城市局部地震灾害危害性指数(ULEDRI)及其在上海市的应用
|
摘要
本论文所首先提出的城市局部地震灾害危害性指数（ULEDRI）是从一个
从全新的角度去理解和分析城市所面临的地震灾害威胁。它着眼于地震灾害危
害性在一个城市内空间分布上的不均匀性，以综合的、层次的指数体系来揭示
出城市内各局部区域间危害性的相对水平及其形成原因。
一个大城市内局部区域间地质环境和各种城市特征的差异会导致其地震灾
害危害性水平在空间分布上呈现出不均匀性。认识并理解这种不均匀性对于城
市的灾害管理、资源分配、城市规划和工程选址等防震减灾工作是非常有意义
的。ULEDRI就是首先以揭示这种空间分布不均匀性为目的的城市地震危害性
分析方法，它不但可以实现各局部区域间危害性以及其影响因素的直接比较，
给出它们的空间分布规律；而且能够揭示出每个区域内组成危害性的六种因素
（直接危险性、次生危险性、承灾体、易损性、城市功能和应急恢复能力）对
其危害性的相对影响程度，据此可以得到各区域危害性高低的形成原因。
与已有的危害性分析方法相比，ULEDRI还具有以下特点和优势：首先，
采取易于理解和应用的综合指数方式来表示危害性大小，不但可以在危害性中
包括那些无法用物质后果来表达的震害要素，而且，也能使城市规划等非专业
部门应用其结果；其次，ULEDRI的层次性使得不同的用户可以根据其需要和
对地震灾害的理解程度从ULEDRI中得到他们所需的信息；第三，ULEDRI是
按照各因素在震害形成中的作用来定义分指数，而不是象常规危害性分析方法
那样以承灾体种类作为危害性的因素，这更有利于揭示危害性形成的原因。
建立一个城市的ULEDRI需要进行以下步骤：确定ULEDRI的研究单位、
定义其概念体系、为各因素选择定量指标、收集各指标数据、确定因素的组合
方式和权重、表示并分析ULEDRI结果。在给出ULEDRI建立方法的基础上，
本论文结合上海市地震危险性和城市特征的实际情况，建立了以其十个中心城
区为研究单位的ULEDRI，由此得到了上海市地震灾害危害性的空间分布特点，
并分析了它们对于上海这样的低危险性、高危害性的特大城市的防震减灾工作
的意义。
以GIS为平台的不固定研究单位的ULEDRI可以在不失去指标宏观意义的
基础上给出更小单位的ULEDRI。这种方法还可以解决了固定研究单位ULEDRI
中统一指标单位导致的模糊某些指标的空间差别，以及数据处理上的困难等问
题。而且，GIS又提供了一种展示并查询ULEDRI结果，维护和管理指标数据
及权重的理想平台。因此，这种不固定研究单位的ULEDRI更适合于城市规划
等要求更细致的危害性比较的相关工作。本论文还建立了上海市的不固定研究
单位的ULEDRI系统──SH-UDI，它把建立ULEDRI的全过程（数据处理、
研究单位的确定，计算ULEDRI和结果显示查询）集成在一系统里。
除此以外，在ULEDRI的建立过程中，本论文还有以下特点和创新；首先，
把城市功能作为一个ULEDRI的一个因素，强调了它对于城市地震危害性的影
响，并给出了它的定量衡量方式；其次，提出了适合于ULEDRI的权重确定方
法──修正的专家意见法。第三，在各因素的组成和指标选择中，充分地应用
了目前的城市灾害的新理论和新经验。
ULEDRI也存在着以下不足：首先，因为一个城市的ULEDRI无法测得，
ULEDRI的科学性和有效性无法验证；第二，ULEDRI各因素采取加权的线形
组合方式与震害的形成是复杂的非线性作用之间存在矛盾，线性组合的权重确
定带有主观性；第三，指标数据的收集存在一定困难，使用有时间跨度的数据
使得ULEDRI无法反映出短时间内的危害性的变化。
Urban Local Earthquake Disaster Risk Index (ULEDRI), which is firstly
presented in this dissertation, analyzes the earthquake disaster threats faced by a
megacity from a different perspective. This composite and hierarchical index focuses
on the spatial imbalance of the earthquake disaster risk within a megacity, and gives
the relative risk level among the local areas of the city.
The spatial districts of the geological environments and urban features among the
local areas within a megacity will cause the imbalance of risk distribution. It is
significant for disaster management, resource allocation, city planning and site
choosing to reveal this kind of imbalance. ULEDRI is the first risk analysis approach
Whose object is to describe this kind of imbalance. It allows direct comparison of
relative earthquake disaster risk of different local areas within a city, and describes the
relative contributions of various factors (direct hazard, collateral hazard, exposure,
vulnerability, city function and emergency response and recovery capability) to the
overall risk, from which the feature of risk of each local area could be given.
ULEDRI is different from the existing risk assessment approaches in three
aspects. First, taking the composite index form makes ULEDRI easy to understand
and use. This can not only consider those disaster components which cannot be
described through physical results in general risk analysis methods, but also allow the
nonprofessional users, e.g. city planner, make use of the index in their work. Second,
the hierarchical structure of ULEDRI provides the different users with needed
information according to their requests and knowledge level about the earthquake
disaster. Third, the basis on which factors were identified is not the categories of
exposure, as other approaches do, but the effects of the factors on the disaster
formation, which is advantageous in revealing the reason of risk formation.
