城市承灾能力及灾害综合风险评价研究
|
摘要
城市作为巨大的承灾体,日益成为国际社会防灾减灾的中心和重点。城市灾害的多样性、频繁发生与其造成的各种损失和破坏的严重化趋势,已经对城市经济社会发展构成重大威胁,城市对灾害的预测、防御、救助及灾后恢复的综合能力,直接决定了城市可持续发展的基础和能力。人们对城市灾害综合风险的正确评估和科学合理的管理成为实现减灾的最好手段。本文针对城市承灾能力评价和风险分析中的一些关键问题作了以下几个方面的理论和方法研究:
(1)从承灾体角度对城市系统的功能性进行了分析。分别判断了城市社会子系统、经济子系统和环境子系统在受灾后的表现和功能影响,以及子系统内部的各重要要素。
(2)在城市承灾体功能性分析的基础上,对城市的综合承灾能力进行研究探讨,提出防灾能力、抗灾能力、救灾能力和灾后恢复能力构成了城市综合承灾能力。建立了城市承灾能力评价指标体系,其中重点添加了以往评价中忽略的城市环境因素。对比分析了全国29个省会及直辖城市的承灾能力,并利用模糊评价对其进行了等级划分,得出这些城市整体的承灾能力较低,需尽快加强城市综合承灾能力建设的结论。
(3)在风险分析的基础上,提出了“网络均衡性”的概念,建立了网络均衡度计算模型。通过综合考虑节点网络结构重要性和功能重要性,判断网络节点的综合重要性,并基于熵原理进行了网络均衡性的实例计算,得到了与原结论一致的分析结果。计算过程表明:该方法简单,避免了以往利用连通可靠性评价网络的复杂数学计算过程。该方法也解决了以往城市生命线抗灾能力只用经济型指标评价的不精确问题。
(4)建立了生命线多功能系统的耦合关联矩阵,提出了判断耦联关系的量化方法。通过生命线多功能耦合系统的脆性关联分析来判断由于子系统在结构、功能上的关联造成其破坏和灾后恢复的相互影响性,解决了以往耦联关系多是定性评价的问题。从整体上评价了城市生命线系统的抗灾能力,得出了灾害下城市生命线系统间的关联性从强到弱为:通讯系统、电力系统、交通系统、供气系统和供水系统。这一结果说明灾害下通讯系统的自身功能破坏对其他系统的影响最大,并得到了无论哪个系统破坏,都会影响城市供水系统的结论。为城市灾后生命线系统的恢复工作提供了理论依据。
(5)建立了城市灾害综合风险评价模型。从风险具有和代表的不确定性和复杂性入手,将城市灾害综合风险看作是基于危险性和易损性的不确定系统,通过判断各自的确定及不确定影响因素指标,基于集对分析中同一、对立和差异度的思想,建立了城市灾害综合风险评价模型,并利用客观的降维方法——投影寻踪确定了因素的权重,降低风险分析问题的复杂性。应用改进的遗传算法计算有约束条件的优化问题,得出了较满意的降维结果。重点研究了集对联系度中的差异性系数的客观量化方法,将其偏向性和偏向程度加入风险不确定性的计算中,得到了风险阈值的范围,进而得出了风险不确定性的大小。利用该方法对大连市做了动态风险分析评价和趋势预测,并得出大连市的城市灾害期望损失值产生的可能性为50.77%的结果。该方法解决了以往灾害风险分析中多需要历史灾害数据或大样本数据的问题,为更多的分析目标物风险提供了可行方法。
(6)提出了城市承灾系统灾害“放大效应”风险的评价方法。基于脆性熵原理计算出城市承灾系统的脆性熵,来判断我们灾后对城市的控制能力。将突变理论应用于脆性熵的计算过程中,解决了脆性因子崩溃概率难以获取的问题。同时,在对城市灾害系统的脆性分析过程中,可以得出在同一时间内,城市各种灾害发生的相对可能性大小,为有针对性的进行防灾减灾工作提供了判断依据。对大连市的城市灾害脆性风险熵进行了计算,得出了该城市灾害“放大效应”风险的发展趋势,结果表明我们对城市灾后的控制力将相对越来越弱,符合城市化进程的发展规律。
(7)提出从灾害组织结构管理角度对风险管理中人力资源进行管理。通过利用已有方法对比分析了上海市和洛杉矶市的灾害组织管理结构情况,建立了组织结构优化的概念模型。提取出合理进行组织结构中部门整合的建议。
(8)建立了应急管理信息系统的初步模型。提出了应急管理信息系统的建立目的不是为了预测和估算,而应是起到当灾害发生时,对已造成的灾情局面做快速反应的辅助功能的观点。分析了城市灾害应急管理的作用和实质工作,利用SuperMap软件开发了某地区应急管理信息系统的一些功能。
(9)进行了防减灾投入与城市经济发展水平协调性分析,提出从协调性管理进行财力资源管理的观点。结合灰关联度和灰色预测模型GM(1,n)对大连市综合承灾能力与经济发展水平协调性进行了分析。通过假设论证,找到了城市承灾能力与经济发展水平不协调的原因是由于承灾能力形成的滞后性,并利用经典的Daniel趋势函数判断了两者之间的发展趋势同步性。
The urban is getting more and more central and important to international society disaster defense and reduction as a huge disaster bearing body. The diversity of frequent urban disaster as well as the severity of lost and damage have threatened to the development of urban economic society. The integrative capability of disaster prevention, defense, salvation and resilience directly reflected on the base and capability of urban sustainable development. The reasonable assessment and management of urban natural disaster were the best way of people completing disaster mitigation.The thesis focuses on some key technology of assessment of urban disaster-carrying capability and risk analysis and the following aspects are devoted to the main effects:
(1) The city systematic functionality is analyzed from the sight of disaster carrying body. The performance and functional affection of urban society sub-system, economic sub-system and environment sub-system after disaster are analyzed as well as the important factors inside.
(2) Based on the analysis of functionality of urban disaster carrying body, the comprehensive disaster carrying capability in urban place is discussed with the result that the capability is constituted of disaster prevention, disaster defense, disaster salvation and resilience. The index system of urban disaster carrying capability assessment is found with the addition of environment factors which are always ignored. The disaster carrying capability of twenty-nine major cities are compared with each other and we get the conclusion that they are all a little low after fuzzy estimation so that they need to be improved with strenghthing the integrated disaster carrying capability.
(3) Based on the risk analysis, a concept named " net proportionality" is raise up to model the calculation of net proportionality. After considering synthetically nod structural importance and functional importance for estimating the integrated importance of net nod, the net proportionality of an example is calculated based on entropy theory. The result is the same as the present one. The process of calculation showes that the method is simple avoiding the complex mathematic calculation of connecting reliability for network estimation. It also resolves the imprecise problem of using the economic index to do estimation of disaster defense of urban lifeline before.
(4) The coupling associate matrix of lifeline multi-functional system is set up for quantifying the coupling relationship. The interaction of destroying and resilience after disaster caused by sub-systems on structural and functional association are judged through the crisp associating analysis of lifeline multi-functional coupling system. The disaster defense of urban lifeline system is estimated as a whole and the association under disaster from strong to weak is: communication system, electric power system, transport system, gas system and water system. The result showes that the affection of communication system to other systems is the most if its functionality was destroyed under disaster, and the water system would be affected whatever which system destroyed.
(5) The estimating model of urban disaster comprehensive risk is set up. The paper takes the urban integrated disaster risk as an uncertain and complex system containing hazards and vulnerability, modeles the risk assessment with the set pair analysis approach after ensuring the certain or uncertain factors and ensures the weight using project pursuit approach which is an objective dimension-decreasing method good for reducing the complexity of the risk analysis. The improved genetic algorithm is used to solve the optimize problem with restriction to get an satisfying result of dimension-decrease. The objective quantify method of otherness coefficient in set pair affiliation is paid more attention. Its deflection is used in the calculation of risk uncertainty for getting the threshold of risk and the uncertainty value further. The dynamic risk in Dalian is analyzed and the trend is forecasted using this method as well as the result that the probability of expectation loss of risk in Dalian is 50.77%. This approach resolved the problem that much more history disaster data or samples data is need for disaster risk analysis.
