of the model. Results include a graph of the tradeoff between risk and return, quantification of the relative contributions of each possible earthquake scenario, and discussion of the effect of risk aversion on the selection of mitigation alternatives.

[1]  John M. Mulvey,et al.  A New Scenario Decomposition Method for Large-Scale Stochastic Optimization , 1995, Oper. Res..

[2]  B. Rustem,et al.  Robust capacity planning under uncertainty , 1991 .

[3]  V. Bawa.  OPTIMAL, RULES FOR ORDERING UNCERTAIN PROSPECTS+ , 1975 .

[4]  Luís Ferreira,et al.  Planning large-scale distribution networks for robust expansion under deregulation , 2000, 2000 Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting (Cat. No.00CH37134).

[5]  Dean A. Jones,et al.  Robust optimization for fleet planning under uncertainty , 2003 .

[6]  Rachel A. Davidson,et al.  Optimizing Regional Earthquake Mitigation Investment Strategies , 2005 .

[7]  John N. Tsitsiklis,et al.  Introduction to linear optimization , 1997, Athena scientific optimization and computation series.

[8]  Craig E. Taylor,et al.  Seismic Risk Reduction Planning for Ports Lifelines , 1999 .

[9]  Yuri M. Ermoliev,et al.  A system approach to management of catastrophic risks , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  Richard Bernknopf,et al.  A Portfolio Approach to Evaluating Natural Hazard Mitigation Policies: An Application to Lateral-Spread Ground Failure in Coastal California , 2001 .

[11]  Scott A. Malcolm,et al.  Robust Optimization for Power Systems Capacity Expansion under Uncertainty , 1994 .

[12]  C. V. Anderson,et al.  The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) , 2002 .

[13]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  A Social Decision Analysis of the Earthquake Safety Problem: The Case of Existing Los Angeles Buildings , 1983 .

[14]  P. Fishburn.  Mean-Risk Analysis with Risk Associated with Below-Target Returns , 1977 .

[15]  Robert J. Vanderbei,et al.  Robust Optimization of Large-Scale Systems , 1995, Oper. Res..

[16]  Michael K. Lindell,et al.  Politics of Hazard Mitigation , 2000 .

[17]  M. Laguna,et al.  Applying Robust Optimization to Capacity Expansion of One Location in Telecommunications with Demand Uncertainty , 1998 .

[18]  James Douglas Englehardt,et al.  A Bayesian Benefit‐Risk Model Applied to the South Florida Building Code , 1995 .

[19]  S. D. Werner,et al.  Proposed Acceptable Earthquake Risk Procedures for the Port of Los Angeles 2020 Expansion Program , 1995 .

[20]  Stephanie E. Chang,et al.  Probabilistic Earthquake Scenarios: Extending Risk Analysis Methodologies to Spatially Distributed Systems , 2000 .