Developing a city's ULEDRI should involve the following six- step procedure: (1)
Determine the study unit of ULEDRI; (2) create a conceptual framework of all the
factors that contribute to ULEDRI; (3) Choose measurable indicators to represent
each of factors in the framework; (4) Collect the data of indicators; (5) Determine the
combination way and weights; (6) present and assess the ULEDRI result. As a case
study this dissertation developed Shanghai's ULEDRI, whose study units are the ten
center districts of the city. From such an index, the spatial distribution features of
earthquake disaster risk of Shanghai were shown. Its potential benefits to earthquake
preparedness and disaster mitigation of Shanghai were analyzed and explored.
Based on GIS technology,the unfixed study unit ULEDRI could keep the
macroscopical sense of indcators even in small study unit. As a result, it could obtain
the relative risk levels of smaller local areas. Additionally, this kind of ULEDRI could
solve the fOllowing problems in the fixed study unit ULEDRI: blurring the spatial
district of some indicators and the data processing troubles caused by unifying the
indicator units. In addition, GIS provide an ideal platform to develop the dynamic
ULEDRI and to present ULEDRI result in vivid way. A ULEDRI system of Shanghai
(SH-UDI), which integrates data processing, study unit determination, ULEDRI
calculation and result presentation, was developed based on the three different
indication units.
W are also seVeral forhal works about the deveoPing the inde cOnducted in
thes disHon: first, in orde tO emPhasize the effect of city fimedon on seithe riSk,
city Mon is deford as a faCtr of ULEDm, and the way to -- them was
given. Second, present a new methd, the modifled SUbective assesSmen tO
detennin the weights of ULEDm. Finaily, In dbog of concePt frameWrk and
chOosing the indictors, new theories and lessons from recen city earthquaks wee
considered and incfudd in these works.
Some draWacks associated nd the conSt
从全新的角度去理解和分析城市所面临的地震灾害威胁。它着眼于地震灾害危
害性在一个城市内空间分布上的不均匀性，以综合的、层次的指数体系来揭示
出城市内各局部区域间危害性的相对水平及其形成原因。
一个大城市内局部区域间地质环境和各种城市特征的差异会导致其地震灾
害危害性水平在空间分布上呈现出不均匀性。认识并理解这种不均匀性对于城
市的灾害管理、资源分配、城市规划和工程选址等防震减灾工作是非常有意义
的。ULEDRI就是首先以揭示这种空间分布不均匀性为目的的城市地震危害性
分析方法，它不但可以实现各局部区域间危害性以及其影响因素的直接比较，
给出它们的空间分布规律；而且能够揭示出每个区域内组成危害性的六种因素
（直接危险性、次生危险性、承灾体、易损性、城市功能和应急恢复能力）对
其危害性的相对影响程度，据此可以得到各区域危害性高低的形成原因。
与已有的危害性分析方法相比，ULEDRI还具有以下特点和优势：首先，
采取易于理解和应用的综合指数方式来表示危害性大小，不但可以在危害性中
包括那些无法用物质后果来表达的震害要素，而且，也能使城市规划等非专业
部门应用其结果；其次，ULEDRI的层次性使得不同的用户可以根据其需要和
对地震灾害的理解程度从ULEDRI中得到他们所需的信息；第三，ULEDRI是
按照各因素在震害形成中的作用来定义分指数，而不是象常规危害性分析方法
那样以承灾体种类作为危害性的因素，这更有利于揭示危害性形成的原因。
建立一个城市的ULEDRI需要进行以下步骤：确定ULEDRI的研究单位、
定义其概念体系、为各因素选择定量指标、收集各指标数据、确定因素的组合
方式和权重、表示并分析ULEDRI结果。在给出ULEDRI建立方法的基础上，
本论文结合上海市地震危险性和城市特征的实际情况，建立了以其十个中心城
区为研究单位的ULEDRI，由此得到了上海市地震灾害危害性的空间分布特点，
并分析了它们对于上海这样的低危险性、高危害性的特大城市的防震减灾工作
的意义。
以GIS为平台的不固定研究单位的ULEDRI可以在不失去指标宏观意义的
基础上给出更小单位的ULEDRI。这种方法还可以解决了固定研究单位ULEDRI
中统一指标单位导致的模糊某些指标的空间差别，以及数据处理上的困难等问
题。而且，GIS又提供了一种展示并查询ULEDRI结果，维护和管理指标数据
及权重的理想平台。因此，这种不固定研究单位的ULEDRI更适合于城市规划
等要求更细致的危害性比较的相关工作。本论文还建立了上海市的不固定研究
单位的ULEDRI系统──SH-UDI，它把建立ULEDRI的全过程（数据处理、
研究单位的确定，计算ULEDRI和结果显示查询）集成在一系统里。
除此以外，在ULEDRI的建立过程中，本论文还有以下特点和创新；首先，
把城市功能作为一个ULEDRI的一个因素，强调了它对于城市地震危害性的影
响，并给出了它的定量衡量方式；其次，提出了适合于ULEDRI的权重确定方
法──修正的专家意见法。第三，在各因素的组成和指标选择中，充分地应用
了目前的城市灾害的新理论和新经验。
ULEDRI也存在着以下不足：首先，因为一个城市的ULEDRI无法测得，
ULEDRI的科学性和有效性无法验证；第二，ULEDRI各因素采取加权的线形
组合方式与震害的形成是复杂的非线性作用之间存在矛盾，线性组合的权重确
定带有主观性；第三，指标数据的收集存在一定困难，使用有时间跨度的数据
使得ULEDRI无法反映出短时间内的危害性的变化。
Urban Local Earthquake Disaster Risk Index (ULEDRI), which is firstly
presented in this dissertation, analyzes the earthquake disaster threats faced by a
megacity from a different perspective. This composite and hierarchical index focuses
on the spatial imbalance of the earthquake disaster risk within a megacity, and gives
the relative risk level among the local areas of the city.
