International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijdrr

Scenario-based seismic vulnerability and hazard analyses to help direct

disaster risk reduction in rural Weinan, China
Yaohui Liu a, b, Emily So c, Zhiqiang Li d, *, Guiwu Su a, Lutz Gross b, Xiaoli Li d, Wenhua Qi a,
Fan Yang a, e, Bo Fu f, Alimujiang Yalikun g, Lijuan Wu a
a
Insititute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, A1, HuaYanLi, ChaoYang District, 100029, Beijing, China
b
School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland, St.Lucia, 4072, Brisbane, Australia
c
Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1PX, UK
d
China Earthquake Networks Center, No.5, SanLiHeNanHeng Street, XiCheng District, 100045, Beijing, China
e
Hebei Earthquake Agency, No.262, HuaiZhong Road, YuHua District, 050021, Shijiazhuang, China
f
Hubei Earthquake Agency, NO.48, Hongshan Side Road, WuChang District, 430071, Wuhan, China
g
Earthquake Agency of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, No.338, KeXueBei Road, XinShi District, 831106, Urumqi, XinJiang, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Seismic vulnerability and hazard analyses play a significant role in comprehensive risk mitigation and seismic
Earthquake emergency planning, especially for the rural Weinan prefecture in northwestern China with a complex con­
Building vulnerability struction infrastructure and a high population density. Traditional methods assessing potential physical seismic
Seismic impact scenarios
damage prior to an earthquake are providing an incomplete picture for seismic risk assessments and post-disaster
Disaster risk reduction
Rural Weinan
situations, and are insufficient for local authorities to plan mitigation strategies effectively. This study presents a
novel perspective on scenario-based seismic vulnerability and hazard assessment. First, an in situ survey was
carried out in three villages, Helan, Zhaojia, and Dongyu Village in the plain, loess, and mountain area
respectively. Then, a quantitative analysis of building vulnerability and associated human homelessness under
different seismic intensities was conducted based on the RISK-UE vulnerability index method. Finally, we esti­
mated and analyzed other seismic impact scenarios. Results showed that the mean building vulnerability index is
0.69, 0.70, and 0.76 for Helan, Zhaojia, and Dongyu Village, respectively. Considering the possible displaced
populations, Dongyu Village will have the highest proportion of homeless people. If an earthquake causes in­
tensity greater than VII, Dongyu Village would suffer landslides and isolated-communication. The residents
would have to rely on self-rescue and mutual rescue. These findings can be a potential guide to decision making
in disaster risk reduction in rural Weinan.

1. Introduction become a priority for the Chinese government to maintain the

Natural hazards represent an ever-present threat to human life as
well as to physical infrastructure and global economy; among them,
earthquakes are constituting extremely serious and deadly natural di­
sasters worldwide [1]. China is highly prone to earthquakes and
frequently suffers from destructive and catastrophic earthquake activity
resulting in a serious loss of life and property [2]. Unfortunately, na­
tional statistics for 2005 showed that 94% of rural houses were self-built
and did not conform with the seismic code regulation [3]. Such a situ­
ation is behind high vulnerabilities and risks on the living environments
in China’s rural areas. Consequently, reducing the seismic risk has
well-being and safety of the local populations and to ensure economic
and social security [4]. To provide stakeholders and decision-makers
with the means to develop mitigation strategies and safety measures
for future earthquakes, seismic vulnerability assessments and damage
scenario analyses are greatly meaningful, and they can help to raise the
public awareness of seismic hazards prior to the onset of expected di­
sasters [5].
Different methods of analyses for seismic vulnerability and risk
assessment have been developed during the last decades, mainly in re­
gions affected by the damages of recent earthquakes. Several quantita­
tive methodologies of assessing physical seismic damage, such as those