(6) The assessing approach of "blown-up" risk of urban disaster carrying system is developed. The crisp entropy of urban disaster carrying system is calculated for judging our control capability. Taking the use of mutation theory in the calculation of crisp entropy, the problem of crisp probability of crisp gene is solved. Mean time, during the crisp analysis of urban disaster system, the relative probability of each kind of disaster also could be gotten for providing the reason of pertinence disaster prevention and mitigation work. The crisp risk entropy of urban disaster in Dalian is calculated to get the developing trend of "blown-up" risk of urban disaster which presentes that our control of urban after disaster would getting weaker according with the developing rule of citifying.
(7) The human resource management is presented from the sight of disaster organization structure. A concept model of organization structure optimization is set up after using a present approach for the analysis of the disaster organization management of Shanghai and Los Angeles.
(8) Modeles an emergency management information system. A point is presented that the aim of setting up emergency management information system is assisting the quick reaction to the situation of a disaster instead of forecasting and estimating. The software SuperMap is used to develop some function of an emergency management information system after the effect and real work of urban disaster emergency management is analyzed.
(9) A point of managing financial resource from the sight of coordination management is presented as well as the analysis of coordination between disaster prevention and mitigation investment and economic development. Combining the grey association and grey forecast model, the coordination in Dalian is analyzed. After supposing argumentation, the reason of un-coordination between urban disaster carrying capability and development proved is the hysteresis of disaster carrying capability. And the developing trends are also judged by classic Daniel function.
(1)从承灾体角度对城市系统的功能性进行了分析。分别判断了城市社会子系统、经济子系统和环境子系统在受灾后的表现和功能影响,以及子系统内部的各重要要素。
(2)在城市承灾体功能性分析的基础上,对城市的综合承灾能力进行研究探讨,提出防灾能力、抗灾能力、救灾能力和灾后恢复能力构成了城市综合承灾能力。建立了城市承灾能力评价指标体系,其中重点添加了以往评价中忽略的城市环境因素。对比分析了全国29个省会及直辖城市的承灾能力,并利用模糊评价对其进行了等级划分,得出这些城市整体的承灾能力较低,需尽快加强城市综合承灾能力建设的结论。
(3)在风险分析的基础上,提出了“网络均衡性”的概念,建立了网络均衡度计算模型。通过综合考虑节点网络结构重要性和功能重要性,判断网络节点的综合重要性,并基于熵原理进行了网络均衡性的实例计算,得到了与原结论一致的分析结果。计算过程表明:该方法简单,避免了以往利用连通可靠性评价网络的复杂数学计算过程。该方法也解决了以往城市生命线抗灾能力只用经济型指标评价的不精确问题。
(4)建立了生命线多功能系统的耦合关联矩阵,提出了判断耦联关系的量化方法。通过生命线多功能耦合系统的脆性关联分析来判断由于子系统在结构、功能上的关联造成其破坏和灾后恢复的相互影响性,解决了以往耦联关系多是定性评价的问题。从整体上评价了城市生命线系统的抗灾能力,得出了灾害下城市生命线系统间的关联性从强到弱为:通讯系统、电力系统、交通系统、供气系统和供水系统。这一结果说明灾害下通讯系统的自身功能破坏对其他系统的影响最大,并得到了无论哪个系统破坏,都会影响城市供水系统的结论。为城市灾后生命线系统的恢复工作提供了理论依据。
(5)建立了城市灾害综合风险评价模型。从风险具有和代表的不确定性和复杂性入手,将城市灾害综合风险看作是基于危险性和易损性的不确定系统,通过判断各自的确定及不确定影响因素指标,基于集对分析中同一、对立和差异度的思想,建立了城市灾害综合风险评价模型,并利用客观的降维方法——投影寻踪确定了因素的权重,降低风险分析问题的复杂性。应用改进的遗传算法计算有约束条件的优化问题,得出了较满意的降维结果。重点研究了集对联系度中的差异性系数的客观量化方法,将其偏向性和偏向程度加入风险不确定性的计算中,得到了风险阈值的范围,进而得出了风险不确定性的大小。利用该方法对大连市做了动态风险分析评价和趋势预测,并得出大连市的城市灾害期望损失值产生的可能性为50.77%的结果。该方法解决了以往灾害风险分析中多需要历史灾害数据或大样本数据的问题,为更多的分析目标物风险提供了可行方法。
(6)提出了城市承灾系统灾害“放大效应”风险的评价方法。基于脆性熵原理计算出城市承灾系统的脆性熵,来判断我们灾后对城市的控制能力。将突变理论应用于脆性熵的计算过程中,解决了脆性因子崩溃概率难以获取的问题。同时,在对城市灾害系统的脆性分析过程中,可以得出在同一时间内,城市各种灾害发生的相对可能性大小,为有针对性的进行防灾减灾工作提供了判断依据。对大连市的城市灾害脆性风险熵进行了计算,得出了该城市灾害“放大效应”风险的发展趋势,结果表明我们对城市灾后的控制力将相对越来越弱,符合城市化进程的发展规律。
(7)提出从灾害组织结构管理角度对风险管理中人力资源进行管理。通过利用已有方法对比分析了上海市和洛杉矶市的灾害组织管理结构情况,建立了组织结构优化的概念模型。提取出合理进行组织结构中部门整合的建议。
(8)建立了应急管理信息系统的初步模型。提出了应急管理信息系统的建立目的不是为了预测和估算,而应是起到当灾害发生时,对已造成的灾情局面做快速反应的辅助功能的观点。分析了城市灾害应急管理的作用和实质工作,利用SuperMap软件开发了某地区应急管理信息系统的一些功能。
(9)进行了防减灾投入与城市经济发展水平协调性分析,提出从协调性管理进行财力资源管理的观点。结合灰关联度和灰色预测模型GM(1,n)对大连市综合承灾能力与经济发展水平协调性进行了分析。通过假设论证,找到了城市承灾能力与经济发展水平不协调的原因是由于承灾能力形成的滞后性,并利用经典的Daniel趋势函数判断了两者之间的发展趋势同步性。
The urban is getting more and more central and important to international society disaster defense and reduction as a huge disaster bearing body. The diversity of frequent urban disaster as well as the severity of lost and damage have threatened to the development of urban economic society. The integrative capability of disaster prevention, defense, salvation and resilience directly reflected on the base and capability of urban sustainable development. The reasonable assessment and management of urban natural disaster were the best way of people completing disaster mitigation.The thesis focuses on some key technology of assessment of urban disaster-carrying capability and risk analysis and the following aspects are devoted to the main effects:
(1) The city systematic functionality is analyzed from the sight of disaster carrying body. The performance and functional affection of urban society sub-system, economic sub-system and environment sub-system after disaster are analyzed as well as the important factors inside.
(2) Based on the analysis of functionality of urban disaster carrying body, the comprehensive disaster carrying capability in urban place is discussed with the result that the capability is constituted of disaster prevention, disaster defense, disaster salvation and resilience. The index system of urban disaster carrying capability assessment is found with the addition of environment factors which are always ignored. The disaster carrying capability of twenty-nine major cities are compared with each other and we get the conclusion that they are all a little low after fuzzy estimation so that they need to be improved with strenghthing the integrated disaster carrying capability.
(3) Based on the risk analysis, a concept named " net proportionality" is raise up to model the calculation of net proportionality. After considering synthetically nod structural importance and functional importance for estimating the integrated importance of net nod, the net proportionality of an example is calculated based on entropy theory. The result is the same as the present one. The process of calculation showes that the method is simple avoiding the complex mathematic calculation of connecting reliability for network estimation. It also resolves the imprecise problem of using the economic index to do estimation of disaster defense of urban lifeline before.