The spatial districts of the geological environments and urban features among the
local areas within a megacity will cause the imbalance of risk distribution. It is
significant for disaster management, resource allocation, city planning and site
choosing to reveal this kind of imbalance. ULEDRI is the first risk analysis approach
Whose object is to describe this kind of imbalance. It allows direct comparison of
relative earthquake disaster risk of different local areas within a city, and describes the
relative contributions of various factors (direct hazard, collateral hazard, exposure,
vulnerability, city function and emergency response and recovery capability) to the
overall risk, from which the feature of risk of each local area could be given.
ULEDRI is different from the existing risk assessment approaches in three
aspects. First, taking the composite index form makes ULEDRI easy to understand
and use. This can not only consider those disaster components which cannot be
described through physical results in general risk analysis methods, but also allow the
nonprofessional users, e.g. city planner, make use of the index in their work. Second,
the hierarchical structure of ULEDRI provides the different users with needed
information according to their requests and knowledge level about the earthquake
disaster. Third, the basis on which factors were identified is not the categories of
exposure, as other approaches do, but the effects of the factors on the disaster
formation, which is advantageous in revealing the reason of risk formation.
Developing a city's ULEDRI should involve the following six- step procedure: (1)
Determine the study unit of ULEDRI; (2) create a conceptual framework of all the
factors that contribute to ULEDRI; (3) Choose measurable indicators to represent
each of factors in the framework; (4) Collect the data of indicators; (5) Determine the
combination way and weights; (6) present and assess the ULEDRI result. As a case
study this dissertation developed Shanghai's ULEDRI, whose study units are the ten
center districts of the city. From such an index, the spatial distribution features of
earthquake disaster risk of Shanghai were shown. Its potential benefits to earthquake
preparedness and disaster mitigation of Shanghai were analyzed and explored.
Based on GIS technology,the unfixed study unit ULEDRI could keep the
macroscopical sense of indcators even in small study unit. As a result, it could obtain
the relative risk levels of smaller local areas. Additionally, this kind of ULEDRI could
solve the fOllowing problems in the fixed study unit ULEDRI: blurring the spatial
district of some indicators and the data processing troubles caused by unifying the
indicator units. In addition, GIS provide an ideal platform to develop the dynamic
ULEDRI and to present ULEDRI result in vivid way. A ULEDRI system of Shanghai
(SH-UDI), which integrates data processing, study unit determination, ULEDRI
calculation and result presentation, was developed based on the three different
indication units.
W are also seVeral forhal works about the deveoPing the inde cOnducted in
thes disHon: first, in orde tO emPhasize the effect of city fimedon on seithe riSk,
city Mon is deford as a faCtr of ULEDm, and the way to -- them was
given. Second, present a new methd, the modifled SUbective assesSmen tO
detennin the weights of ULEDm. Finaily, In dbog of concePt frameWrk and
chOosing the indictors, new theories and lessons from recen city earthquaks wee
considered and incfudd in these works.
Some draWacks associated nd the conSt
引文
Allen, Clarence R., 1995, Earthquake Hazard Assessment: Has Our Approach Been Modified in the Light of Recent Earthquake? Earthquake Spectra, V. 11, No. 3, August 1995, p357-366
Amakumi, K. et al., 1995, Study on evaluation method of damage and seismic intensity distribution for the 1993 Kushiro-Oki earthquake using GIS, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 1265-1272, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
Amakumi, K., et al., 1995, Study on Yokohama city's seismic risk mapping using GIS, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 1273-1280, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
Anagnos, T. 1997, Preface of theme issue on loss estimation of Earthquake Spectra. Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) .
Bender, B. et al, 1987, SEISRISK III: a computer program for seismic hazard estimation, USGS Bulletin, 1772．
Chang, Stephanie, 1995, Economic Impacts, Prelininary Reports from the Hyogo-ken Nambu Earthquake of January 17, 1995． NCEER RESPONSE.
Cornell, C.A., 1968, Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 58, 1583-1606．
Crippen, R.E. and Blom R.G., 1993, Mapping of the Horizontal Strain Field of the 1992 Landers Earthquake by Imageodesy, EOS Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, Vol.73, No.43, pp.374．
Dahlhamer, J. M. and Tiemey, K. J.1998, Rebounding From Disruptive Events: Business Recovery Following the Northridge Earthquake, Sociological Spectrum, 18:121-141,1998
Davidson, Rachel. 1997b. An Urban Earthquake Disaster Risk Index. The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, report no. 121． Stanford, California: Biume Center.
