Natech

Primary reference(s)

Showalter, P.S. and M.F. Myers, 1994. Natural disasters in the United States as release agents of oil, chemical, or radiological materials between 1980-1989: analysis and recommendations. Risk Analysis, 14:169-182.

Additional scientific description

Natural hazards can trigger fires, explosions, and toxic or radioactive releases at hazardous installations and other infrastructures that process, store, or transport dangerous substances (Krausmann et al., 2017). These technological ‘secondary effects’ caused by natural hazards are also called ‘Natech’ accidents. They are a returning but often overlooked feature in many natural-disaster situations and have repeatedly had significant and long-term social, environmental, and economic impacts. In the immediate aftermath of a disaster, Natech accidents add significantly to the burden of the population already struggling to cope with the effects of the triggering natural event (Krausmann et al., 2019).

Metrics and numeric limits

In addition to country initiatives to address Natech hazards, several international bodies have started to address Natech hazards and risks. For example, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) issued a Natech addendum to its Guiding Principles for Chemical Accident Prevention, Preparedness and Response (OECD, 2021). The addendum consists of a number of modifications to the Guiding Principles and the addition of a new chapter providing more detailed guidance on Natech prevention, preparedness and response. Recognising the potential for severe acute and chronic health impacts from Natech accidents, the World Health Organization has issued information for public health authorities in the wake of chemical releases caused by natural events, focusing on earthquakes, floods and cyclones. It aims to provide brief information to planners in the health sector and to public health authorities that wish to learn more about chemical releases resulting from natural events. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) has gathered a team of experts who prepared Words into Action Guidelines for National Disaster Risk Assessment and for Man-made/Technological Hazards, both of which contain chapters that discuss actions and guidance for Natech risk reduction (UNDRR, 2020).

Recently, work on developing metrics to measure the performance of Natech risk management has been launched by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, and a framework for a performance rating system has been proposed by researchers at Kyoto University in Japan (Suarez-Paba, 2019).

Examples of drivers, outcomes and risk management

Natural hazards can cause multiple and simultaneous releases of hazardous materials over extended areas, damage or destroy safety barriers and systems, and disrupt lifelines needed for accident prevention and consequence mitigation. These are also the ingredients of cascading disasters. Emergency responders are usually not prepared for or do not have the necessary resources to combat multiple release events at the same time (Feng and Li, 2018).

The risk management of an industrial installation is usually viewed in isolation from its surroundings and does not take account of the potential interactions with other industry, lifelines and nearby communities to capture the potential for cascading events and the impact on industry resilience and recovery (Krausmann et al., 2017). A call for integrated risk governance of Natech hazards has been made, which requires bringing together industry, government agencies overseeing regulatory frameworks, public health and environment authorities, city planners, emergency responders and natural hazard experts, together with potentially affected communities, in order to promote resilient territories (UNDRR, 2017).

Community encroachment on natural-hazard areas, climate change, rapid demographic changes and urbanisation all increase the exposure (and vulnerability) of the population to Natech hazards (Krausmann et al., 2017). Identification of Natech hazards is not always easy as information on technological hazards is often considered confidential and is closely held by industry unless notification and reporting obligations exist.