(4) The coupling associate matrix of lifeline multi-functional system is set up for quantifying the coupling relationship. The interaction of destroying and resilience after disaster caused by sub-systems on structural and functional association are judged through the crisp associating analysis of lifeline multi-functional coupling system. The disaster defense of urban lifeline system is estimated as a whole and the association under disaster from strong to weak is: communication system, electric power system, transport system, gas system and water system. The result showes that the affection of communication system to other systems is the most if its functionality was destroyed under disaster, and the water system would be affected whatever which system destroyed.
(5) The estimating model of urban disaster comprehensive risk is set up. The paper takes the urban integrated disaster risk as an uncertain and complex system containing hazards and vulnerability, modeles the risk assessment with the set pair analysis approach after ensuring the certain or uncertain factors and ensures the weight using project pursuit approach which is an objective dimension-decreasing method good for reducing the complexity of the risk analysis. The improved genetic algorithm is used to solve the optimize problem with restriction to get an satisfying result of dimension-decrease. The objective quantify method of otherness coefficient in set pair affiliation is paid more attention. Its deflection is used in the calculation of risk uncertainty for getting the threshold of risk and the uncertainty value further. The dynamic risk in Dalian is analyzed and the trend is forecasted using this method as well as the result that the probability of expectation loss of risk in Dalian is 50.77%. This approach resolved the problem that much more history disaster data or samples data is need for disaster risk analysis.
(6) The assessing approach of "blown-up" risk of urban disaster carrying system is developed. The crisp entropy of urban disaster carrying system is calculated for judging our control capability. Taking the use of mutation theory in the calculation of crisp entropy, the problem of crisp probability of crisp gene is solved. Mean time, during the crisp analysis of urban disaster system, the relative probability of each kind of disaster also could be gotten for providing the reason of pertinence disaster prevention and mitigation work. The crisp risk entropy of urban disaster in Dalian is calculated to get the developing trend of "blown-up" risk of urban disaster which presentes that our control of urban after disaster would getting weaker according with the developing rule of citifying.
(7) The human resource management is presented from the sight of disaster organization structure. A concept model of organization structure optimization is set up after using a present approach for the analysis of the disaster organization management of Shanghai and Los Angeles.
(8) Modeles an emergency management information system. A point is presented that the aim of setting up emergency management information system is assisting the quick reaction to the situation of a disaster instead of forecasting and estimating. The software SuperMap is used to develop some function of an emergency management information system after the effect and real work of urban disaster emergency management is analyzed.
(9) A point of managing financial resource from the sight of coordination management is presented as well as the analysis of coordination between disaster prevention and mitigation investment and economic development. Combining the grey association and grey forecast model, the coordination in Dalian is analyzed. After supposing argumentation, the reason of un-coordination between urban disaster carrying capability and development proved is the hysteresis of disaster carrying capability. And the developing trends are also judged by classic Daniel function.
引文
[1]Lenneal J.Henderson.Emergency and disaster:pervasive risk and public bureaucracy in developing nations,Public Organization Review:A global journal.2004,(4):103-119.
[2]郭济.中央和大城市政府应急机制建设.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004。
[3]苏桂武,高庆华.自然灾害风险的行为主体特性与时间尺度问题.自然灾害学报,2003,12(1):9-16.
[4]Scira Menoni.Chains of damages and failures in a metropolitan environment-some observation on the Kobe earthquake in 1995,Journal of Hazardous Materials,2001,(86):101-119.
[5]S.Menoni,F.Pergalani,M.P.BoniV.Petrini.Lifelines earthquake vulnerability assessment:a systemic approach.Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2002,(22):1199-1208.
[6]Marco Antonio Torres-Vera,Jose Antonio Canas.A lifeline vulnerability study in Barcelona,Spain.Reliability Engineering and System Safety,2003,(80):205-210.
[7]A.Sevtap Selcuk,M.Semih Yucemen.Reliability of lifeline networks under seismic hazard.Reliability Engineering and System Safety,1999,(65):213-227.
[8]Masaru Hoshiya,Kinya Yamamoto,Haruo Olmo.Redundancy index of lifelines for mitigation measurea against seismic risk.Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics,2004,19:205o210.
[9]E.Salzano,l.lervolinob G.Fabbrocinob.Seismic risk of atmospheric storage tanks in the framework of quantitative risk analysis.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,2003,16(5):403-409
[10]Maxx Dilley.Setting priprities:global patterns of disaster risk.Philosophical transactions of the royal society,2006,A(364):2217-2229.
[11]Colleen Murphy,Paolo Gardoni.The Role of Society in Engineering Risk Analysis:A Capabilities-Based Approach.Risk Analysis,2006,26(4):1073-1083.
[12]Ken Granger.Quantifying storm tide risk in Calms.Natural hazards,2003,(30):165-185.
[13]Ken Durham.Treating the Risks in Cairns.Natural hazards,2003,(30):251-261.
[14]Giacomo Di Pasquale,Giampiero Orsini,Roberto W.Romeo.New Developments in Seismic Risk Assessment in Italy.Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering,2005,3:101-128.
[15]A.C.Khanduri,G.C.MorrowVulnerability of buildings to windstorms andinsurance loss estimation.Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,2003,91:455-467:
[16]W.Neil Adger.Vulnerability.Global environmental change,2006,16:268-281.
[17]C.R.Magill,K.J.McAneney,I.E.M.Smith.Probabilistic Assessment of Vent Locations for the Next Auckland Volcanic Field Event.Mathematical Geology,2005,37(3):227-242.
[18]Giacomo Di Pasquale,Giampiero Orsini,Roberto W.Romeo.New Developments in Seismic Risk Assessment in Italy.Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering,2005,3:101-128.
[19]黄崇福.自然灾害风险评价理论与实践.北京:科学出版社,2005.
[20]Iman Karimi,Eyke Hiillermeier.Risk assessment system of natural hazards:A new approach based on fuzzy probability.FuzzySetsandSystems,2007,(158):987-999.
[21]Augustine O.Esogbue.Fuzzy sets modeling and optimization for disaster control systems planning.Fuzzy Sets and System,1996,81:169-183.
[22]Mark J.Ducey,Bruce C.Larson.A fuzzy set approach to the problem of sustainability.Forest Ecology and Management,1999,15:29-40.
[23]A.Zerger,D.I.Smith,G.J.Hunter,S.D.Jones.Riding the storm:a comparison of uncertainty modeling techniques for storm surge risk management.Applied geography,2002,(22):307-330.
[24]Nazzareno Diodato,Michele Ceccarelli.Geographical Information Systems and Geostatistics for Modelling Radioactively Contaminated Land Areas.Natrual Hazards,2005,35:229-242.
[25]Lorena Montoya,Ian Masser.Management of natural hazard risk in Cartago,Costa Rica.Hbitat International,2005,29:493-509.
[26]Davidson Rachel.An urban earthquake disaster risk index:(dissertation).Stanford.CA:Stanford university,1999.
[27]杨挺.城市局部地震灾害危害性指数ULEDRI及其在上海市的应用:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:中国地震局工程力学研究所,2001.
[28]王飞.城市地震危害性模糊评价及地震损失预测评估:(硕士学位论文).杭州:浙江大学,2005.
[29]夏书丹.城市建设用地地震危害性综合评价方法的研究:(硕士学位论文).北京:北京工业大学,2005.
[30]张风华,谢礼立,范立础.城市防震减灾能力评估研究.地震学报,2004,26(3):318-330.
[31]谢礼立.城市防震减灾能力的定义及评估方法.地震工程与工程振动,2006,26(3):1-10.
[32]郑宇.城市防震减灾能力评价指标与应急需求研究:(硕士学位论文).南京:南京工业大学,2003.
[33]刘艳,康仲远,赵汉章等.我国城市减灾管理综合评价指标体系的研究.自然灾害学报,1999,8(2):61-66.
[34]高庆华.中国区域减灾基础能力初步研究.北京:气象出版社,2006.