Der Kiureghian, et al., 1977, A fault-ruputure model for seismic risk analysis, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 67,1173-1194．
Dick, W., 1997, Medical Response, First Internaitonal Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4,1997．
Driel N. V., 1991, GIS for earth science application [A]. Proceeding of the fourth International Conference on Seismic Zonation [C]
ESRI, 1994a, Understanding GIS, Environmental System Research Institute, Inc.
ESRI, 1994b, ARC/INFO Data Management, Environmental System Research Institute, Inc.
EERI, 1999, The Chi-Chi, Taiwan Earthquake of September 21,1999, EERI Special Earthquake Report-December 1999, http://www.eeri .org/ Reconn/ Taiwan1299/TaiwanFinal.html
Egozcue, J.J., et al, 1991, A method to estimate intensity occurrence probabilities in low sesmic activity regions, Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics, 20,43-60．
Faccioli, E. et all, 1995, Seismic risk zonation and earthquake scenarios suing GIS technology, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 136-141, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
Giardini, D. & Funiciello, R., 1997, Seismic hazard assessment as input for risk mitigation in megacities:the Kobe lessons. First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop. Sep. 1-4,1997, Seeheim, Germany.
Giardini, D., Funiciello, R., and Boschi, E., 1997, Seismic Assessment as Input for Risk Mitigation in Megacities: The Kobe Lessons, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept 1-4,1997．
Gupta, Anju, 1997, "Performance Based Strategy Evaluation Methodology for Earthquake Risk Management," Technical Report No. 122, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford, CA.
Heaton, T., Future Earthquakes and Cities, 1997, Seismic Assessment as Input for Risk Mitigation hi Megacities: The Kobe Lessons, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4,1997．
Kakhandiki, Abhijit, 1997, "Urban Earthquake Disaster Risk Management: Risk-Tune Charts to Plan for the future," Ph.D. dissertation in progress, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford, CA.
King, S. A., Kiremidjian A. S., et al., 1995, Earthquake damage and loss extimation through GIS, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 265-272, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
King, S. A., Kiremidjian, A. S., et al., 1997, Methodologies for Evaluating the Socio-Economic Consequences of Large Earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 565-584．
King, Stephanie A., and Anne S. Kiremidiian. 1994． Regional seismic hazard and risk analysis through Geographic Information Systems. The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, report no. 111． Stanford. California: Blume Center.
Lindell, M. K. and Perry, R. W, 1998, Earthquake Impacts and Hazard Adjustment by Acutely Hazardous Materials Facilities Following the Northridge Earthquake. Earthquake Spectra, V. 14, No. 2, May 1998．
Makropuulos, K.C., et al, 1986, KAZAN: a Fortran program to evaluate seismic hazard parameters using Gumbel's theory of extreme value statistics, Computer & Geosciences, 12,29-46．
Matsuoka M., GIS-based integrated seismic hazard mapping for a large metropolitan area [A]. Proceedings of the forth International Conference on Seismic Zonation[C], 1991．
May, P. J., 1997, Megacities and Earthquakes: social science perspectives, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop. Sep. 1-4, 1997, Seeheim, Germany.
McGuire, R.K., 1978, FRISK: computer program for seismic risk analysis using faults as earthquake sources, USGS Open File Report 78-100．
Palm, R., 1997, Soci-political Aspects, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4,1997．
Perkins, J. 1991, Use of GIS (BASIS) by the association of bay area government for earthquake hazard mapping [A]. Proceedings of the forth International Conference on Seismic Zonation[C], 1991．
Petersen, M. D., Bryant, W. A., et al., Seismic Ground-Motion Hazard Mapping Incorporating Site Effects for Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura Conties, California: A GIS Application, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of American, 87(1) , 249-255．
Ram, R. 1982． Compsite indices of physical quality of life, basic needs fulfillment, and income. Journal of Delelopment Economics, 11, 227-247．
Rojahn, C., King, S. A., et al., Earthquake Damage and Loss Estimation Methodology and Data for Salt Lake County, Utah(ATC-36) , Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 623-642．
Scarthorn, C., 1999, Lifeline Damage and Fire Following Earthquake, Preliminary Reports from the Kocaeli (Izmit) Earthquake of August 17, 1999． MCEER RESPONS
Shinozuka, M., Chang, S. E., et al., 1997, Advances in Eathquake Loss Estimation and Application to Memphis Tennessee, Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 739-758．
Shinozuka, M., Rose A., and Eguchi, R., 1998, Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An Analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions in the New Madrid Area, Monograph No. 2, MCEER, Buffalo, New York.
Tarr, A. C., GIS activities supporting seismic zonation studies in the southern puget sound. Washington: a case study [A].
