SARS-CoV-2 Risk Quantification Model and Validation Based on Large-Scale Dutch Test Events.

In response to the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, many governments decided in 2020 to impose lockdowns on societies. Although the package of measures that constitute such lockdowns differs between countries, it is a general rule that contact between people, especially in large groups of people, is avoided or prohibited. The main reasoning behind these measures is to prevent healthcare systems from becoming overloaded. As of 2021 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are available, but these do not guarantee 100% risk reduction and it will take a while for the world to reach a sufficient immune status. This raises the question of whether and under which conditions events like theater shows, conferences, professional sports events, concerts, and festivals can be organized. The current paper presents a COVID-19 risk quantification method for (large-scale) events. This method can be applied to events to define an alternative package of measures replacing generic social distancing.

Decision-making and evacuation planning for flood risk management in the Netherlands.

A traditional view of decision-making for evacuation planning is that, given an uncertain threat, there is a deterministic way of defining the best decision. In other words, there is a linear relation between threat, decision, and execution consequences. Alternatives and the impact of uncertainties are not taken into account. This study considers the 'top strategic decision-making' for mass evacuation owing to flooding in the Netherlands. It reveals that the top strategic decision-making process itself is probabilistic because of the decision-makers involved and their crisis managers (as advisers). The paper concludes that deterministic planning is not sufficient, and it recommends probabilistic planning that considers uncertainties in the decision-making process itself as well as other uncertainties, such as forecasts, citizens responses, and the capacity of infrastructure. This results in less optimistic, but more realistic, strategies and a need to pay attention to alternative strategies.

EvacuAid: a probabilistic model to determine the expected loss of life for different mass evacuation strategies during flood threats.

Evacuation of people in case of a threat is a possible risk management strategy. Evacuation has the potential to save lives, but it can be costly with respect to time, money, and credibility. The consequences of an evacuation strategy depend on a combination of the time available, citizen response, authority response, and capacity of the infrastructure. The literature that discusses evacuations in case of flood risk management focuses, in most cases, only on a best-case strategy as a preventive evacuation and excludes other possible strategies. This article introduces a probabilistic method, EvacuAid, to determine the benefits of different types of evacuation with regards to loss of life. The method is applied for a case study in the Netherlands for preventive and vertical evacuation due to flood risk. The results illustrate the impact of uncertainties in available time and actual conditions (e.g., the responses of citizens and authorities and the use of infrastructure). It is concluded that preparation for evacuation requires adaptive planning that takes preventive and vertical evacuation into account, based on a risk management approach.

Time needed to evacuate the Netherlands in the event of large-scale flooding: strategies and consequences.

On 30 May 2008, the Government of the Netherlands informed the national parliament about the effectiveness of preventive evacuation of coastal and river areas in case of flooding. Analysis of a case study showed that it is impossible to evacuate coastal areas preventively within a 48-hour time span preceding a worst credible scenario flood caused by a storm surge. This fact illustrates the need for alternative evacuation strategies, such as vertical evacuation (evacuating to safe havens, inside the flood zone) or shelter-in-place (hiding), to reduce loss of life and the impact of the evacuation. This paper defines these strategies and demonstrates, by returning to the case study used by the Dutch government, that they require different measures, methods of approach, and crisis management processes. In addition, it addresses the need for flexible and scalable preparation so that after detecting and understanding the threat, authorities and citizens can make decisions about different evacuation strategies.