[35]郭跃.灾害易损性研究的回顾与展望.灾害学,2005,20(4):92-96.
[36]Blaikie,P.Cannon,T.,Davis.At Risk:Natural Hazards,People's Vulnerability and Disasters,"Routledge,London,1994.
[37]李辉霞,陈国阶.可拓方法在区域易损性评判当中应用.地理科学,2003,23(3):335-341.
[38]王飞,蒋建群.城市地震灾害综合易损性分析方法探讨.地震研究,2005,28(1):95-101.
[39]刘希林,莫多闻.泥石流易损度评价.地理研究,2002,21(5):569-577.
[40]樊运晓,罗云,陈庆寿.区域承灾体脆弱性评价指标体系研究.现代地质,2001,15(1):113-116.
[41]樊运晓,罗云,陈庆寿.承灾体脆弱性评价指标中的量化方法探讨.灾害学,2000,15(2):78-81.
[42]樊运晓,罗云,陈庆寿.区域承灾体脆弱性综合评价指标权重的确定.灾害学,2001,16(1):85-87.
[43]樊运晓,高朋会,王红娟.模糊综合评判区域承灾体脆弱性的理论模型.灾害学,2003,18(3):20-23.
[44]毛德华,王立辉.湖南城市洪涝易损性诊断与评估.长江流域资源与环境,2002,11f1):89-93.
[45]葛怡,史培军,刘婧等.中国水灾社会脆弱性评估方法的改进与应用.自然灾害学报,2005,14(6):54-58.
[46]冯志泽,胡政,何钧等.建立城市自然灾害承灾能力指标的思路探讨.灾害学,1994,9(4):40-44.
[47]郭章林,刘明广.基于AHM的城市承灾能力二级模糊综合评判.河北建筑科技学院学报,2003,20(2):5-8.
[48]高庆华、聂高众等.中国防灾减灾能力初步研究.“十五”国家重点科技攻关课题《综合自然灾害信息共享》综合分析报告之三.中国地震局地质研究所:科技部国家计委国家经贸委灾害综合研究 组,2003.
[49]刘新立,史培军.区域水灾风险评估模型研究的理论与实践.自然灾害学报,2003,10f2):66-72.
[50]高庆华,张业成,苏桂武启然灾害风险初议.地球学报,1999,20(1):81-86.
[51]丁继新,杨志法,尚彦军.区域泥石流灾害的定量风险分析.岩土力学,2006,27(7):1071-1076.
[52]王栋,潘少明,吴吉春等.洪水风险分析的研究进展与展望.自然灾害学报,2006,15(1):103-109.
[53]冯利华.基于信息扩散理论的气象要素风险分析.气象科技,2000,(1):27-29.
[54]冯利华,程归燕.基于信息扩散理论的地震风险评估.地震学刊,2000,20(1):19-22.
[55]许世远,王军,石纯.沿海城市自然灾害风险研究.地理学报,2006,61(2):127-138.
[56]黄崇福.内集-外集模型的矩阵算法.北京师范大学学报.2002,38(6):820-828.
[57]黄崇福,ClaudioMoraga,陈志芬.内集-外集模型的一个简便算法.自然灾害学报.2004,13(4):15-20.
[58]陈志芬,黄崇福,张俊香.基于扩散函数的内集-外集模型.模糊系统与数学,2006,20(1):42-48.
[59]Huang Chongfu.An application of calculated fuzzy risk.Information sciences,2002,(142):37-56.
[60]刘新立,黄崇福,史培军.对不完备样本下风险分析方法的改进及应用.自然灾害学报.1998,7(2):10-16.
[61]黄崇福.自然灾害风险分析的信息矩阵方法.自然灾害学报.2006,15(1):1-10.
[62]白海玲,黄崇福.自然灾害的模糊风险.自然灾害学报.2000,9(1):47-53.
[63]Huang Chongfu.Fuzzy risk assessment of urban natural hazards.Fuzzy sets and systems,1996,(83):271-282.
[64]胡浩鹏.北京市泥石流灾害风险评估指标体系及方法研究:(硕士学位论文).北京:中国地址大学,2007.
[65]张应华,刘志全,李广贺.基于不确定性分析的健康环境风险评价.环境科学,2007,28(7):1409-1415.
[66]穆斯塔克.达力伯.贾巴,冯健,孙冬英.基于RS和GIS技术对中国陕西省北部地区土壤水蚀风险评估.水土保持通报,2005,25(1):5-10.
[67]崔红艳.基于GIS的盘锦市潜在海平面上升风险性分析.吉林师范大学学报,2005,(2):5-7.
[68]余世舟,赵振东,钟江荣.基于GIS确定城市地震次生火灾高危区方法的研究.地震工程与工程振动,2004,24(2):176-180.
[69]周成虎,万庆,黄诗峰,陈德清.基于GIS的洪水灾害风险区划研究.地理学报,2000,55(1):15-24.
[70]朱良峰,吴信才,殷坤龙,刘修国.基于GIS的中国滑坡灾害风险分析.岩土力学,2003,24(增刊):221-230.
[71]罗培,况明生,光磊,李华.重庆市地质灾害风险评估信息系统.自然灾害学报,2004,13(6):30-35.
[72]邓丽君.试论城市功能与社会经济发展之关系.现代城市研究,2002,2:52-55.
[73]潘承仕.城市功能综合评价研究:(硕士学位论文).重庆:重庆大学,2004.
[74]金磊.城市灾害学原理.北京:气象出版社,1997.
[75]李恩昌.生命质量级别论及意义.http://www.jyyy.com.cn/yygU1988/8805/880520.html.
[76]Ehren B.Ngo.When disasters and age colleges reviewing vulnerability of the elderly.Natural hazards review.2001,(5):80-89.
[77]叶义成,柯丽华,黄德育.系统综合评价技术及其应用.北京:冶金工业出版社,2006.
[78]孙家乐,蒋德鹏.层次分析法中一致判断矩阵的构造方法.东南大学学报,1991,21(3):69-75.
[79]陈守煜.水资源与防洪系统可变模糊集理论与方法.大连:大连理工大学出版社,2005.
[80]李杰.生命线工程抗震.北京:科学出版社,2005.
[81]何新贵.模糊知识处理的理论与技术.北京:国防工业出版社,1998.
[82]吕大刚,李晓鹏,王光远.基于可靠度和性能的结构整体地震易损性分析.自然灾害学报,2006,15(2):107-114.
[83]张风华,谢礼立.生命线系统对城市地震灾害损失评价研究.土木工程学报,2003,46(11):99-105.
[84]章在墉.地震危险性分析及其应用.上海:同济大学出版社,1996.
[85]张安玉.基于GIS供水管网地震功能评价系统研究:(硕士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2006.
[86]温瑞智,陶夏新,谢礼立.生命线系统的震害耦联.自然灾害学报,2000,9(2):105-110.
[87]汤爱平,郭明珠,欧进萍,谢礼立.生命线系统相互作用下的震害预测方法.土木工程学报,2005,38(8):49-54.
[88]韦琦.复杂系统脆性理论及其在危机分析中的应用:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学,2004.
[89]Scira Menoni.Chains of damages and failures in a metropolitan environment:some observations on the Kobe earthquake in 1995.Journal of Hazardous Materials,2001,86:101-119.
[90]S.Menonia,F.Pergalanib,M.P.Bonib,V.Petrinib.Lifelines earthquake vulnerability assessment:a systemic approach.Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2002,22:1199-1208.
[91]汤爱平,欧进萍,张克绪,陆钦年.生命线系统相互作用下性态评价方法.哈尔滨工业大学学报,2005,37(2):151-155.
[92]姚保华,谢礼立,火恩杰.研究地震情况下生命线系统相互作用的综合方法.地震学报,2004,26(2):193-202.
[93]张风华,谢礼立.生命线系统对城市地震灾害损失评价研究.土木工程学报,2003,36(11):99-105.