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: lzhq9028@163.com (Z. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101577
Received 29 November 2018; Received in revised form 11 April 2019; Accepted 21 March 2020
Available online 23 March 2020
2212-4209/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Liu et al.
proposed by the Gruppo Nazionale per Difesa dai Terremoti in Italy [6],
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the U.S.A [7],
ATC-13 in the U.S.A. [8], as well as the European RISK-UE method
[9–12], have been developed according to the resources and scale of the
assessment. These methodologies, which can be fine-tuned to represent
the characteristics of regional building vulnerabilities so long as a
detailed building inventory is available, have been widely applied to
many areas of the world. However, many researches and past earth­
quake experiences have proved that assessing seismic physical damage
only tells part of the story in seismic risk assessments. The possible
post-disaster situations (including secondary hazards, effects on water
supply, power supply, electronic communications, etc.) would provide
more broad sufficient evidence for disaster preparedness as well as for
emergency rescue operations after earthquake disasters, which should
be taken into further consideration.
Several moderate to large historical earthquakes have occurred in
the Weinan area, of Shaanxi province, China. The largest one was the
1556 M 8.5 Great Huaxian earthquake, which caused the occurrence of
giant landslides, widespread building, and infrastructure damage, and
more than 830,000 deaths, the largest number recorded in human his­
tory [13–18]. In the event of a major earthquake, disaster losses in rural
areas can be proportionately greater than in urban areas due to the
higher vulnerability, relative isolation, and rapid access difficulties.
Currently, the rural area in Weinan is characterized by the lack of
seismic design of residential buildings and high population density, with
elderly and youth populations who mostly lack seismic awareness and
have reduced the ability to self-rescue [19]. Accordingly, this area will
suffer more severe damages induced by earthquakes. Thus, a compre­
hensive study on building vulnerability and possible seismic risk sce­
narios is particularly urgent and expected in the region. Unfortunately,
to the best of our knowledge, no detailed assessments have been con­
ducted within this city to date.
Here, the scenario-based seismic vulnerability and hazard assess­
ment have been performed for the rural area of Weinan. First, an in situ
field survey was carefully carried out in three villages which can
represent the characteristics of three topographic conditions in Weinan.
Building attributes and some social vulnerable factors were collected
and processed. Then, a quantitative analysis of building vulnerability
and human homelessness under different seismic intensities was con­
ducted based on the RISK-UE vulnerability index method which per­
forms specific parameters of characterized buildings. Lastly, we
estimated and analyzed other seismic impact scenarios, which would be
a good supplement to seismic risk analysis.
2. Study area and data
2.1. Study area
Weinan City is located in the Shaanxi Province, China, between
latitude 34� 130 and 35� 520 N and longitude 108� 500 and 110� 380 E. The
city has a total population of about 5.38 million (2017 Census), covering
an area of 13,134 square kilometers. The three topographical features
that make up the Weinan City, are the plain area, the loess tableland
area, and the mountainous area.
The city had been devastated by several strong seismic events in
history, including the largest 1556 M 8.5 Great Huaxian earthquake, the
deadliest earthquake ever recorded. Currently, the tectonic movements
in Weinan are still at a relatively high-level, and the probabilistic seismic
intensity ranges from VI to IX (a probability of exceedance of 10% in 50
years) for a return period of 475 years (GB18306-2015). Major active
faults include the Huashan Piedmont Fault and the northern margin
fault of the Weinan Loess Tableland. They are both characterized by
normal-slip motion with average throw-rates of 1.5–3 mm/yr during the
Late Pleistocene-Holocene [17].
The location of Weinan City, seismic intensity zoning map
(GB18306-2015), digital elevation model (DEM), and location of the
2
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577
three surveyed villages are presented in Fig. 1 below.
2.2. Data collection and pre-processing
Different geological and topographical environments affect the
seismic ground motions and therefore the impacts of earthquakes
locally. Thus, it is necessary to consider soil effects and site conditions.
Based on the topographic distribution characteristics of Weinan City
[20,21], three representative villages were selected in the field survey
(carried out between 1st to 21st, August 2018), namely Helan Village
(Fuping County) in the plain area, Zhaojia Village (Pucheng County) in
the loess area, and Dongyu Village (Huazhou District) in the mountain
area. The high-resolution remote sensing images and DEM of the three
villages are presented in Fig. 2.
Detailed information about building attributes is critical for seismic
vulnerability and risk modeling as it reflects the main load-bearing el­
ements in buildings and thus, the behavior of buildings under seismic
load [22]. In this research, we investigated the following building at­
tributes: type of structures, number of floors, period of construction, and
state of maintenance. According to these attributes, we can evaluate the
physical damage to the buildings accompanied by the vulnerability
index methods. Meanwhile, we collected several social vulnerability
factors including the natural environment of each village, infrastructure
status (road), number of occupants, seismic perception, self-help and
mutual rescue skills, food reserves, car ownership, and smartphone
usage [23].
In China, types of building structure are usually assigned to the
following five categories [24]: (1) earth/wood buildings; (2) single-story
brick buildings; (3) brick and concrete buildings; (4) reinforced concrete
buildings; and (5) specially structured buildings. In general, the field
survey in three villages revealed the dominant building types as pre­
sented in Fig. 3: earth/wood buildings (E/W), brick/wood buildings
(B/W), unreinforced masonry (U/M), and reinforced masonry (R/M).
The detail descriptions of different structures are presented as following:
(1) Earth/wood buildings are the adobe walls without the use of
bricks, and the roofs are wooden-frame structures. This structure
is quite similar to the M2 structure in RISK-UE classification
typologies.
(2) Brick/wood buildings are the structure of brick walls with
wooden frames. This kind of structure is corresponding to the M5
structure in RISK-UE, but such buildings may suffer damage to
the walls relatively easily, while the wooden frame remains intact