TERA Corporation, 1980, Seismic hazard analysis, a methodology for the Eastern United States, U. S. Nuclear Rewgulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-1582． 2．
Tiemey, K. J. and Dahlhamer, J. M., 1998a, Earthquake Vulnerability and Emergency Preparedness Among Business, Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions hi the New Madrid Area, edited by M. Shinozuka, A. Rose, and R. T. Eguchi (NY: MCEER, 1998) . p53-72
Tierney, K. J. and Dahlhamer, J. M., 1998b, Business Disruption, Preparedness and Recovery: Lessons From the Northridge Earthquake, Proceedings of the NEHRP Conference and Workshop on Research on the Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994, Volume IV, (Richmond, California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, 1998) : 174-178．
Tierney, K. J., 1997, Business Impacts and Recovery Following the Northridge Earthquake, Proceedings of the 5th United States/Japan Workshop on Urban Earthquake Hazard Reduction, Rasadena, California, 1997． p43 1-434
Tversky, et al., 1974, Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and Biasis. Sciences 185, No. 1457:1124-1137．
Verstappen, H. Th. 1997, Why an Interdisciplinary Program on Earthquakes and Megacities, First Internaitonal Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4, 1997．
Wang, H. M., 1991, Probabilistic mapping of peak har-rock acceleration in the memphis area [A]. Proceedings of the forth International Conference on Seismic Zonation[C], 1991．
Whitman, R. V, Anagnos, T., et al., Development of a National Eathquake Loss Estimation Methodology, Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 643-661．
Wisner, B., 1997, The geography of vulnerability: the pivotal importance of social vulnerability in disaster risk assessment and mitigation, First Internaitonal Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4, 1997．
曹新玲，毛国敏 等 译，1991,[美]应用技术委员会，《加利福尼亚未来地震的损失估计》，地震出版社，北京
陈棋福，1997,大尺度地震灾害损失预测评估方法研究，博士学位论文，国家 地震局地球物理研究所。
邓起东 等，1980，中国地震烈度区划图编制的原则和方法，地震学报，2(1)，1980。
冯启民，1991，生命线工程系统震害预测，《工程地震研究》，国家地震局震害防御司。
冯启民，1991，生命线工程震害预测，工程地震研究》，国家地震局震害防御司。
郭增建，陈鑫连 主编，1991，《城市地震对策》，地震出版社
国家地震局，1990，中国地震烈度区划图，地震出版社。北京，
国家地震局震害防御司 编译，1991，未来地震的损失估计方法，地震出版社，北京
国家地震局震害防御司未来地震灾害损失预测研究小组，1990，中国地震灾害损失预测研究，19-23，地震出版社，北京。
胡聿贤，1988，《地震工程学》，地震出版社
蒋溥，戴丽思，著，1993，《工程地震学概论》，地震出版社
蒋溥，王启鸣 等 著，1990，《地震小区划概论》，地震出版社
金磊 著，1997年，《城市灾害学原理》，气象出版社。
兰从欣，徐平，1999，地理信息系统与震后快速响应，地震，19(3)297-301
李斌，1996，计算机网络技术与城市地理信息系统，《城市地理信息系统：方法与应用》，中国海外地理信息系统协会。美国伯克利
李桂青，1993，结构动力可靠性理论及其应用，地震出版社
李秋文，1999，地震海啸灾害及其研究概述，地震科技情报，1999年第4期(总第177期)，p5-7．
李山有，廖振鹏，1999，基于概率地震危险性分析的重大工程结构设计地震的研究，工程抗震，1999年第3期，18-21．
廖振鹏，1989，《地震小区划——理论与实践》，地震出版社
林洪 罗良清 主编，1996年，《现代统计学》，经济管理出版社
马东辉 等，1998，基于GIS的抗震设防区划计算机应用模型，自然灾害学报，7(2)，74-78。
美国地震工程研究会，1991年，中国石化总公司抗震办公室 译，《洛马普里埃塔地震考察》，地震出版社。
潘耀忠，史培军，1997，区域自然灾害系统基本单元研究——Ⅰ：理论部分，《自然灾害学报》，Vol．6(4)，Nov．1997
上海市地震局 编，1992a，《上海市地区地震危险性分析与基本烈度复核》，地震出版社
上海市地震局 编，1992b，《上海市地区地震危险性分析与基本烈度复核》图集，地震出版社
上海市地震局 编，1999，《上海市的地震与应急——1996年11月9日长江口以东海域地震研究文集》，地震出版社
上海市民防办公室，1993，上海市工业易燃物品重点目标汇总表，(内部资料)
上海市民防办公室，1995，上海市化学危险物品重点目标汇总表，(内部资料)
上海市人口抽样调查办公室 编，1996，《1995年全国1％人口抽样调查资料》(上海分册)。
上海市统计局 编，1999，《98’上海市统计年鉴》，中国统计出版社
石原安雄，1988，城市自然灾害，《现代城市与自然灾害》，海洋出版社。p1-8
石原研而，1988，地震时的地基灾害，《现代城市与自然灾害》，海洋出版社。p92-100
史培军，1996，再论灾害研究的理论与实践，《自然灾害学报》，Vol．5(4)，Nov．1996
宋俊高，朱元清，等，1998，关于建立城市防震减灾应急决策信息系统(GIS应用)的设想，地震学报，20(2)，210～216。
汤爱平，等，1999，GIS在城市防震减灾研究中的应用综述，自然灾害学报，8(2)，67-72
汤爱平，陶夏新，谢礼立，1998，GIS在震后应急反应中的应用，自然灾害学报，7(3)，77-83。
陶夏新，等，1996，基于AI和GIS的地震危险性分析方法在太原-临汾地区地震区划中的应用，中国地震，12(增刊)，18-24。
同济大学，1992a，《上海市地震小区划研究报告》(上册)。
同济大学，1992b，《上海市地震小区划研究报告》(下册)。
王海滋，黄渝祥，1997，地震灾害间接经济损失的概念及分类，自然灾害学报，6(2)，1997．p11-16
王亚勇，王理，1993，智能型地理信息系统(AIGIS)在城市抗震防灾规划中的应用，自然灾害学报，2(1)，79-90
温瑞智，陶夏新，谢礼立，1998，基于GIS的生命线防震减灾系统，自然灾害学报，7(3)，84-89。
徐国祥 主编，1994年，《统计预测和决策》，复旦大学出版社。
徐金明，1990，上海市地震滑坡的预测研究，地质灾害与防治，1(1)。
徐耀标，主编，1991，《上海消防要览》，上海人民出版社，1991
杨挺 朱元清 宋俊高，1998，运用GIS进行城市震害预测的有利性，灾害学，13(3)，15-22
杨玉成，1991，震害预测研究，《工程地震研究》，国家地震局震害防御司。
尹之潜，1995，《地震灾害及损失预测方法》。地震出版社。
尹之潜，1999，城市地震危害性分析的基本框架和方法，地震工程与工程振动，19(1)，70-75．
郁寿松、石兆吉，土壤震陷试验研究，岩土工程学报，11(4)，1989年4月。