[94]姚保华,谢礼立,袁一凡.生命线系统相互作用及其分类.世界地震工程,2001,17(4):48-52.
[95]向喜琼,区域滑坡地质灾害危险性评价与风险管理:(硕士学位论文).成都:成都理工大学,2005.
[96]刘希林.泥石流风险评价中若干问题的探讨.山地学报,2000,18(4):341-345.
[97]Shook,G.An.Assessment of disaster risk and its management in Thailand.Disaster,1997,21(1):77-88.
[98]IUGS.Quantitative risk assessment for slopes and landslides-the state of the art.In:ruden D and Fell R,eds.Landslide Risk Assessment.Rotterdam:AABalkema,1997.42-55.
[99]杨帅英,郝芳华,宁大同.干旱灾害风险评估的研究进展.安全与环境学报,2004,4(2):79-82.
[100]史培军.三论灾害研究的理论与实践.自然灾害学报,2002,11(3):1-9.
[101]张继权,冈田宪夫,多多纳裕一.综合自然灾害风险管理.城市与减灾,2005,(2):2-5.
[102]Dongmei Jin,Jiquan Zhang,Junshan Han.A Study on Urban Drought and WaterShortage Risk Assessment and Management Measures in Jilin Province.In:Proceedings of Fifth annual IIASA-DPRI forum on Integrated Disaster Risk Management,Sept.14-18,Beijing,China,2005,62-71.
[103]张继权,赵万智,冈田宪夫等.综合自然灾害风险管理的理论、对策与途径.应用基础与工程科学学报,2004(增刊):263-271.
[104]张继权,岗田宪夫,多多纳裕一.综合自然灾害风险管理—全面整合的模式与中国的战略选择.自然灾害学报,2006,15(1):29-37.
[105]金冬梅,张继权,韩俊山.吉林省城市干旱缺水风险评价体系与模型研究.自然灾害学报,2005,14(6):100-104.
[106]任鲁川.区域自然灾害风险分析研究进展.地球科学进展,1999,14(3):242-246.
[107]LeungY,HuangCF.A new algorithm for estimating the risk of natural disaster with incomplete data.Int.J.GeneralSystems,2000,29(2):175-204.
[108]王璐,王沁,何平.基于复杂系统综合评价的二重主成分分析法.统计与决策,2006,11(2):145-146.
[109]鲁珂,赵继东,吴跃,何晓飞.基于保局投影的相关反馈算法.计算机辅助设计与图形学学报,2007,19(1):20-24.
[110]姚清林,黄崇福.地震灾害风险因素和风险评估指标的模糊算法.自然灾害学报,2002,11(2):51-58.
[111]高庆华等.中国自然灾害危险性分析与区划,国家“十五”科技攻关课题“综合自然灾害信息共享”研究成果之二.
[112]高吉喜,潘英姿,柳海鹰等.区域洪水灾害易损性评价.环境科学研究,2004,17(6):30-34.
[113]冯利华,吴樟荣.区域易损性的模糊综合评判.地理学与国土研究,2001,17(2):63-66.
[114]C.Dorland,R.S.J.Tol and J.P.Paluticof.Vulnerability of the Netherlands and Northwest Europe to Storm Damage under Climate Change.Climatic Change,1999,43:513-535.
[115]Johnr.Lindsay.The Determinants of disaster vulnerability- Achieving Sustainable Mitigation through Population Health.Natural Hazards,2003,28:291-304.
[116]孙艳丰,郑加齐,王德兴等.基于遗传算法的约束优化方法评述.北方交通大学学报,2000,24(6):14-19.
[117]Goldberg D E.Genetic algorithms in search,Optimization and machine leaming[M].MA:Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,1989.
[118]Deb K,Agrawal S,Pratap A,Meyarivan T.A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization:NAGAII.KanGAL Report No.2000001.Kanpur,India:Indian Institute of Technology,2000.
[119]Jaszkiewicz A.Genetic local search for multi-objective combinatorial optimization.European Journal of Operational Research,2002,137(1):50-71.
[120]Ishibuchi H,Shibata Y.Mating scheme for controlling the diversity-convergence balance for multi-objective optimization.Lecture Notes in Computer Science,Berlin:Springer,2004,3120:1259-1271.
[121]阮宏博.基于遗传算法的工程多目标优化研究:(硕士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2007.
[122]赵克勤.集对分析及其初步应用.杭州:浙江科技出版社,2000.
[123]邓红霞,李存军,朱兵.基于集对分析法的生态承载能力综合评价方法.长江科学院院报,2006,23(6):35-38.
[124]苏钰.基于模糊集对分析的营销风险改进方案选择模型研究.科技管理研究,2006,(11):168-16.
[125]罗崴.基于集对分析理论的公路网综合评价方法研究.华东公路,2007,(1):71-74.
[126]赵克勤.集对分析与熵的研究.浙江大学学报(社科),1992,(2):65-72.
[127]荣盘祥.复杂系统脆性及其理论框架的研究:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学,2006.
[128]闫丽梅,金鸿章,荣盘祥.系统脆性及其脆性源.哈尔滨工程大学学报,2006,27(2):223-226.
[129]阿诺德.突变理论.北京:商务印书馆,1992.
[130]史志富,张安,刘海燕,张圣云.基于突变理论与模糊集的复杂系统多准则决策.系统工程与电子技术,2006,28(7):1010-1013.
[131]郭健.突变理论在复杂系统脆性理论研究中的应用:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学,2004.
[132]李艳,陈晓宏,张鹏飞.突变级数法在区域生态系统健康评价中的应用.中国人口资源与环境,2007,17(3):50-54.
[133]高汝熹,罗守贵.大城市灾害事故综合管理模式研究.中国软科学,2002,(3):109-114.
[134]Ronald H.Ballou,王晓东译.企业物流管理.北京:机械工业出版社,2005.
[135]何天祥.企业管理结构复杂度评价的新方法—熵正交投影法.系统工程理论与实践,2005,(4):115-119.
[136]邱菀华.管理决策与应用熵学.北京:机械工业出版社,2002.
[137]阎植林,邱菀华,陈志强.管理系统有序度评价的熵模型.系统工程理论与实践,1997,(6):45-48.
[138]薛伟.组织管理效能的管理熵分析.科技进步与对策,.2006,(9):103-104.
[139]李伟钢.复杂系统结构有序度.系统工程理论与实践,1988,(4):15-22.
[140]张军,李金林.应用结构熵分析评价管理幅度与跨度.统计与决策,2007,(5):164-166.
[141]朱荣华.基于熵模型对企业组织结构有序度分析.现代管理科学,2007,(3):79-80.
[142]张拮,黄沛.渠道结构有序度的熵模型.工业工程与管理,2007,(3):1-3.
[143]翟永梅,韩新,沈祖炎.国内外大城市防灾减灾管理模式的比较研究.灾害学,2002,17(1):62-69.
[144]葛长庠.控制论经济学导论.北京:中国物资出版社,2005.
[145]陈安,陈宁,周龙骧.数据挖掘技术及应用.北京:科学出版社,2006.
[146]杨马陵,续新民.我国灾害现代管理模式的构想.灾害学,2004,19(4):83-88.
[147]金磊,周有芒.国外最新安全减灾管理方法与应用.天津:天津大学出版社,2006.
[148]田依林.城市公共安全应急管理信息系统建设模型.武汉理工大学学报(信息与管理工程版),2007,29(3):68-71.
[149]李宏男,柳春光.生命线工程系统减灾研究趋势与展望.大连理工大学学报,2005,11(6):931-936.
[150]刘仁义,刘南.基于GIS技术的水利防灾信息系统研究.自然灾害学报,2002,11(1):62-67.
[151]黄诗峰,李纪人.GIS支持下的防汛指挥决策支持系统的系统分析与设计.中国管理科学,2005,9(6):73-80.
[152]郑晓军,王奕首,滕弘飞.应急系统开发与应用.计算机应用研究,2006,(1):9-11.
