A TOOL OF DECISION SUPPORT FOR THE NATURAL RISK

MANAGEMENT

Nadia Abdat and Zaia Alimazighi

Laboratoire LSI - Département Informatique, Faculté Génie Electronique et Informatique

University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene (USTHB), Algiers, Algeria

Keywords: Geographic Information Systems, decision support systems, natural risk management, seismic risk, balanced

scorecard, spatial indicators, seismic measurements, seismology.

Abstract: In this paper, we propose a space balanced scorecard for the seismic risk management. Indeed, to install an

effective policy of prevention against the natural risk, the phenomenon should be controlled. This can be

carried out only after a good knowledge of this last. From where, the need for having a large volume of

information coming from various sources. The Geographical information systems (GIS) are largely used for

the decision support. However, they give a rather static vision whereas the management of an environmental

process in general and natural risk in particular requires tools based on dynamic models. In addition, the

scorecards are often used to build decision support systems. In this paper, we propose a balanced scorecard

for the management of a seismic risk which is established on the basis of spatial indicators.

1 INTRODUCTION

This paper propose a tool of decision support for the

natural risk management, in particular the seismic

risk.

Various fields are interested more and more in

the risks in particular in environment. In this

context, the objective is to control the natural

phenomena through, simulation, prevention and

decision support tools. The problem arises even

more when they are natural risks such as the seism.

Indeed, the disastrous effects of the seism as well on

the human lives as on their works (infrastructures,

houses...) reach sometimes important proportions. If

it is not possible to currently envisage with

exactitude a seism, it is possible to evaluate the

whole of the socio-economic consequences on the

areas where it can occur (Djeddi, 1994)

The purpose of the research undertaken in this

direction, is to evaluate and manage the effects of

this type of "dangerous" phenomenon in order to

limit its occurrence. The results of these works

generally integrate a strong geographical component

which results in the use of the Geographical

Information systems (GIS) (Chatelain and al,

1995)(Glassey and al, 1997).

Indeed, these tools offer means for the

identification of the concerned sectors and the

impacted stakes in order to do an evaluation of the

damage following a seismic catastrophe. So, the GIS

are largely used for the decision support. However,

they give a rather static vision whereas the

management of an environmental process in general

and natural risk in particular requires tools based on

dynamic models. (Koch, 2001).

In addition, decisional data processing in order to

increase the flexibility and the reactivity of the

organizations, introduced more and more new

information and communication technologies such

as the scorecards.

In this paper, we propose a balanced scorecard

for the management of a seismic risk. It is

established on the basis of spatial indicators

describing the variations.

It relates to the research works carried out by the

laboratory of the information processing systems

(LSI) of the data-processing department (USTHB) in

collaboration with the Research Center in

Astrophysical and Geophysical Astronomy

(CRAAG) concerning the impact of the use of the

GIS for the reduction of the seismic risk in Algeria.

In the first phase, we used an object approach to

simulate the scenario of an earthquake. The cross-

referencing data are carried out from various maps

(geological, topographic,...) as well as data relating

579

Abdat N. and Alimazighi Z. (2008).

A TOOL OF DECISION SUPPORT FOR THE NATURAL RISK MANAGEMENT.

In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - AIDSS, pages 579-582

DOI: 10.5220/0001718105790582

 SciTePress

to the seismicity of the area of study(Abdat and al,

2005 a), (Abdat and alimazighi, 2005). Like

principal results of this phase, we can quote:

-a geographical data base (Geo-Relational

DataBase) is built covering the whole of the

concepts handled in seismic management (Abdat

and al, 2005 b)

-The study of the historical seismicity.

-The real time study of the seisms : the

instrumental seismic monitoring is done starting

from seismological stations distributed on the whole

of the territory. The data collected by the

seismometers are centralized and saved in the

GeoDataBase.

-graphical documents describing the area

seismicity are produced such as the chart the

magnitudes, the aftershocks on one or more areas

and the chart of the intensities following the results

of the macro seismic investigation or a simulation.

-The simulator of seism makes it possible to

estimate the intensities of areas touched by a seism.