章在墉 编著，1996年，《地震危险性分析及其应用》，同济大学出版社。
郑杭生 李强 李路路 著，1989年，《社会指标理论研究》，中国人民大学出版社。
邹其嘉 王子平 陈非比 王邵玉 主编，1997，《唐山地震灾区社会恢复与社会问题研究》。地震出版社。
左惠强，谢礼立，等，1999，设定地震影响场的GIS模拟，地震学报，21(4)，427-432。
佐武正雄，和泉正哲，1988，城市的地震灾害，《现代城市与自然灾害》，海洋出版社。p111-125。
Amakumi, K. et al., 1995, Study on evaluation method of damage and seismic intensity distribution for the 1993 Kushiro-Oki earthquake using GIS, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 1265-1272, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
Amakumi, K., et al., 1995, Study on Yokohama city's seismic risk mapping using GIS, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 1273-1280, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
Anagnos, T. 1997, Preface of theme issue on loss estimation of Earthquake Spectra. Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) .
Bender, B. et al, 1987, SEISRISK III: a computer program for seismic hazard estimation, USGS Bulletin, 1772．
Chang, Stephanie, 1995, Economic Impacts, Prelininary Reports from the Hyogo-ken Nambu Earthquake of January 17, 1995． NCEER RESPONSE.
Cornell, C.A., 1968, Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 58, 1583-1606．
Crippen, R.E. and Blom R.G., 1993, Mapping of the Horizontal Strain Field of the 1992 Landers Earthquake by Imageodesy, EOS Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, Vol.73, No.43, pp.374．
Dahlhamer, J. M. and Tiemey, K. J.1998, Rebounding From Disruptive Events: Business Recovery Following the Northridge Earthquake, Sociological Spectrum, 18:121-141,1998
Davidson, Rachel. 1997b. An Urban Earthquake Disaster Risk Index. The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, report no. 121． Stanford, California: Biume Center.
Der Kiureghian, et al., 1977, A fault-ruputure model for seismic risk analysis, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 67,1173-1194．
Dick, W., 1997, Medical Response, First Internaitonal Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4,1997．
Driel N. V., 1991, GIS for earth science application [A]. Proceeding of the fourth International Conference on Seismic Zonation [C]
ESRI, 1994a, Understanding GIS, Environmental System Research Institute, Inc.
ESRI, 1994b, ARC/INFO Data Management, Environmental System Research Institute, Inc.
EERI, 1999, The Chi-Chi, Taiwan Earthquake of September 21,1999, EERI Special Earthquake Report-December 1999, http://www.eeri .org/ Reconn/ Taiwan1299/TaiwanFinal.html
Egozcue, J.J., et al, 1991, A method to estimate intensity occurrence probabilities in low sesmic activity regions, Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics, 20,43-60．
Faccioli, E. et all, 1995, Seismic risk zonation and earthquake scenarios suing GIS technology, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 136-141, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
Giardini, D. & Funiciello, R., 1997, Seismic hazard assessment as input for risk mitigation in megacities:the Kobe lessons. First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop. Sep. 1-4,1997, Seeheim, Germany.
Giardini, D., Funiciello, R., and Boschi, E., 1997, Seismic Assessment as Input for Risk Mitigation in Megacities: The Kobe Lessons, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept 1-4,1997．
Gupta, Anju, 1997, "Performance Based Strategy Evaluation Methodology for Earthquake Risk Management," Technical Report No. 122, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford, CA.
Heaton, T., Future Earthquakes and Cities, 1997, Seismic Assessment as Input for Risk Mitigation hi Megacities: The Kobe Lessons, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4,1997．
Kakhandiki, Abhijit, 1997, "Urban Earthquake Disaster Risk Management: Risk-Tune Charts to Plan for the future," Ph.D. dissertation in progress, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford, CA.
King, S. A., Kiremidjian A. S., et al., 1995, Earthquake damage and loss extimation through GIS, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Seismic Zonation, 265-272, Oct. 17-19,1995, Nice, France.