[153]中国政府网http://www.gov.cn/
[154]韩阳.城市地下管网系统的地震可靠性研究:(博士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2003.
[155]柳春光,杜玮,翟桐.城市交通系统抗震可靠性研究.地震工程与工程振动,1999,19(2):95-99.
[156]陈一平.公路交通系统震害预测计算机辅助系统DPLH简介.建筑科学,1994,(4):71-75.
[157]白广斌.基于GIS的城市生命线震害预测系统:(硕士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2007.
[158]L.Comfort,B.Wisner,S.Cutter,R.Pulwarty.Reframing disaster policy:the global evolution of vulnerable communities,Environmental Hazards,1999,(1):39-44.
[159]Rodger Doran.What's in a name? a comment on a possible intergovernmental panel on natural disasters.Global Environmental Change Part B:Environmental Hazards,2001,3(3-4):143.
[160]曾珍香.可持续发展协调性分析.系统工程理论与实践,2001(3):18-21.
[161]宋松柏,蔡焕杰.区域水资源-社会经济-环境协调模型研究.沈刚农业人学学报,2004,35(5-6):501-503.
[162]张岐山,郭喜江.灰关联熵分析方法.系统工程理论与实践,1996(8):7-11.
[163]刘思峰,郭天榜,党耀国.灰色系统理论及应用.北京:科学出版社,1999.
[164]李彤,黄岁樑.灰色GM(1,2,M,N)在地面沉降预测中的应用.灾害学,2007,22(2):56-61.
[2]郭济.中央和大城市政府应急机制建设.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004。
[3]苏桂武,高庆华.自然灾害风险的行为主体特性与时间尺度问题.自然灾害学报,2003,12(1):9-16.
[4]Scira Menoni.Chains of damages and failures in a metropolitan environment-some observation on the Kobe earthquake in 1995,Journal of Hazardous Materials,2001,(86):101-119.
[5]S.Menoni,F.Pergalani,M.P.BoniV.Petrini.Lifelines earthquake vulnerability assessment:a systemic approach.Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2002,(22):1199-1208.
[6]Marco Antonio Torres-Vera,Jose Antonio Canas.A lifeline vulnerability study in Barcelona,Spain.Reliability Engineering and System Safety,2003,(80):205-210.
[7]A.Sevtap Selcuk,M.Semih Yucemen.Reliability of lifeline networks under seismic hazard.Reliability Engineering and System Safety,1999,(65):213-227.
[8]Masaru Hoshiya,Kinya Yamamoto,Haruo Olmo.Redundancy index of lifelines for mitigation measurea against seismic risk.Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics,2004,19:205o210.
[9]E.Salzano,l.lervolinob G.Fabbrocinob.Seismic risk of atmospheric storage tanks in the framework of quantitative risk analysis.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,2003,16(5):403-409
[10]Maxx Dilley.Setting priprities:global patterns of disaster risk.Philosophical transactions of the royal society,2006,A(364):2217-2229.
[11]Colleen Murphy,Paolo Gardoni.The Role of Society in Engineering Risk Analysis:A Capabilities-Based Approach.Risk Analysis,2006,26(4):1073-1083.
[12]Ken Granger.Quantifying storm tide risk in Calms.Natural hazards,2003,(30):165-185.
[13]Ken Durham.Treating the Risks in Cairns.Natural hazards,2003,(30):251-261.
[14]Giacomo Di Pasquale,Giampiero Orsini,Roberto W.Romeo.New Developments in Seismic Risk Assessment in Italy.Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering,2005,3:101-128.
[15]A.C.Khanduri,G.C.MorrowVulnerability of buildings to windstorms andinsurance loss estimation.Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,2003,91:455-467:
[16]W.Neil Adger.Vulnerability.Global environmental change,2006,16:268-281.
[17]C.R.Magill,K.J.McAneney,I.E.M.Smith.Probabilistic Assessment of Vent Locations for the Next Auckland Volcanic Field Event.Mathematical Geology,2005,37(3):227-242.
[18]Giacomo Di Pasquale,Giampiero Orsini,Roberto W.Romeo.New Developments in Seismic Risk Assessment in Italy.Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering,2005,3:101-128.
[19]黄崇福.自然灾害风险评价理论与实践.北京:科学出版社,2005.
[20]Iman Karimi,Eyke Hiillermeier.Risk assessment system of natural hazards:A new approach based on fuzzy probability.FuzzySetsandSystems,2007,(158):987-999.
[21]Augustine O.Esogbue.Fuzzy sets modeling and optimization for disaster control systems planning.Fuzzy Sets and System,1996,81:169-183.
[22]Mark J.Ducey,Bruce C.Larson.A fuzzy set approach to the problem of sustainability.Forest Ecology and Management,1999,15:29-40.
[23]A.Zerger,D.I.Smith,G.J.Hunter,S.D.Jones.Riding the storm:a comparison of uncertainty modeling techniques for storm surge risk management.Applied geography,2002,(22):307-330.
[24]Nazzareno Diodato,Michele Ceccarelli.Geographical Information Systems and Geostatistics for Modelling Radioactively Contaminated Land Areas.Natrual Hazards,2005,35:229-242.
[25]Lorena Montoya,Ian Masser.Management of natural hazard risk in Cartago,Costa Rica.Hbitat International,2005,29:493-509.
[26]Davidson Rachel.An urban earthquake disaster risk index:(dissertation).Stanford.CA:Stanford university,1999.
[27]杨挺.城市局部地震灾害危害性指数ULEDRI及其在上海市的应用:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:中国地震局工程力学研究所,2001.
[28]王飞.城市地震危害性模糊评价及地震损失预测评估:(硕士学位论文).杭州:浙江大学,2005.
[29]夏书丹.城市建设用地地震危害性综合评价方法的研究:(硕士学位论文).北京:北京工业大学,2005.
[30]张风华,谢礼立,范立础.城市防震减灾能力评估研究.地震学报,2004,26(3):318-330.
[31]谢礼立.城市防震减灾能力的定义及评估方法.地震工程与工程振动,2006,26(3):1-10.
[32]郑宇.城市防震减灾能力评价指标与应急需求研究:(硕士学位论文).南京:南京工业大学,2003.
[33]刘艳,康仲远,赵汉章等.我国城市减灾管理综合评价指标体系的研究.自然灾害学报,1999,8(2):61-66.
[34]高庆华.中国区域减灾基础能力初步研究.北京:气象出版社,2006.
[35]郭跃.灾害易损性研究的回顾与展望.灾害学,2005,20(4):92-96.
[36]Blaikie,P.Cannon,T.,Davis.At Risk:Natural Hazards,People's Vulnerability and Disasters,"Routledge,London,1994.
[37]李辉霞,陈国阶.可拓方法在区域易损性评判当中应用.地理科学,2003,23(3):335-341.
[38]王飞,蒋建群.城市地震灾害综合易损性分析方法探讨.地震研究,2005,28(1):95-101.
[39]刘希林,莫多闻.泥石流易损度评价.地理研究,2002,21(5):569-577.
[40]樊运晓,罗云,陈庆寿.区域承灾体脆弱性评价指标体系研究.现代地质,2001,15(1):113-116.
[41]樊运晓,罗云,陈庆寿.承灾体脆弱性评价指标中的量化方法探讨.灾害学,2000,15(2):78-81.
[42]樊运晓,罗云,陈庆寿.区域承灾体脆弱性综合评价指标权重的确定.灾害学,2001,16(1):85-87.
[43]樊运晓,高朋会,王红娟.模糊综合评判区域承灾体脆弱性的理论模型.灾害学,2003,18(3):20-23.
[44]毛德华,王立辉.湖南城市洪涝易损性诊断与评估.长江流域资源与环境,2002,11f1):89-93.
[45]葛怡,史培军,刘婧等.中国水灾社会脆弱性评估方法的改进与应用.自然灾害学报,2005,14(6):54-58.