due to its higher ductility [25].
(3) Unreinforced masonry buildings are very common in the three
villages. The walls and roofs of this structure are all made of
bricks without any reinforcements, which corresponding to the
M5 category in the RISK-UE model. However, this type of struc­
ture is more vulnerable than the brick/wood structure due to its
heavy brick roofs.
(4) In reinforced masonry, bars or steel mesh are embedded in holes
or between layers of masonry bricks, creating a composite ma­
terial acting as a highly resistant system. Therefore, this kind of
structure, corresponding to the M7 category in RISK-UE, has the
most anti-vulnerable ability than the other three structures.
Table 1 presents the collected survey data in the three villages. 151
(205 in total), 102 (145 in total), and 24 (39 in total) buildings were
surveyed in the Helan, Zhaojia, and Dongyu Village respectively and
their construction and conservation details were recorded. The un-
surveyed buildings are uninhabited for a long time, which are not
included in this research. The number of occupants in the Helan,
Zhaojia, and Dongyu Village is 321, 200, and 84, respectively. Unrein­
forced masonry accounts for the largest proportion in Helan and Zhaojia
Village (60.3% and 58.8%). On the contrary, 91.7% of the buildings are
adobe structures in Dongyu Village, which represents higher seismic
Y. Liu et al.
Fig. 1. Seismic intensity zonation and elevation maps of Weinan with county or district boundaries. The red stars indicate the name and location of the in situ
surveys. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
vulnerability. Considering the number of occupants per building, in all
three villages, buildings mostly housed 1 or 2 persons, 73.5%, 82.4%,
and 37.4%, respectively. The distribution and proportion of these
different attributes were mapped in a GIS environment (ArcGIS 10.2).
The results are presented in Fig. 4.
3. Method
3.1. Vulnerability index methodology
The vulnerability index method (VIM) adopted in this work to assess
the seismic vulnerabilities of buildings in rural Weinan is based on the
RISK-UE project [9,12], which was launched in 1999 and involved seven
cities throughout Europe and around the Mediterranean Sea, namely,
Barcelona (Spain), Bitola (Macedonia), Bucharest (Romania), Catania
(Italy), Nice (France), Sofia (Bulgaria), and Thessaloniki (Greece). Due
to its compatibility with the EMS-98 macroseismic intensity scale [25]
which is quite similar to the Chinese intensity scale [26,27], the VIM has
been widely applied to other areas worldwide, including Iran [28],
Grenoble in France [29,30], Faro in Portugal [31], Horta in Portugal
[32], Sion and Martigny in Switzerland [33], Urumqi in China [34], and
Al Hoceima in Morocco [34,35]. It has advantages over similar statis­
tical methods [25,36] because it distinguishes the differences among
constructions that are commonly found across the world’s seismically
prone regions. The VIM provides a vulnerability index for different
building typologies based on the constructive features and seismic
resistance of a structure. The procedure for determining the damage can
be categorized into three steps as discussed below.
Step 1. Estimation of the vulnerability index VI .
At first, a typological classification system, the building typology
matrix (BTM), grouping together structures that are expected to display
3
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577
similar seismic performances are developed (Table 2). Basic vulnera­
bility indices are attributed to each typology class [11] corresponding to
the median value VI;BTM�
and to the lower (VI;BTM ) and upper (VI;BTM
þ
)
bounds values of the vulnerability index. Modifier factors are then
applied to VI� in consideration of various physical factors, including the
height, irregularities, or position. The final vulnerability index is the
sum of all possible factors as follows:
VI ¼ VI� þ ΔVR þ ΔVm (1)
where VI� is the vulnerability index corresponding to the building ty­
pology, ΔVR is a regional vulnerability factor considering the charac­
teristics of the region or the construction period, and ΔVm is the seismic
behavior modifier that includes all other aspects of the seismic perfor­
mance. The latter two parameters could characterize the regional and
individual differences of seismic vulnerability, which would help to
improve the accuracy of the seismic vulnerability assessment. However,
to the best of our knowledge, the regional modifier for the other areas
using the RISK-UE model is not determined. Meanwhile, the detailed
differences of the same type of structure are not obvious for buildings in
rural China [34]. Therefore, we took these two parameters equal to zero
in this research. As the details of different types of buildings afore­
mentioned in Section 2.2, the vulnerability index of E/W, B/W, U/M,
*
and R/M is assigned based on Table 2 as 0.84 (VI;BTM of M2), 0.65 (VI;BTM
* *
of M5), 0.74 (VI;BTM of M5), and 0.451 (VI;BTM of M7), respectively.
Step 2. Estimation of the mean damage grade μD .
A mean damage grade μD is defined to characterize the expected
damage using the following equation:
� � ��
I þ 6:25VI 13:1
μD ¼ 2:5 1 þ tanh (2)
φ
Y. Liu et al.
Fig. 2. High-resolution remote sensing images and DEM of three villages of the survey.
where I is the macroseismic intensity according to the EMS-98 intensity
scale, which usually ranges from V (5) to XII (12) when considering the
damage to building structures, and φ is the ductility index, which is
evaluated by considering the building typology and constructive fea­
tures [9,37]. For residential buildings, φ takes a value of 2.3 [38].
The EMS-98 damage grades are considered to describe the observed
physical damage to the structural and non-structural components of
buildings. Five damage grades are identified [9] such that Dk ​ ðk ¼ 0; 1;
2; 3; 4; 5Þ: D0 (None), D1 (Slight), D2 (Moderate), D3 (Heavy), D4 (Very
Heavy), and D5 (Destruction).
Step 3. Estimation of the damage distribution.
The expected probability of occurrence of a damage grade for any
degree of seismic intensity is assumed to follow a binomial distribution.
The probability of each damage grade can be calculated as follows:
4
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577
5! �μ �k � μD �5 k
PðDk Þ ¼ D
1 (3)
k!ð5 kÞ! 5 5
where ! indicates the factorial operator.
3.2. Effect of soil conditions on seismic hazard
Whichever approach to hazard estimation is used, the influence of
site conditions need to be taken into account. A good approach would be
to construct a site-dependent scenario ground motion map and to
identify zones prone to seismically induced landslides, liquefaction and
areas in the loess area [9,35].
The intensity is implemented depending on the type of soil. The in­
crements are calculated by empirical methods [35]. This method for
introducing soil effects in terms of intensity was also recommended in
the Risk-UE project in case geotechnical data is not available. Table 3
Y. Liu et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

