This data publication provides a European assessment of building exposure, organized country-by-country. The dataset provides information about the number of buildings; the number of occupants; structural information and structural costs of buildings per geographical area. The main purpose of this data collection is risk assessment for natural hazards, however it can be used by anyone in need of a building exposure dataset.
The data holds information about single buildings, with global estimates of built-up area on 10m x 10m pixels and exposure information per district. All OpenStreetMap (OSM) buildings existing in an OSM excerpt from 1 July 2023, 00:00 UTC (OpenStreetMap contributors, 2023), all buildings from the Global ML Building Footprint (GMLBF, Microsoft, 2023) dataset have been processed and for each building the occupancy type and number of stories have been identified based on data in OSM, such as land use and points of interest. The Global Human Settlement Built-up Characteristics 2022A Layer has been used as initial distribution of built area (Pesaresi, 2022). Aggregated exposure information, including the structural information and the number of occupants, stems the ESRM20 (Crowley et al., 2020).
The resulting dataset is distributed per country as an SQLite/SpatiaLite database. Each database contains three tables and one view. The database is organized around three key concepts, that each have their own table. An Entity is a geographical unit that contains exposure. In this dataset, the entities are tiles in a multi-resolution grid, according to the Quad tree structure (Finkel & Bentley, 1974), with the tiles projected using the Web Mercator projection (EPSG:3857). The zoom-level of the Quadkeys inside the grid varies from level-15 to level-18, depending on the number of buildings inside each tile to preserve privacy-sensitive information. Practically, the size of the tiles varies between around 100m x 100m and 1km x 1km. Each entity consists of one or more Assets, defining the number of buildings of a particular structural type and their population and structural value. The structural type is described using a taxonomy string, describing for example structural properties, occupancy type and the expected number of stories. The exact definition of a taxonomy that is used in this dataset is described in the GEM Building Taxonomy v2.0 (Brzev et al., 2013). On top of the tables, one key view has been defined too. A view is essentially a query on the table that give some insights into the data. The `key_values_per_tile` provides the total number of buildings, total number of occupants at night and total structural costs summed over all assets in one tile entity.
This work has received funding from the European Union thought the Geo-INQUIRE project (GA 101058518), within the Research Infrastructures Programme of Horizon Europe.
This data repository contains the spatial distribution of the direct financial loss computed expected for the residential building stock of Metropolitan Lima (Peru) after the occurrence of six decoupled earthquake and tsunami risk scenarios (Gomez-Zapata et al., 2021a; Harig and Rakowsky, 2021).
These risk scenarios were independently calculated making use of the DEUS (Damage Exposure Update Service) available in https://github.com/gfzriesgos/deus. The reader can find documentation about this programme in (Brinckmann et al, 2021) where the input files required by DEUS and outputs are comprehensively described.
Besides the spatially distributed hazard intensity measures (IM), other inputs required by DEUS to computed the decoupled risk loss estimates comprise: spatially aggregated building exposure models classified in every hazard-dependent scheme. Each class must be accompanied by their respective fragility functions, and financial consequence model (with loss ratios per involved damage state). The collection of inputs is presented in Gomez-Zapata et al. (2021b).
The risk estimates are computed for each spatial aggregation areas of the exposure model. For such a purpose, the initial damage state of the buildings is upgraded from undamaged (D0) to any progressive damage state permissible by the fragility functions. The resultant outputs are spatially explicit .JSON files that use the same spatial aggregation boundaries of the initial building exposure models. An aggregated direct financial loss estimate is reported for each cell after every hazard scenario.
It is reported one seismic risk loss distribution outcome for each of the 2000 seismic ground motion fields (GMF) per earthquake magnitude (Gomez-Zapata et al., 2021a). Therefore, 1000 seismic risk estimates from uncorrelated GMF are stored in “Clip_Mwi_uncorrelated” and 1000 seismic risk estimates from spatially cross-correlated GMF (using the model proposed by Markhvida et al. (2018)) are stored in “Clip_ Mwi_correlated”.
It is worth noting that the prefix “clip” of these folders refers to the fact that, all of the seismic risk estimates were clipped with respect to the geocells were direct tsunami risk losses were obtained. This spatial compatibility in the losses obtained for similar areas and Mw allowed the construction of the boxplots that are presented in Figure 16 in Gomez-Zapata et al., (2021).
The reader should note that folder “All_exposure_models_Clip_8.8_uncorrelated_and_correlated” also contains another folder entitled “SARA_entire_Lima_Mw8.8” where the two realisations (with and without correlation model) selected to produce Figure 10 in Gomez-Zapata et al., (2021) are stored. Moreover, the data to produce Figure 9 (boxplots comparing the variability in the seismic risk loss estimates for this specific Mw 8.8, are presented in the following .CSV file: “Lima_Mw_8.8_direct_finantial_loss_distributions_all_spatial_aggregations_Corr_and_NoCorr.csv”. Naturally, 1000 values emulating the 1000 realisations are the values that compose the variability expressed in that figure. Since that is a preliminary study (preprint version), the reader is invited to track the latest version of the actually published (if so) journal paper and check the actual the definitive numeration of the aforementioned figures.
This dataset shows the original data of a series of enhanced-gravity (centrifuge) analogue models, which were performed to test the influence of the pre-existing fabrics in the brittle upper crust on the evolution of structures resulting from oblique rifting. The obliquity of the rift (i.e., the angle between the rift axis and the direction of extension) was kept constant at 30° in all the models. The main variable of this experimental series was the orientation of the pre-existing fabrics (indicated as the angle between the trend of the fabric and the orthogonal to extension), which varied from 0° to 90° (i.e., from orthogonal to parallel to the extension direction). The inherited discontinuities were reproduced by cutting with a knife through the top brittle layer of models. An overview of the experimental series is shown in Table 1. In this dataset, four different data types are provided for further analysis: 1) Top-view photos of model deformation, taken at different time intervals and showing the deformation process of each model; they can be used to interpret the geometrical characteristics of rift-related faults; 2) Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) used to reconstruct the 3D deformation of the analogue models, allowing for quantitative analysis of the fault pattern. 3) Movies of model deformation, built from top-view photos, which help to visualize the evolution of model deformation; 4) Faults line-drawings to be used for statistical quantification of rift-related structures. Further information on the modelling strategy and setup can be found in the publication associated to this dataset and in Corti (2012), Philippon et al. (2015), Maestrelli et al. (2020), Molnar et al. (2020), Zwaan et al. (2021), Zou et al. (2023). Materials used to perform these enhanced-gravity analogue models were described in Montanari et al. (2017), Del Ventisette et al. (2019) and Zwaan et al. (2020).