[46]冯志泽,胡政,何钧等.建立城市自然灾害承灾能力指标的思路探讨.灾害学,1994,9(4):40-44.
[47]郭章林,刘明广.基于AHM的城市承灾能力二级模糊综合评判.河北建筑科技学院学报,2003,20(2):5-8.
[48]高庆华、聂高众等.中国防灾减灾能力初步研究.“十五”国家重点科技攻关课题《综合自然灾害信息共享》综合分析报告之三.中国地震局地质研究所:科技部国家计委国家经贸委灾害综合研究 组,2003.
[49]刘新立,史培军.区域水灾风险评估模型研究的理论与实践.自然灾害学报,2003,10f2):66-72.
[50]高庆华,张业成,苏桂武启然灾害风险初议.地球学报,1999,20(1):81-86.
[51]丁继新,杨志法,尚彦军.区域泥石流灾害的定量风险分析.岩土力学,2006,27(7):1071-1076.
[52]王栋,潘少明,吴吉春等.洪水风险分析的研究进展与展望.自然灾害学报,2006,15(1):103-109.
[53]冯利华.基于信息扩散理论的气象要素风险分析.气象科技,2000,(1):27-29.
[54]冯利华,程归燕.基于信息扩散理论的地震风险评估.地震学刊,2000,20(1):19-22.
[55]许世远,王军,石纯.沿海城市自然灾害风险研究.地理学报,2006,61(2):127-138.
[56]黄崇福.内集-外集模型的矩阵算法.北京师范大学学报.2002,38(6):820-828.
[57]黄崇福,ClaudioMoraga,陈志芬.内集-外集模型的一个简便算法.自然灾害学报.2004,13(4):15-20.
[58]陈志芬,黄崇福,张俊香.基于扩散函数的内集-外集模型.模糊系统与数学,2006,20(1):42-48.
[59]Huang Chongfu.An application of calculated fuzzy risk.Information sciences,2002,(142):37-56.
[60]刘新立,黄崇福,史培军.对不完备样本下风险分析方法的改进及应用.自然灾害学报.1998,7(2):10-16.
[61]黄崇福.自然灾害风险分析的信息矩阵方法.自然灾害学报.2006,15(1):1-10.
[62]白海玲,黄崇福.自然灾害的模糊风险.自然灾害学报.2000,9(1):47-53.
[63]Huang Chongfu.Fuzzy risk assessment of urban natural hazards.Fuzzy sets and systems,1996,(83):271-282.
[64]胡浩鹏.北京市泥石流灾害风险评估指标体系及方法研究:(硕士学位论文).北京:中国地址大学,2007.
[65]张应华,刘志全,李广贺.基于不确定性分析的健康环境风险评价.环境科学,2007,28(7):1409-1415.
[66]穆斯塔克.达力伯.贾巴,冯健,孙冬英.基于RS和GIS技术对中国陕西省北部地区土壤水蚀风险评估.水土保持通报,2005,25(1):5-10.
[67]崔红艳.基于GIS的盘锦市潜在海平面上升风险性分析.吉林师范大学学报,2005,(2):5-7.
[68]余世舟,赵振东,钟江荣.基于GIS确定城市地震次生火灾高危区方法的研究.地震工程与工程振动,2004,24(2):176-180.
[69]周成虎,万庆,黄诗峰,陈德清.基于GIS的洪水灾害风险区划研究.地理学报,2000,55(1):15-24.
[70]朱良峰,吴信才,殷坤龙,刘修国.基于GIS的中国滑坡灾害风险分析.岩土力学,2003,24(增刊):221-230.
[71]罗培,况明生,光磊,李华.重庆市地质灾害风险评估信息系统.自然灾害学报,2004,13(6):30-35.
[72]邓丽君.试论城市功能与社会经济发展之关系.现代城市研究,2002,2:52-55.
[73]潘承仕.城市功能综合评价研究:(硕士学位论文).重庆:重庆大学,2004.
[74]金磊.城市灾害学原理.北京:气象出版社,1997.
[75]李恩昌.生命质量级别论及意义.http://www.jyyy.com.cn/yygU1988/8805/880520.html.
[76]Ehren B.Ngo.When disasters and age colleges reviewing vulnerability of the elderly.Natural hazards review.2001,(5):80-89.
[77]叶义成,柯丽华,黄德育.系统综合评价技术及其应用.北京:冶金工业出版社,2006.
[78]孙家乐,蒋德鹏.层次分析法中一致判断矩阵的构造方法.东南大学学报,1991,21(3):69-75.
[79]陈守煜.水资源与防洪系统可变模糊集理论与方法.大连:大连理工大学出版社,2005.
[80]李杰.生命线工程抗震.北京:科学出版社,2005.
[81]何新贵.模糊知识处理的理论与技术.北京:国防工业出版社,1998.
[82]吕大刚,李晓鹏,王光远.基于可靠度和性能的结构整体地震易损性分析.自然灾害学报,2006,15(2):107-114.
[83]张风华,谢礼立.生命线系统对城市地震灾害损失评价研究.土木工程学报,2003,46(11):99-105.
[84]章在墉.地震危险性分析及其应用.上海:同济大学出版社,1996.
[85]张安玉.基于GIS供水管网地震功能评价系统研究:(硕士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2006.
[86]温瑞智,陶夏新,谢礼立.生命线系统的震害耦联.自然灾害学报,2000,9(2):105-110.
[87]汤爱平,郭明珠,欧进萍,谢礼立.生命线系统相互作用下的震害预测方法.土木工程学报,2005,38(8):49-54.
[88]韦琦.复杂系统脆性理论及其在危机分析中的应用:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学,2004.
[89]Scira Menoni.Chains of damages and failures in a metropolitan environment:some observations on the Kobe earthquake in 1995.Journal of Hazardous Materials,2001,86:101-119.
[90]S.Menonia,F.Pergalanib,M.P.Bonib,V.Petrinib.Lifelines earthquake vulnerability assessment:a systemic approach.Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2002,22:1199-1208.
[91]汤爱平,欧进萍,张克绪,陆钦年.生命线系统相互作用下性态评价方法.哈尔滨工业大学学报,2005,37(2):151-155.
[92]姚保华,谢礼立,火恩杰.研究地震情况下生命线系统相互作用的综合方法.地震学报,2004,26(2):193-202.
[93]张风华,谢礼立.生命线系统对城市地震灾害损失评价研究.土木工程学报,2003,36(11):99-105.
[94]姚保华,谢礼立,袁一凡.生命线系统相互作用及其分类.世界地震工程,2001,17(4):48-52.
[95]向喜琼,区域滑坡地质灾害危险性评价与风险管理:(硕士学位论文).成都:成都理工大学,2005.
[96]刘希林.泥石流风险评价中若干问题的探讨.山地学报,2000,18(4):341-345.
[97]Shook,G.An.Assessment of disaster risk and its management in Thailand.Disaster,1997,21(1):77-88.
[98]IUGS.Quantitative risk assessment for slopes and landslides-the state of the art.In:ruden D and Fell R,eds.Landslide Risk Assessment.Rotterdam:AABalkema,1997.42-55.
[99]杨帅英,郝芳华,宁大同.干旱灾害风险评估的研究进展.安全与环境学报,2004,4(2):79-82.
[100]史培军.三论灾害研究的理论与实践.自然灾害学报,2002,11(3):1-9.
[101]张继权,冈田宪夫,多多纳裕一.综合自然灾害风险管理.城市与减灾,2005,(2):2-5.
[102]Dongmei Jin,Jiquan Zhang,Junshan Han.A Study on Urban Drought and WaterShortage Risk Assessment and Management Measures in Jilin Province.In:Proceedings of Fifth annual IIASA-DPRI forum on Integrated Disaster Risk Management,Sept.14-18,Beijing,China,2005,62-71.
[103]张继权,赵万智,冈田宪夫等.综合自然灾害风险管理的理论、对策与途径.应用基础与工程科学学报,2004(增刊):263-271.