King, S. A., Kiremidjian, A. S., et al., 1997, Methodologies for Evaluating the Socio-Economic Consequences of Large Earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 565-584．
King, Stephanie A., and Anne S. Kiremidiian. 1994． Regional seismic hazard and risk analysis through Geographic Information Systems. The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, report no. 111． Stanford. California: Blume Center.
Lindell, M. K. and Perry, R. W, 1998, Earthquake Impacts and Hazard Adjustment by Acutely Hazardous Materials Facilities Following the Northridge Earthquake. Earthquake Spectra, V. 14, No. 2, May 1998．
Makropuulos, K.C., et al, 1986, KAZAN: a Fortran program to evaluate seismic hazard parameters using Gumbel's theory of extreme value statistics, Computer & Geosciences, 12,29-46．
Matsuoka M., GIS-based integrated seismic hazard mapping for a large metropolitan area [A]. Proceedings of the forth International Conference on Seismic Zonation[C], 1991．
May, P. J., 1997, Megacities and Earthquakes: social science perspectives, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop. Sep. 1-4, 1997, Seeheim, Germany.
McGuire, R.K., 1978, FRISK: computer program for seismic risk analysis using faults as earthquake sources, USGS Open File Report 78-100．
Palm, R., 1997, Soci-political Aspects, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4,1997．
Perkins, J. 1991, Use of GIS (BASIS) by the association of bay area government for earthquake hazard mapping [A]. Proceedings of the forth International Conference on Seismic Zonation[C], 1991．
Petersen, M. D., Bryant, W. A., et al., Seismic Ground-Motion Hazard Mapping Incorporating Site Effects for Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura Conties, California: A GIS Application, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of American, 87(1) , 249-255．
Ram, R. 1982． Compsite indices of physical quality of life, basic needs fulfillment, and income. Journal of Delelopment Economics, 11, 227-247．
Rojahn, C., King, S. A., et al., Earthquake Damage and Loss Estimation Methodology and Data for Salt Lake County, Utah(ATC-36) , Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 623-642．
Scarthorn, C., 1999, Lifeline Damage and Fire Following Earthquake, Preliminary Reports from the Kocaeli (Izmit) Earthquake of August 17, 1999． MCEER RESPONS
Shinozuka, M., Chang, S. E., et al., 1997, Advances in Eathquake Loss Estimation and Application to Memphis Tennessee, Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 739-758．
Shinozuka, M., Rose A., and Eguchi, R., 1998, Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An Analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions in the New Madrid Area, Monograph No. 2, MCEER, Buffalo, New York.
Tarr, A. C., GIS activities supporting seismic zonation studies in the southern puget sound. Washington: a case study [A].
TERA Corporation, 1980, Seismic hazard analysis, a methodology for the Eastern United States, U. S. Nuclear Rewgulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-1582． 2．
Tiemey, K. J. and Dahlhamer, J. M., 1998a, Earthquake Vulnerability and Emergency Preparedness Among Business, Engineering and Socioeconomic Impacts of Earthquakes: An analysis of Electricity Lifeline Disruptions hi the New Madrid Area, edited by M. Shinozuka, A. Rose, and R. T. Eguchi (NY: MCEER, 1998) . p53-72
Tierney, K. J. and Dahlhamer, J. M., 1998b, Business Disruption, Preparedness and Recovery: Lessons From the Northridge Earthquake, Proceedings of the NEHRP Conference and Workshop on Research on the Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994, Volume IV, (Richmond, California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, 1998) : 174-178．