The intensity is regarded here as a classification of

the gravity of an earthquake according to the effects

observed in a limited zone. Its calculation is a

function of the characteristics of seisms and the

areas where they occur : magnitude, depth, the

distance epicenter-area, the type of ground, the type

of construction and associated intensity according to

the European Macro scale seismic (EMS).

-A prototype is constructed using ARC GIS. It

was applied to the seismic risks of Algiers (Abdat

and al, 2005 b).

This first phase enabled us to show the

contribution of the GIS in the seismic risk

management. In the second phase, object of this

present paper, we present a space balanced scorecard

(SBSC) applied to the seismic risk. The indicators of

the SBSC are calculated starting from the

Geodatabase (figure 1) .

2 THE BALANCED

SCORECARDS (SBSC)

A scorecard or a dashboard is a means allowing to

represent a complex reality by using a simplified

model. It gives an incomplete and often vague of

reality but sufficient vision to make fast decisions.

The dashboards of decision such as the balanced

scorecard (Kaplan and Norton, 2001), concentrate

especially on the quality of information and not on

its quantity. They represent the indicators in a

comprehensible and suggestive way in order to

facilitate their visualization. They present an outline

representative of the situation, then making it

possible to reach the more detailed data. The

dashboard must be contextual, one can select his

own indicators, with the representation which he

prefers, in order to produce his personalized

dashboard.

Figure 1: Functional architecture of the system.

Many organizations use dashboards. For

example, administrations, banks. International

organizations such as the United Nations also use

social, economic, geopolitical or environmental

indicators. In the field of geomatic, there are some

work such as (Devillers and al, 2005) which

proposes a space dashboard for the management of

the quality of the geographical data. Certain works

were made to adapt tools of the Business

Intelligence in the field of geomatic, such as Spatial

Data Mining, the SOLAP (Spatial On-line

Analytical Processing) and the spatial data

warehouses (Miller and Han, 2001), (Rivest and al,

2001).

The GIS users handle the geographical data in

order to obtain information being able to be used in

a process of decision-making (e.g. to identify the

areas of risk, to identify the vulnerable buildings to a

seism with given magnitude or intensity). For that,

They perceive signals of the real world, interpret

them, and proceed to an abstraction in order to

generate a cognitive map being used for this

decision-making. The decisions are made in order to

achieve a goal, according to many criterias such as

the perceived situation, the experiment and the

reference of values of users and their motivations,

according to the measurement of the risks and the

available means (Devillers and al, 2004). (Klein,

1999) affirms that the mental intuition and

simulations are central in the decision-making, based

respectively on the experiment and imagination. He

ICEIS 2008 - International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

580

stresses the importance of the relevant indices which

help to recognize a situation.

An indice or indicator is an information or a set

of information contributing to the general

appreciation of a situation (Fernandez, 2000). The

objective of an indicator is to measure a situation

and to initiate a reaction. The value of an indicator

can be based on a single data or result from a

calculation implying several data. These data must

be technically accessible. They can be already

available in a data base or come from other sources.

3 OUR SPACE BALANCED

SCORECARD (SBSC) APPLIED

TO THE SEISMIC RISK

We have applied the Balanced Scorecard approach

for the CRAAG. To develop a coherent dashboard, it

is inevitable to have a perfect knowledge of the

organization. The principal mission of the CRAAG

consists in studying the seismicity of the territory

and the seismic monitoring with like principal

objective "the reduction of the seismic risk in

Algeria”. To succeed in achieving this objective, the

CRAAG will have to plan intermediate objectives

such, the improvement of the seismic monitoring by

improving the performance of the seismic

monitoring networks and the participation in the

sensitizing of the citizens.

We worked out a strategic chart which is defined

according to the four axes of the Balanced

Scorecards (customer, financier, internal processes,

research and development) (figure 2).

Characteristics of our SBSC :

-to communicate information on a visual basis,

-to avoid an overload of information,

-to allow the users to adapt their dashboard to

their needs

- to provide indicators in real time

- to allow the users to select the relevant

indicators in their context or to define their own

indicators

- to allow the users to visualize the indicators at

various levels of details: the indicators are organized

in a hierarchical way (indicators and under-

indicators)

- to offer various representations of the

indicators which the users can select (ex.

histograms).

Figure 2: The strategic chart of the SBSC of the CRAAG.