Fig. 3. Typical types of buildings in rural Weinan.

vulnerability index of Zhaojia Village ranges from 0.60 to 0.84, with a

Table 1
mean value of 0.70. Almost 37.3% of the buildings have a RISK-UE
The in situ survey data in three villages.
vulnerability index over 0.70, and no building has an index of less
Helan Village Zhaojia Village Dongyu Village than 0.55. By contrast, the vulnerability index of Dongyu Village ranges
Total 151 102 24 from 0.44 to 0.86, with a mean value of 0.76. This is because only one
Earth/wood 4.6% 25.4% 91.6% building is of reinforced/confined masonry construction, with a
Brick/wood 26.5% 14.7% 4.2%
vulnerability index of 0.44, and the rest are all adobe construction which
Unreinforced masonry 60.3% 58.8% 0
Reinforced masonry 8.6% 0.1% 4.2% is characterized as highly seismic vulnerable.
1 person 31.1% 27.5% 4.2%
2 persons 42.4% 54.9% 33.3%
3 persons 12.6% 12.7% 12.5% 4.2. Seismic loss estimation
4 persons 11.3% 3.9% 25.0%
5 persons 2.0% 1.0% 8.3% Once the vulnerability index has been defined, the mean damage
6 persons 0.6% 0 16.7%
Natural environment Plain Loess Mountain
grade can be calculated for the different macroseismic intensities using
Road status Good Good Bad equation (2) while the expected probability of occurrence of a damage
Seismic perception 59.6% 72.5% 54.2% grade for any degree of seismic intensity to each building class is derived
Phone usage 96% 92.2% 83.3% from equation (3).
Food reserve 12.6% 12.7% 4.2%
Rescue skill 31.1% 39.2% 29.2%
Car ownership 70.2% 66.7% 20.8% 4.2.1. Direct physical damage
The direct physical damage to buildings obtained is the starting point
for other aspects of risk assessment, such as damage to the population,
shows the site classifications for the city of Weinan. For soil types R and institutions, and services, as well as to the economic and social system
A, no increment in intensity are applied, while for soil types B and C an functions of the community. Table 4 shows the mean damage grade and
increment in the intensity of 0.5 were applied to construct the intensity the description of the corresponding damage states.
map with soil effects. The geomorphology map and distribution of soil The spatial distribution of damage grades for different macroseismic
types in Weinan are presented in Fig. 5. Accordingly, the increments are intensities in Helan Village is presented in Fig. 7. The values of physical
applied at each level of the EMS-98 macroseismic intensities assumed at damage (damage grade) ranges from 0.23 to 1.99 on the macroseismic
the next stage of calculation in the three villages. intensity VII, with a mean value of 0.93.149 buildings (98.7% in total)
are categorized in the “None” or “Slight” damage category whereas only
4. Results 2 buildings are expected to have “Moderate” damage. As the intensity
increased to VIII, expected damage for 99 buildings is increased to
4.1. Seismic vulnerability assessment “Moderate”, and the total number of buildings in the “Moderate” dam­
age is raised to 65.6%. As the seismic intensity increases further, the
All available data were collected and integrated into a GIS environ­ damage grade increases. 110 buildings (72.8% in total) will suffer
ment, which performs spatial analyses and presents the associated dis­ “Substantial to Heavy” damage when the earthquake intensity reaches
tributions. Fig. 6 shows the vulnerability index in three villages IX. When the earthquake intensity is at X, 112 buildings (74.2% in total)
according to the RISK-UE method. The vulnerability index of Helan will suffer “Very Heavy” damage. Only 39 buildings (25.8% in total) are
Village ranges from 0.42 to 0.90, with a mean value of 0.69. Almost expected to maintain “Moderate” and even lighter damage. Table 5
46.4% of the buildings have a RISK-UE vulnerability index over 0.70, presents the number and proportion of buildings under different dam­
and only 7.9% of the buildings have an index of less than 0.55. The ages and intensities in Helan Village, which will be further utilized for

5
Y. Liu et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

Fig. 4. Spatial distributions of types of structures (left row) and number of occupants (right row) within the in situ database.

Table 2 Table 3
Vulnerability indices for all types of buildings in rural Weinan based on RISK-UE Site classifications for Weinan City.
[12]. Zones Sites Increments
Typology Description VI* representative values (Intensity)

max A-compacted Consolidated dune sands, Plain area 0.0

min
VI;BTM VI;BTM *
VI;BTM VI;BTM
þ VI;BTM
materials
M2 Adobe (earth bricks) 0.62 0.687 0.84 0.98 1.02 B-semi-compacted Terrace or surface encrusted on gravel, þ0.5
M5 Unreinforced masonry 0.46 0.65 0.74 0.83 1.02 materials Loess tableland area
(old bricks) C-non-cohesive Slope deposit, scree, silty glacis/ þ0.5
M7 Reinforced or 0.14 0.33 0.451 0.633 0.7 materials terrace-silt plains
confined masonry R-hard rock Limestone, flysch, sandstone, 0.0
dolomites, shale, Mountain area

6
Y. Liu et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

Fig. 5. (a) Geomorphology map of Weinan, (b) Distribution of soil types in Weinan City.

Fig. 6. The spatial distribution of vulnerability index in three villages of Weinan by the RISK-UE method.

the calculation of the homelessness.

Table 4
Fig. 8 shows the spatial distribution of damage grades for different
Mean damage grade values and corresponding damage states.
macroseismic intensities of Zhaojia Village. The values of physical
Mean damage grade Most probable Description of damage damage (damage grade) are ranging from 0.83 to 2.12 on the macro­
interval damage state
seismic intensity VII, with a mean value of 1.30. It is expected that 74
0.0–0.5 None No damage buildings (72.5% in total) will have “None” or “Slight” damages whereas
0.5–1.5 Slight Negligible to slight damage
only 28 buildings will show “Moderate” damage. As the intensity is
1.5–2.5 Moderate Slight structural, moderate non-
structural increased further to VIII, damage for 63 buildings (61.8% in total) is
2.5–3.5 Substantial to Heavy Moderate structural, heavy non- expected to change to “Moderate”, and the rest will show “Substantial to
structural Heavy” damage. 63 buildings (61.8% in total) will suffer “Substantial to
3.5–4.5 Very Heavy Heavy structural, very heavy non- Heavy” damage when the intensity reaches IX, and the rest of the
structural
buildings are expected to be affected “Very Heavy” damage. When the
4.5–5.0 Destruction Very heavy structural, total or
nearly total collapse earthquake intensity is X, 99 buildings (97.1% in total) will suffer “Very

7
Y. Liu et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

Fig. 7. Damage scenarios as macroseismic intensity increases in Helan Village.