[104]张继权,岗田宪夫,多多纳裕一.综合自然灾害风险管理—全面整合的模式与中国的战略选择.自然灾害学报,2006,15(1):29-37.
[105]金冬梅,张继权,韩俊山.吉林省城市干旱缺水风险评价体系与模型研究.自然灾害学报,2005,14(6):100-104.
[106]任鲁川.区域自然灾害风险分析研究进展.地球科学进展,1999,14(3):242-246.
[107]LeungY,HuangCF.A new algorithm for estimating the risk of natural disaster with incomplete data.Int.J.GeneralSystems,2000,29(2):175-204.
[108]王璐,王沁,何平.基于复杂系统综合评价的二重主成分分析法.统计与决策,2006,11(2):145-146.
[109]鲁珂,赵继东,吴跃,何晓飞.基于保局投影的相关反馈算法.计算机辅助设计与图形学学报,2007,19(1):20-24.
[110]姚清林,黄崇福.地震灾害风险因素和风险评估指标的模糊算法.自然灾害学报,2002,11(2):51-58.
[111]高庆华等.中国自然灾害危险性分析与区划,国家“十五”科技攻关课题“综合自然灾害信息共享”研究成果之二.
[112]高吉喜,潘英姿,柳海鹰等.区域洪水灾害易损性评价.环境科学研究,2004,17(6):30-34.
[113]冯利华,吴樟荣.区域易损性的模糊综合评判.地理学与国土研究,2001,17(2):63-66.
[114]C.Dorland,R.S.J.Tol and J.P.Paluticof.Vulnerability of the Netherlands and Northwest Europe to Storm Damage under Climate Change.Climatic Change,1999,43:513-535.
[115]Johnr.Lindsay.The Determinants of disaster vulnerability- Achieving Sustainable Mitigation through Population Health.Natural Hazards,2003,28:291-304.
[116]孙艳丰,郑加齐,王德兴等.基于遗传算法的约束优化方法评述.北方交通大学学报,2000,24(6):14-19.
[117]Goldberg D E.Genetic algorithms in search,Optimization and machine leaming[M].MA:Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,1989.
[118]Deb K,Agrawal S,Pratap A,Meyarivan T.A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization:NAGAII.KanGAL Report No.2000001.Kanpur,India:Indian Institute of Technology,2000.
[119]Jaszkiewicz A.Genetic local search for multi-objective combinatorial optimization.European Journal of Operational Research,2002,137(1):50-71.
[120]Ishibuchi H,Shibata Y.Mating scheme for controlling the diversity-convergence balance for multi-objective optimization.Lecture Notes in Computer Science,Berlin:Springer,2004,3120:1259-1271.
[121]阮宏博.基于遗传算法的工程多目标优化研究:(硕士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2007.
[122]赵克勤.集对分析及其初步应用.杭州:浙江科技出版社,2000.
[123]邓红霞,李存军,朱兵.基于集对分析法的生态承载能力综合评价方法.长江科学院院报,2006,23(6):35-38.
[124]苏钰.基于模糊集对分析的营销风险改进方案选择模型研究.科技管理研究,2006,(11):168-16.
[125]罗崴.基于集对分析理论的公路网综合评价方法研究.华东公路,2007,(1):71-74.
[126]赵克勤.集对分析与熵的研究.浙江大学学报(社科),1992,(2):65-72.
[127]荣盘祥.复杂系统脆性及其理论框架的研究:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学,2006.
[128]闫丽梅,金鸿章,荣盘祥.系统脆性及其脆性源.哈尔滨工程大学学报,2006,27(2):223-226.
[129]阿诺德.突变理论.北京:商务印书馆,1992.
[130]史志富,张安,刘海燕,张圣云.基于突变理论与模糊集的复杂系统多准则决策.系统工程与电子技术,2006,28(7):1010-1013.
[131]郭健.突变理论在复杂系统脆性理论研究中的应用:(博士学位论文).哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学,2004.
[132]李艳,陈晓宏,张鹏飞.突变级数法在区域生态系统健康评价中的应用.中国人口资源与环境,2007,17(3):50-54.
[133]高汝熹,罗守贵.大城市灾害事故综合管理模式研究.中国软科学,2002,(3):109-114.
[134]Ronald H.Ballou,王晓东译.企业物流管理.北京:机械工业出版社,2005.
[135]何天祥.企业管理结构复杂度评价的新方法—熵正交投影法.系统工程理论与实践,2005,(4):115-119.
[136]邱菀华.管理决策与应用熵学.北京:机械工业出版社,2002.
[137]阎植林,邱菀华,陈志强.管理系统有序度评价的熵模型.系统工程理论与实践,1997,(6):45-48.
[138]薛伟.组织管理效能的管理熵分析.科技进步与对策,.2006,(9):103-104.
[139]李伟钢.复杂系统结构有序度.系统工程理论与实践,1988,(4):15-22.
[140]张军,李金林.应用结构熵分析评价管理幅度与跨度.统计与决策,2007,(5):164-166.
[141]朱荣华.基于熵模型对企业组织结构有序度分析.现代管理科学,2007,(3):79-80.
[142]张拮,黄沛.渠道结构有序度的熵模型.工业工程与管理,2007,(3):1-3.
[143]翟永梅,韩新,沈祖炎.国内外大城市防灾减灾管理模式的比较研究.灾害学,2002,17(1):62-69.
[144]葛长庠.控制论经济学导论.北京:中国物资出版社,2005.
[145]陈安,陈宁,周龙骧.数据挖掘技术及应用.北京:科学出版社,2006.
[146]杨马陵,续新民.我国灾害现代管理模式的构想.灾害学,2004,19(4):83-88.
[147]金磊,周有芒.国外最新安全减灾管理方法与应用.天津:天津大学出版社,2006.
[148]田依林.城市公共安全应急管理信息系统建设模型.武汉理工大学学报(信息与管理工程版),2007,29(3):68-71.
[149]李宏男,柳春光.生命线工程系统减灾研究趋势与展望.大连理工大学学报,2005,11(6):931-936.
[150]刘仁义,刘南.基于GIS技术的水利防灾信息系统研究.自然灾害学报,2002,11(1):62-67.
[151]黄诗峰,李纪人.GIS支持下的防汛指挥决策支持系统的系统分析与设计.中国管理科学,2005,9(6):73-80.
[152]郑晓军,王奕首,滕弘飞.应急系统开发与应用.计算机应用研究,2006,(1):9-11.
[153]中国政府网http://www.gov.cn/
[154]韩阳.城市地下管网系统的地震可靠性研究:(博士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2003.
[155]柳春光,杜玮,翟桐.城市交通系统抗震可靠性研究.地震工程与工程振动,1999,19(2):95-99.
[156]陈一平.公路交通系统震害预测计算机辅助系统DPLH简介.建筑科学,1994,(4):71-75.
[157]白广斌.基于GIS的城市生命线震害预测系统:(硕士学位论文).大连:大连理工大学,2007.
[158]L.Comfort,B.Wisner,S.Cutter,R.Pulwarty.Reframing disaster policy:the global evolution of vulnerable communities,Environmental Hazards,1999,(1):39-44.
[159]Rodger Doran.What's in a name? a comment on a possible intergovernmental panel on natural disasters.Global Environmental Change Part B:Environmental Hazards,2001,3(3-4):143.
[160]曾珍香.可持续发展协调性分析.系统工程理论与实践,2001(3):18-21.
[161]宋松柏,蔡焕杰.区域水资源-社会经济-环境协调模型研究.沈刚农业人学学报,2004,35(5-6):501-503.
[162]张岐山,郭喜江.灰关联熵分析方法.系统工程理论与实践,1996(8):7-11.
[163]刘思峰,郭天榜,党耀国.灰色系统理论及应用.北京:科学出版社,1999.
[164]李彤,黄岁樑.灰色GM(1,2,M,N)在地面沉降预测中的应用.灾害学,2007,22(2):56-61.