The indicators can represent various types of

information, as well quantitative as qualitative:

- Indicators of status: A status indicator gives

information about monitoring network status, GPS

network status.

- Indicators of measure : A measure indicator

gives information on measures relating to recorded

seismic waves of soil movements.

Users have access to proposed indicators

description in different aspects such as:

definition/meaning of the indicator; method used to

calculate the indicator value; representation mod of

the indicator.

Various representations can be used to visualize

the value of an indicator, such as numbers, symbols,

icons, pictograms, tables, graphs, texts, images, etc.

Moreover, to take into account the space

component, one offers a cartographic mode of

visualization of the indicators (figure 3).

A prototype is constructed using the Visual

Basic language. The cartographical functionalities of

the prototype are developed using ARC GIS (ARC

MAP). This prototype is integrated to SIGARS

(figure 1).

A TOOL OF DECISION SUPPORT FOR THE NATURAL RISK MANAGEMENT

581

(a)

(b)

Figure 3 : Cartographic mode of visualization of the

indicators:

(a) Capacity of cover of the telemetric network;

(b) Telemetric network of seismic monitoring.

4 CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, this paper presents a new approach

allowing to communicate information relating to the

dynamic of geographical data in order to reduce

natural risks. In order to avoid an overload of

information and to support adequately the decision

process, this approach advocate the integration to a

GIS a spatial balanced scorecard. The information

relating to the dynamic is communicated to the user

in forms of indicators which he can select, modify in

need, then consult in different levels of details.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank T. Alili (CRAAG) and C. M. Mokrane ,

T.Boudjemaa (USTHB) for their contribution in the

realization of the application.

REFERENCES

Abdat, N, Alimazighi, Z, 2005, Geographic object

generating process, Symposium international des

technologies de l’information et de la communication

ICTIS’2005, Morocco, june 2005.

Abdat, N, Alimazighi, Z, Allili, T, 2005 a, Un système

d’information géographique appliqué au risque

sismique, Colloque sur l'Optimisation et les Systèmes

d'Information (COSI), Béjaïa Algeria june 2005.

Abdat, N, Alimazighi, Z, Allili, T, 2005 b, A GIS TOOL

for the evaluation of the seismic risk : application to

the seismic risks of Algiers XXII International

Cartographic Conference (ICC 2005), Corunã, Espana,

july 2005.

Chatelain, JL, Guillier, B, Souris,M, Dupérie, Yepes,

1995, SIG et évaluation des risques

naturels ;application aux risques sismiques de Quito.

Mappemonde 3/95

Devillers, R, Bédard, Y, Jeansoulin, R, 2005,

Multidimensional management of geospatial data

quality information for its dynamic use within

Geographical Information Systems. Photogrammetric

Engineering and Remote Sensing.

Devillers, R, Bédard, Y, Gervais, M, 2004, Indicateurs de

qualité pour réduire les risques de mauvaise utilisation

des données géospatiales. Revue Internationale de

Géomatique vol. 14, n. 1

Djeddi, M, 1994, Eléments de sismologie, OPU Algeria

04-1994

Ems, http://www.emsc-csem.org/

Fernandez A, 2000, Les nouveaux tableaux de bord des

décideurs , Paris, Éditions d'organisation,

Glassey, P,J, Forsyth, P, DipGrad, Turnbull, 1997, A GIS-

based hazard Information system: Dunedin pilot

project, IPENZ Transactions, Vol. 24, No. 1/GEN,

1997

Kaplan R.S, Norton D.P, 2001, The strategy-focused

organization : how balanced scorecard companies

thrive in the new business environment, Havard

Business School Publishing Corporation.

Klein G, 1999, Sources of Power - How people make

decisions, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press.

Koch A, 2001, Linking MultiAgent System and GIS.

Modelling and Simulating Spatial InterActions.

Department of Geography RWTH, Aachen

(Allemangne).

Miller H. J., Han J., 2001, Geographic Data mining and

Knowledge Discovery, Taylor & Francis.

Rivest S., Bédard Y., Marchand P., 2001, Towards Better

Support for Spatial Decision Making: Defining the

Characteristics of Spatial On-Line Analytical

Processing (SOLAP) , Geomatica, vol 55, nº 4

ICEIS 2008 - International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

582