(95.8% in total) will show “None” or “Slight” damage whereas only 1

Table 5
building will suffer “Moderate” damage. As the intensity is increased to
Number and proportion of buildings with different damage grades under
VIII, 21 buildings (87.5% in total) have changed to “Moderate” damage,
different intensities in Helan Village.
1 building will show “Slight” damage and 2 buildings will have “Sub­
Macroseismic Intensity Substantial to Heavy Very Heavy Destruction stantial to Heavy” damage. 21 buildings (87.5% in total) will suffer
VII 0 0 0 “Substantial to Heavy” damage when the earthquake intensity reaches
VIII 2 (1.3%) 0 0 IX. When the earthquake intensity is X, 23 buildings (95.8% in total) will
IX 110 (72.8%) 2 (1.3%) 0
suffer “Very Heavy” damage whereas only 1 building (4.2% in total) will
X 25 (16.6%) 112 (74.2%) 0
show “Moderate” damage. Table 7 presents the number and proportion
of buildings under different damages and intensities in Dongyu Village,
Heavy” damage, and 3 buildings will be destructed. Table 6 shows the which will be further used for the calculation of the homelessness.
number and proportion of buildings under different damages and in­
tensities in Zhaojia Village, which will be further used for the calculation 4.2.2. Human homelessness
of the homelessness. The main purpose of an earthquake protection programme is to
The calculated results of the damage grade for different macro­ ensure human safety and reduce life-loss and injury risks. Human losses
seismic intensities of Dongyu Village are shown in Fig. 9. The values of are estimated by considering building damage as the root cause of fa­
physical damage (damage grade) are ranging from 0.26 to 1.61 on the talities and injuries [39,40]. Only potential homelessness due to build­
macroseismic intensity VII, with a mean value of 1.23. 23 buildings ing collapses is considered in this research. The methodology for

8
Y. Liu et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

Fig. 8. Damage scenarios as macroseismic intensity increases in Zhaojia Village.

units (UNUSD) due to structural damage is computed using the following

Table 6
two equations:
Number and proportion of buildings under different damages and intensities in
Zhaojia Village. %MF ¼ 100%DMF þ 100%VHMF þ 90%HMF (4)
Macroseismic Intensity Substantial to Heavy Very Heavy Destruction
UNUSD ¼ UMF � %MF (5)
VII 0 0 0
VIII 39 (38.2%) 0 0
IX 63 (61.8%) 39 (38.2%) 0
where UMF represents the total number of multi-family residential units,
X 0 99 (97.1%) 3 (2.9%) and DMF , VHMF and HMF represent the damage grade probabilities for the
“Destruction”, “Very Heavy” and “Substantial to Heavy” structural dam­
age states, respectively. Those living in single-family homes are much
estimating the probability of collapse and unusable buildings adopted in more likely to tolerate damage and continue to live in their home [41].
this work has been proposed by FEMA based on the work of HAZUS [41], Therefore, only multi-family residential units are considered to calculate
a quantitative method that has been widely applied in other parts of the the homelessness in this research.
world [35,42]. This method considers 100% of the residential units The total number of persons relocated from each building of a ty­
located in buildings within the “Very Heavy” and “Destruction” damage pology (PUND ) is obtained using the following relationship:
grades and 90% of those units within the “Substantial to Heavy” damage
grade to be uninhabitable. The total number of uninhabitable residential PUND ¼ Ph � UNUSD (6)

9
Y. Liu et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

Fig. 9. Damage scenarios as macroseismic intensity increases in Dongyu Village.

Table 7 Table 8
Number and proportion of buildings under different damages and intensities in Number and proportion of homeless people in three villages.
Dongyu Village. Village Macroseismic intensity
Macroseismic Intensity Substantial to Heavy Very Heavy Destruction
VII VIII IX X
VII 0 0 0
Helan 10 (3.8%) 51 (19.5%) 146 (55.7%) 224 (85.5%)
VIII 2 (8.3%) 0 0
Zhaojia 6 (3.6%) 37 (22.3%) 98 (59.0%) 145 (87.3%)
IX 21 (87.5%) 2 (8.3%) 0
Dongyu 7 (8.3%) 28 (33.3%) 61 (72.6%) 78 (92.9%)
X 0 23 (95.8%) 0

homelessness ratio increasing from 3.6% to 87.3% and from 8.3% to

where Ph is the number of persons assumed to live in each household of
the building.
Following the same presentation scheme used in the previous sec­
tion, Table 8 presents the number and proportion of homeless people in
the three villages, and Fig. 10 shows the estimation of the number of
homelessness associated with the mean vulnerability index of the three
villages. The homelessness ratio in Helan Village will increase from
3.8% to 85.5% with the intensity ranging from VII to X. According to the
HAZUS model, the other two villages show the same patterns, with the
92.9% in Zhaojia Village and Dongyu Village, respectively. Under the
same intensity, Helan Village will suffer the least homelessness, while
Dongyu Village was the highest.
4.3. Other seismic impact scenarios
Various scenarios would emerge after an earthquake disaster, such as
landslides, liquefaction, floods, water, wireless communication, and

