Geology ReportsSearch

Geology topics

Danielle Charlton

Publications and source records attributed to Danielle Charlton.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

The communication of volcano information in New Zealand - A narrative review

Communication of volcano information is critical for effective volcanic risk management. A variety of information is communicated to inform decisions and guide actions for planning, preparedness, and response. Such information needs to be reliable, and fit-for-purpose across different stages of volcanic activity (quiescence, unrest, short or long-term eruptive stages, and the post-eruptive stage). However, an understanding of communication across these different stages of volcanic activity remains limited. We undertook a narrative review of New Zealand literature to explore what information is communicated about volcanoes, across which stages of activity and by whom. Results highlight that NZ literature only documents certain aspects of volcano information and communication, specifically regarding certain locations, stages of volcanic activity (i.e. quiescence or unrest), or hazards. Literature gaps exist regarding volcano communication during unrest and post-eruptive stages, as well as how volcano information evolves between these phases, and how decision-makers use such information. Additional work would be useful to document existing examples of volcano information for different stages of activity. Further research could help in understanding the information needs of decision-makers during each of these stages to improve information and communication.

New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics

The diversity of volcanic hazard maps around the world: Insights from map makers

The IAVCEI Working Group on Hazard Mapping has been active since 2014 and has facilitated several activities to enable sharing of experiences of how volcanic hazard maps are developed and used around the world. One key activity was a global survey of 90 map makers and practitioners to collect data about official, published volcanic hazard maps and how they were developed. The survey asked questions about map content, design, and input data, as well as about the map development process and key lessons learned. Here we present the results of this global survey, which are then used to quantitatively describe and summarise current practices in volcanic hazard map development. We received entries related to 89 volcanic hazard maps (78% long-term/background maps and 22% short-term/crisis hazard maps), covering a total of 80 volcanoes across 28 countries. Although most maps captured in the survey are volcano-scale maps of stratovolcanoes that show similar types of content, such as primary hazard footprints or zones, they vary greatly in input data, communication style, format, appearance, scale, content, and visual design. This diversity stems from a range of factors, including differences in map purpose, the methodology used, the level of understanding of past eruptive history, the prevailing scientific and cartographic practice at the time, the state of volcanic activity, and variations in culture, national map standards and legal requirements. Experiences and lessons shared by our respondents can be divided into six main themes: map design considerations; the process of map development; map audience and map user needs; hazard assessment approach; map availability and accessibility; and external (e.g., political) influences. Insights shared included the importance of: visual design elements, map testing and evaluation, working with stakeholders and end users to improve a map’s efficacy and relevance, and considering possible unanticipated uses of hazard maps. These free-form text insights (i.e., responses to open-ended questions) from map makers and practitioners familiar with the maps lend depth and clarity to our results. They provide a rich complement to our more quantitative analysis of design elements and of approaches used to determine and delineate map zones. Results from our global survey of hazard map makers and practitioners, together with insights from other key initiatives of the Working Group on Hazard Mapping such as the Volcanic Hazard Maps Database (VHMD; https://volcanichazardmaps.org/ ), provide a snapshot of the wide variety of volcanic hazard maps generated over the past decades, and improve our understanding of the diversity across volcanic hazard mapping practices. These initiatives represent important steps towards fulfilling the aims of the Working Group, namely, to construct a framework for a classification scheme for volcanic hazard maps and to promote harmonized terminology, as well as to identify and categorise good practices and considerations for volcanic hazard mapping.

Journal of Applied Volcanology

The Volcanic Hazard Maps Database: An initiative of the IAVCEI Commission on Volcanic Hazards and Risk

In this work we present the International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth’s Interior (IAVCEI) Commission on Volcanic Hazards and Risk (CVHR) Volcanic Hazard Maps Database and the accompanying volcanichazardmaps.org website. Using input from a series of IAVCEI CVHR Working Group on Hazard Mapping workshops, we developed a classification scheme and terminology framework for categorizing, discussing, naming, and searching for hazard maps. ≥ The database and website aim to serve as a resource for the volcanology community to explore how different aspects of hazard map development and design have been addressed in different countries, for different hazard processes, and for different intended purposes and audiences. Additionally, they act as a tool for presenting hazard map options to stakeholder groups and serve as a learning resource that can be incorporated into educational materials and training courses. In this work, we present the database and website, discuss the classification scheme, explore the enormous diversity of hazard maps, and suggest ways that the database and website can be used by the volcanic hazard mapping community.

Journal of Applied Volcanology