Tierney, K. J., 1997, Business Impacts and Recovery Following the Northridge Earthquake, Proceedings of the 5th United States/Japan Workshop on Urban Earthquake Hazard Reduction, Rasadena, California, 1997． p43 1-434
Tversky, et al., 1974, Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and Biasis. Sciences 185, No. 1457:1124-1137．
Verstappen, H. Th. 1997, Why an Interdisciplinary Program on Earthquakes and Megacities, First Internaitonal Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4, 1997．
Wang, H. M., 1991, Probabilistic mapping of peak har-rock acceleration in the memphis area [A]. Proceedings of the forth International Conference on Seismic Zonation[C], 1991．
Whitman, R. V, Anagnos, T., et al., Development of a National Eathquake Loss Estimation Methodology, Earthquake Spectra, 13(4) , 643-661．
Wisner, B., 1997, The geography of vulnerability: the pivotal importance of social vulnerability in disaster risk assessment and mitigation, First Internaitonal Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4, 1997．
曹新玲，毛国敏 等 译，1991,[美]应用技术委员会，《加利福尼亚未来地震的损失估计》，地震出版社，北京
陈棋福，1997,大尺度地震灾害损失预测评估方法研究，博士学位论文，国家 地震局地球物理研究所。
邓起东 等，1980，中国地震烈度区划图编制的原则和方法，地震学报，2(1)，1980。
冯启民，1991，生命线工程系统震害预测，《工程地震研究》，国家地震局震害防御司。
冯启民，1991，生命线工程震害预测，工程地震研究》，国家地震局震害防御司。
郭增建，陈鑫连 主编，1991，《城市地震对策》，地震出版社
国家地震局，1990，中国地震烈度区划图，地震出版社。北京，
国家地震局震害防御司 编译，1991，未来地震的损失估计方法，地震出版社，北京
国家地震局震害防御司未来地震灾害损失预测研究小组，1990，中国地震灾害损失预测研究，19-23，地震出版社，北京。
胡聿贤，1988，《地震工程学》，地震出版社
蒋溥，戴丽思，著，1993，《工程地震学概论》，地震出版社
蒋溥，王启鸣 等 著，1990，《地震小区划概论》，地震出版社
金磊 著，1997年，《城市灾害学原理》，气象出版社。
兰从欣，徐平，1999，地理信息系统与震后快速响应，地震，19(3)297-301
李斌，1996，计算机网络技术与城市地理信息系统，《城市地理信息系统：方法与应用》，中国海外地理信息系统协会。美国伯克利
李桂青，1993，结构动力可靠性理论及其应用，地震出版社
李秋文，1999，地震海啸灾害及其研究概述，地震科技情报，1999年第4期(总第177期)，p5-7．
李山有，廖振鹏，1999，基于概率地震危险性分析的重大工程结构设计地震的研究，工程抗震，1999年第3期，18-21．
廖振鹏，1989，《地震小区划——理论与实践》，地震出版社
林洪 罗良清 主编，1996年，《现代统计学》，经济管理出版社
马东辉 等，1998，基于GIS的抗震设防区划计算机应用模型，自然灾害学报，7(2)，74-78。
美国地震工程研究会，1991年，中国石化总公司抗震办公室 译，《洛马普里埃塔地震考察》，地震出版社。
潘耀忠，史培军，1997，区域自然灾害系统基本单元研究——Ⅰ：理论部分，《自然灾害学报》，Vol．6(4)，Nov．1997
上海市地震局 编，1992a，《上海市地区地震危险性分析与基本烈度复核》，地震出版社
上海市地震局 编，1992b，《上海市地区地震危险性分析与基本烈度复核》图集，地震出版社
上海市地震局 编，1999，《上海市的地震与应急——1996年11月9日长江口以东海域地震研究文集》，地震出版社
上海市民防办公室，1993，上海市工业易燃物品重点目标汇总表，(内部资料)
上海市民防办公室，1995，上海市化学危险物品重点目标汇总表，(内部资料)
上海市人口抽样调查办公室 编，1996，《1995年全国1％人口抽样调查资料》(上海分册)。
上海市统计局 编，1999，《98’上海市统计年鉴》，中国统计出版社
石原安雄，1988，城市自然灾害，《现代城市与自然灾害》，海洋出版社。p1-8
石原研而，1988，地震时的地基灾害，《现代城市与自然灾害》，海洋出版社。p92-100
史培军，1996，再论灾害研究的理论与实践，《自然灾害学报》，Vol．5(4)，Nov．1996
宋俊高，朱元清，等，1998，关于建立城市防震减灾应急决策信息系统(GIS应用)的设想，地震学报，20(2)，210～216。
汤爱平，等，1999，GIS在城市防震减灾研究中的应用综述，自然灾害学报，8(2)，67-72
汤爱平，陶夏新，谢礼立，1998，GIS在震后应急反应中的应用，自然灾害学报，7(3)，77-83。
陶夏新，等，1996，基于AI和GIS的地震危险性分析方法在太原-临汾地区地震区划中的应用，中国地震，12(增刊)，18-24。
同济大学，1992a，《上海市地震小区划研究报告》(上册)。
同济大学，1992b，《上海市地震小区划研究报告》(下册)。
王海滋，黄渝祥，1997，地震灾害间接经济损失的概念及分类，自然灾害学报，6(2)，1997．p11-16
王亚勇，王理，1993，智能型地理信息系统(AIGIS)在城市抗震防灾规划中的应用，自然灾害学报，2(1)，79-90
温瑞智，陶夏新，谢礼立，1998，基于GIS的生命线防震减灾系统，自然灾害学报，7(3)，84-89。
徐国祥 主编，1994年，《统计预测和决策》，复旦大学出版社。
徐金明，1990，上海市地震滑坡的预测研究，地质灾害与防治，1(1)。
徐耀标，主编，1991，《上海消防要览》，上海人民出版社，1991
杨挺 朱元清 宋俊高，1998，运用GIS进行城市震害预测的有利性，灾害学，13(3)，15-22
杨玉成，1991，震害预测研究，《工程地震研究》，国家地震局震害防御司。
尹之潜，1995，《地震灾害及损失预测方法》。地震出版社。
尹之潜，1999，城市地震危害性分析的基本框架和方法，地震工程与工程振动，19(1)，70-75．
郁寿松、石兆吉，土壤震陷试验研究，岩土工程学报，11(4)，1989年4月。
章在墉 编著，1996年，《地震危险性分析及其应用》，同济大学出版社。
郑杭生 李强 李路路 著，1989年，《社会指标理论研究》，中国人民大学出版社。
邹其嘉 王子平 陈非比 王邵玉 主编，1997，《唐山地震灾区社会恢复与社会问题研究》。地震出版社。
左惠强，谢礼立，等，1999，设定地震影响场的GIS模拟，地震学报，21(4)，427-432。
佐武正雄，和泉正哲，1988，城市的地震灾害，《现代城市与自然灾害》，海洋出版社。p111-125。