10
Y. Liu et al.
Fig. 10. The ratio of the homeless population for three villages under
increasing macroseismic intensities.
power supply interruption, etc., which would pose a threat to the pop­
ulations and social security [43–45]. Based on the collected social
vulnerability data presented in Section 2.2, we can estimate and
describe other possible seismic impact scenarios for seismic emergency
planning apart from building damages and population impacts (e.g.,
homeless people) resulted from that damages. This would be a good
supplement for the pre-earthquake preparedness and post-disaster
emergency rescue.
4.3.1. Helan Village
Helan Village is located in a plain area with good status of road.
Based on the in situ data presented in Table 1, the percentage of the
villagers who have phones is at 96%, only 59.6% of the residents have
earthquake risk perception and rescue awareness, and only 31.1% of
residents had some self-help and mutual rescue skills. Only 12.6% of
households have food reserves. 70.2% of families have cars or vehicles.
In Helan Village. If earthquakes causing intensity greater than VII
occurred, there would be considerable damage to the structures of the
houses, though somewhat lighter than similar villages in the loess and
mountain areas where local buildings are more vulnerable. The resi­
dents would have to partly rely on self-help and mutual rescue until
outside help arrives.
4.3.2. Zhaojia Village
As we mentioned in Section 3.2, the soil in the loess area is semi-
compacted and most likely amplifies the damages of seismic hazards
[46]. Zhaojia Village has a risk of the liquefaction, landslides and debris
flows, which leads to the structural instability and uneven settlement of
structures [14,47,48]. Therefore, under the same seismic intensity, the
buildings in the loess area will suffer more serious damage than other
areas.
Zhaojia Village also has a good transportation status. The residents of
this village are relatively wealthy and 66.7% of families have private
cars or tricycles. The usage rate of phones is 92.2%, as high as 72.5% of
residents had earthquake risk prevention and rescue awareness, which is
much higher than in the other two villages. 39.2% of residents have
some self-help and mutual rescue skills. However, as with people in
Helan village, only 12.7% of households have food reserves in peace­
time. In the event of an earthquake causing intensity greater than VII in
the village, the consequences on the village will be more serious than
that in the plain area. The residents will have to considerably rely on
self-rescue and mutual rescue.
4.3.3. Dongyu Village
Dongyu Village is located in the mountain area with more than 90%
of the houses made of vulnerable adobe bricks. The road access is
11
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577
inconvenient, and there is only one way to get into the village. The usage
rate of phones is 83.3%. Only 54.2% of residents had seismic perception
and awareness, which is the lowest than the other two villages. 29.2% of
residents have some self-help and mutual rescue skills. Only 4.2% of
households have food reserves in peacetime. 20.8% of families have cars
or vehicles. If an earthquake causes intensity greater than VII in the
village, there may be falling boulders and rocks which could impact
buildings and block road access. Meanwhile, the earthquake is likely to
lead to communication interruption, isolating large parts of the popu­
lation. All households in the village would lack food and daily necessity
reserves until outside help and supplies arrive. The local earthquake
rescue would be mostly based on self-help and mutual assistance.
5. Discussion
The 1556 M 8.5 Great Huaxian earthquake caused devastating
damage to Weinan region. Currently, the rural area of Weinan is char­
acterized as having a high-proportion lack of residential buildings
complying with earthquake design standards and a dense population,
which poses serious threats to the local economy and human lives. From
existing researches and experiences from past earthquakes, it is evident
that assessing seismic risk and post-disaster situations posed by physical
damage of buildings alone is insufficient and that it is important to
include post-earthquake impact scenarios in disaster risk management
to enable local authorities to plan mitigation and preparedness strategies
effectively.
In this research, a widely-used quantitative RISK-UE model is
employed for building seismic vulnerability assessment in rural Weinan,
considering different regional vulnerability and seismic behavior. The
mean building vulnerability index is 0.69, 0.70, and 0.76 for Helan,
Zhaojia, and Dongyu Village, respectively, revealing that the buildings
in rural Weinan are highly seismic vulnerable. This result is associated
with the complex construction environment in China in recent years.
Since the reform and opening-up in 1978, the speed of development
including increased buildings and reconstructions has been remaining at
a high level [49,50]. Currently, most of the buildings in rural Weinan are
unreinforced brick masonry. Moreover, adobe structures are commonly
found in the mountainous area. The buildings in Dongyu Village are
almost entirely adobe structures accompanied by decades of bad main­
tenance, hence the vulnerability index is higher than the other two
villages.
For social vulnerability and possible post-disaster scenario descrip­
tion, we focus mainly on the landslide, transportation, seismic percep­
tion, wireless communication, rescue ability, and food reserve.
However, many other secondary hazards will occur along with the
earthquake, such as ruptured utility lines, hazardous spills, and fires
[51]. Further research needs to focus on a quantitative analysis
considering these possible post-earthquake scenarios. Additionally,
field-sampling of more villages in the area and definition of adequate
indicators of social vulnerabilities are critical to further improve the
results of quantifying seismic vulnerability and the outcomes of risk
scenario analyses.
6. Conclusions
Analyses of seismic vulnerability and possible post-disaster situa­
tions have been a fundamental and challenging task of disaster risk
reduction. In this paper, the seismic intensity-based hazard and risk
assessments have been described for rural Weinan. First, an in situ field
survey was carried out in three villages which represent the character­
istics of three different topography areas in Weinan. Then, a quantitative
analysis of building vulnerability and human homelessness under
increasing seismic intensities was conducted based on the RISK-UE
vulnerability index method and in situ available database in three vil­
lages. Finally, we estimated other seismic impact scenarios of the three
villages, which would be a good supplement to seismic risk analysis. All
Y. Liu et al.
the results were calculated and presented in ArcGIS software. The mean
building vulnerability index of three villages are 0.69, 0.70, and 0.76 for
Helan, Zhaojia, and Dongyu Village. Under the same seismic ground
motion intensity, Zhaojia Village is expected to suffer the highest rate of
damage to buildings while Helan Village will have the lowest. For
human homelessness, Dongyu Village needs to expect the highest impact
while Helan Village will be least affected. If an earthquake causes in­
tensity greater than VII in Weinan, Dongyu Village would suffer land­
slides and isolated-communication. The residents would have to rely on
self-rescue and mutual rescue.
In conclusion, the results of this study represent a potential first-early
guide for earthquake protection and risk management endeavors for the
rural area of Weinan. Moreover, the original results described in this
study in conjunction with the complete and detailed technical infor­
mation concerning the expected damage and consequences to the pop­
ulation will be delivered to the civil protection services of the
municipality of Weinan, who will utilize these findings to update the
emergency plans for the city.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the PAGER-O project (it’s National
Natural Science Foundation of China Grant No. is 41661134013)
belonging to an UK-China Collaboration programme ‘‘Increasing Resil­
ience to Natural Hazards in Earthquake-Prone regions in China’‘. The
programme was jointly funded by the Natural Environment Research
Council and the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, and by
the National Natural Science Foundation of China. This research was
also supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Institute of
Geology, China Earthquake Administration [grant number IGCEA1610].
We sincerely thank the anonymous reviewers and associated editors for
their valuable and constructive comments and suggestions that helped
to improve this paper. In addition, the first author wants to express his
acknowledgment to the China Scholarship Council (CSC) for providing
financial support to study at The University of Queensland, Australia.
References
[1] U UNISDR, Terminology on disaster risk reduction, Geneva, Switzerland (2009).
[2] X. Li, Z. Li, J. Yang, Y. Liu, B. Fu, W. Qi, et al., Spatiotemporal characteristics of
earthquake disaster losses in China from 1993 to 2016, Nat. Hazards 94 (2018)
843–865.
[3] X. Gao, J. Ji, Analysis of the seismic vulnerability and the structural characteristics
of houses in Chinese rural areas, Nat. Hazards 70 (2014) 1099–1114.
[4] P. Shi, W. Xu, Natural disaster system in China, in: Natural Disasters in China,
Springer, 2016, pp. 1–36.
[5] M. Panagiota, C. Jocelyn, P. Erwan, G. Philippe, A support vector regression
approach for building seismic vulnerability assessment and evaluation from remote
sensing and in-situ data, in: Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 2013,
pp. 7533–7536.
[6] D. Benedetti, V. Petrini, Sulla vulnerabilita sismica di edifici in muratura: un
metodo di valutazione. A method for evaluating the seismic vulnerability of
masonry buildings, Lindustria Delle Costruzioni, 1984.
[7] C.A. Kircher, R.V. Whitman, W.T. Holmes, HAZUS earthquake loss estimation
methods, Nat. Hazards Rev. 7 (2006) 45–59.
[8] Mccormack T. C., Rad F. N., An Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology for
Buildings Based on ATC-13 and ATC-21, Earthquake Spectra 13 (4) (n.d.) 605–621.
[9] S. Lagomarsino, S. Giovinazzi, Macroseismic and mechanical models for the
vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 4
(2006) 415–443.
[10] P. Mouroux, B.L. Brun, Risk-Ue Project: an Advanced Approach to Earthquake Risk
Scenarios with Application to Different European Towns, Springer, Netherlands,
2006.
[11] P. Mouroux, B. Le Brun, Risk-UE project: an advanced approach to earthquake risk
scenarios with application to different European towns, in: Assessing and
Managing Earthquake Risk, Springer, 2008, pp. 479–508.
[12] S. Giovinazzi, S. Lagomarsino, A macroseismic method for the vulnerability
assessment of buildings, in: 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
2004, pp. 1–6.
12
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577
[13] T.-c. Kuo, On the Shensi earthquake of January 23, 1556, Acta Geophysica Sinica 6
(1957) 59–68.
[14] Z. Li, P. Cui, The secondary disasters of great Huaxian earthquake in 1556, J. Mt.
Sci. 25 (2007) 425–430.
[15] T. Yuan, X. Feng, The 1556 Huaxian Great Earthquake, Seismol. Press, Beijing,
2010, p. 386.
[16] X. Yu-shou, On magnitude of 1556 Guanzhong great earthquake,
J. Catastrophology 7 (1992) 10–13.
[17] G. Rao, Y. Cheng, Y. Yu, B. Yan, A. Lin, Tectonic characteristics of the Lishan
Piedmont Fault in the SE Weihe graben (central China), as revealed by the
geomorphological and structural analyses, Geomorphology 282 (2017) 52–63.
[18] G. Rao, A. Lin, B. Yan, D. Jia, X. Wu, Tectonic activity and structural features of
active intracontinental normal faults in the Weihe Graben, central China,
Tectonophysics 636 (2014) 270–285.
[19] J. Xu, J. An, G. Nie, A quick earthquake disaster loss assessment method supported
by dasymetric data for emergency response in China, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
16 (2016) 885–899.
[20] D. Li, J. Du, Y. Ma, A. Xiao, Active faults and dip slip rates along the northern
margins of the Huashan Mountain and Weinan loess tableland in the southeastern
Weihe Graben, central China, J. Asian Earth Sci. 114 (2015) 266–278.
[21] J. Liu, P. Zhang, R.O. Lease, D. Zheng, J. Wan, W. Wang, et al., Eocene onset and
late Miocene acceleration of Cenozoic intracontinental extension in the North
Qinling range–Weihe graben: insights from apatite fission track thermochronology,
Tectonophysics 584 (2013) 281–296.
[22] C. Geiß, P.A. Pelizari, M. Marconcini, W. Sengara, M. Edwards, T. Lakes, et al.,
Estimation of seismic building structural types using multi-sensor remote sensing
and machine learning techniques, ISPRS J. Photogrammetry Remote Sens. 104
(2015) 175–188.
[23] G. Su, Z. Ma, R. Wang, Y. Wang, B. Dai, S. Zhang, S. Zhang, General features and
their disaster-reduction education implications of the earthquake disaster
cognition and responses of the social public in Ms 8.0 Wenchuan earthquake-hit
area: a case study from Deyang prefecture-level city, Sichuan Province, Seismol.
Geol. 30 (4) (2008) 877–894.
[24] Z. Yin, A study for predicting earthquake disaster loss, Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 11
(1991) 87–96.
[25] G. Grünthal, European Macroseismic Scale 1998, European Seismological
Commission (ESC), 1998.
[26] W. Qi, G. Su, L. Sun, F. Yang, Y. Wu, “Internetþ” approach to mapping exposure
and seismic vulnerability of buildings in a context of rapid socioeconomic growth:
a case study in Tangshan, China, Nat. Hazards 86 (2016) 107–139.
[27] G. Su, W. Qi, S. Zhang, T. Sim, X. Liu, R. Sun, et al., An integrated method
combining remote sensing data and local knowledge for the large-scale estimation
of seismic loss risks to buildings in the context of rapid socioeconomic growth: a
case study in tangshan, China, Rem. Sens. 7 (2015) 2543–2601.
[28] B. Omidvar, B. Gatmiri, S. Derakhshan, Experimental vulnerability curves for the
residential buildings of Iran, Nat. Hazards 60 (2012) 345–365.
[29] I. Riedel, P. Gu�eguen, M. Dalla Mura, E. Pathier, T. Leduc, J. Chanussot, Seismic
vulnerability assessment of urban environments in moderate-to-low seismic hazard
regions using association rule learning and support vector machine methods, Nat.
Hazards 76 (2015) 1111–1141.
[30] I. Riedel, P. Gueguen, F. Dunand, S. Cottaz, Macroscale vulnerability assessment of
cities using association rule learning, Seismol Res. Lett. 85 (2014) 295–305.
[31] R. Maio, T.M. Ferreira, R. Vicente, J. Est^ev~ao, Seismic vulnerability assessment of
historical urban centres: case study of the old city centre of Faro, Portugal, J. Risk
Res. 19 (2016) 551–580.
[32] T.M. Ferreira, R. Maio, R. Vicente, Seismic vulnerability assessment of the old city
centre of Horta, Azores: calibration and application of a seismic vulnerability index
method, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 15 (2016) 2879–2899.
[33] P. Lestuzzi, S. Podest�a, C. Luchini, A. Garofano, D. Kazantzidou-Firtinidou,
C. Bozzano, et al., Seismic vulnerability assessment at urban scale for two typical
Swiss cities using Risk-UE methodology, Nat. Hazards 84 (2016) 249–269.
[34] Y. Liu, Z. Li, B. Wei, X. Li, B. Fu, Seismic vulnerability assessment at urban scale
using data mining and GIScience technology: application to Urumqi (China),
Geomatics, Nat. Hazards Risk 10 (2019) 958–985.
[35] S.-e. Cherif, M. Chourak, M. Abed, L. Pujades, Seismic risk in the city of Al Hoceima
(north of Morocco) using the vulnerability index method, applied in Risk-UE
project, Nat. Hazards 85 (2016) 329–347.
[36] A.T. Council, Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California, Applied
technology council, 1985.
[37] S. Lagomarsino, On the vulnerability assessment of monumental buildings, Bull.
Earthq. Eng. 4 (2006) 445–463.
[38] N. Lantada, J. Irizarry, A.H. Barbat, X. Goula, A. Roca, T. Susagna, et al., Seismic
hazard and risk scenarios for Barcelona, Spain, using the Risk-UE vulnerability
index method, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 8 (2009) 201–229.
[39] S. Wang, E. So, P. Smith, Detecting tents to estimate the displaced populations for
post-disaster relief using high resolution satellite imagery, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs.
Geoinf. 36 (2015) 87–93.
[40] A. Coburn, R. Spence, Earthquake Protection, John Wiley & Sons, 2003.
[41] M. Hazus, Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology—Technical and User Manuals,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, 1999.
[42] R. Sabelli, S. Mahin, C. Chang, Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings
with buckling-restrained braces, Eng. Struct. 25 (2003) 655–666.
[43] M. Bruneau, S.E. Chang, R.T. Eguchi, G.C. Lee, T.D. O’Rourke, A.M. Reinhorn, et
al., A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of
communities, Earthq. Spectra 19 (2003) 733–752.
Y. Liu et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 48 (2020) 101577

[44] F. Fiedrich, F. Gehbauer, U. Rickers, Optimized resource allocation for emergency Further reading
response after earthquake disasters, Saf. Sci. 35 (2000) 41–57.
[45] P. Blaikie, T. Cannon, I. Davis, B. Wisner, At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s
[52] J. Xu, J. An, G. Nie, A quick earthquake disaster loss assessment method supported
Vulnerability and Disasters, Routledge, 2004.
by dasymetric data for emergency response in China, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
[46] J. Liu-Zeng, P. Wang, Z. Zhang, Z. Li, Z. Cao, J. Zhang, et al., Liquefaction in
16 (2016) 885–899.
western Sichuan basin during the 2008 Mw 7.9 Wenchuan earthquake, China,
[53] D.A. de Alwis Pitts, E. So, Enhanced change detection index for disaster response,
Tectonophysics 694 (2017) 214–238.
recovery assessment and monitoring of accessibility and open spaces (camp sites),
[47] J.-J. Hou, M.-K. Han, B.-L. Chai, H.-Y. Han, Geomorphological observations of
Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 57 (2017) 49–60.
active faults in the epicentral region of the Huaxian large earthquake in 1556 in
[54] Y. Deng, G. Su, N. Gao, L. Sun, Investigation and analysis of the importance
Shaanxi Province, China, J. Struct. Geol. 20 (1998) 549–557.
awareness of the factors affecting the earthquake emergency and rescue in
[48] M.-s. Zhang, J. Liu, Controlling factors of loess landslides in western China,
different areas: a case study of Yunnan and Jiangsu Provinces, Int. J. Disaster Risk
Environ. Earth Sci. 59 (2010) 1671–1680.
Reduct. 25 (2017) 163–172.
[49] X. Huang, J. Xia, R. Xiao, T. He, Urban expansion patterns of 291 Chinese cities,
[55] L. Sun, Y. Deng, W. Qi, Two impact pathways from religious belief to public
1990–2015, Int. J. Digital Earth (2017) 1–16.
disaster response: findings from a literature review, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 27
[50] Y. Liu, E. Cai, Y. Jing, J. Gong, Z. Wang, Analyzing the decoupling between rural-
(2018) 588–595.
to-urban migrants and urban Land expansion in hubei province, China,
[56] J. Zhou, S. Li, G. Nie, X. Fan, J. Tan, H. Li, et al., Developing a database for
Sustainability 10 (2018) 345.
pedestrians’ earthquake emergency evacuation in indoor scenarios, PloS One 13
[51] Y. Han, H. Liu, P. Cui, F. Su, D. Du, Hazard assessment on secondary mountain-
(2018), e0197964.
hazards triggered by the Wenchuan earthquake, J. Appl. Remote Sens. 3 (2009),
[57] A. Guettiche, P. Gu�eguen, M. Mimoune, Seismic vulnerability assessment using
031645-031645.
association rule learning: application to the city of Constantine, Algeria, Nat.
Hazards 86 (2017) 1223–1245.
[58] Z. Yin, A study for predicting earthquake disaster loss, Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 11
(1991) 87–96.

13