Volcanic disaster mitigation in the Philippines: experience from Mt. Pinatubo.
Volcanic disaster mitigation in the Philippines: experience from Mt. Pinatubo.
复制标题
菲律宾的火山减灾：皮纳图博山的经验。
DOI：
10.1111/j.1467-7717.1994.tb00281.x
复制
发表时间：
1994
期刊：
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
R. Punongbayan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. C. Tayag;R. Punongbayan
自1951年毁灭性的希博克-希博克喷发和1952年菲律宾火山学和地震学研究所(PHIVOLCS)的前身--火山委员会(COMVOL)成立以来，菲律宾在减轻火山灾害方面取得了相当大的进展。1991-92年皮纳图博火山喷发危机的管理标志着该国减轻火山灾害的发展达到了最高点。应用了最先进的火山监测技术和仪器；准确预测了喷发；在剧烈爆炸前一个月编制并分发了危险区划图；设计和实施了警报和警报系统；及时调动了灾害应对机制。然而，这些灾害前所未有的规模和挥之不去的性质，及其广泛和长期的影响，严重考验了该国火山减灾系统的能力。特别是，Lahar威胁引发了争议，并使决策者陷入两难境地，在适应性和对抗性/控制方法之间做出选择。至少已阐明并以不同程度和形式通过了三项战略：(1)建立火山灰监测-预警-疏散系统，以紧急处理火山灰问题；(2)将定居点迁出危险地区；(3)安装工程对策，以控制/转移火山灰流动和保护定居点。三者的结合似乎是最好的，但最有效、成本最低的组合仍有待确定。
Considerable progress has been made in volcanic disaster mitigation in the Philippines during the last four decades, since the devastating Hibok-Hibok eruption in 1951 and the establishment of the Commission on Volcanology (COMVOL), the forerunner of the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) in 1952. The management of the Pinatubo Volcano eruption crisis of 1991-92 marks the highest point in the development of volcanic disaster mitigation in the country. State-of-the-art volcano monitoring techniques and instruments were applied; the eruption was accurately predicted; hazards zonation maps were prepared and disseminated a month before the violent explosions; an alert and warning system was designed and implemented; and the disaster response machinery was mobilized on time. The unprecedented magnitude and lingering nature of the hazards, however, and their widespread, long-term impacts have sorely tested the capability of the country's volcanic disaster mitigation systems. In particular, the lahar threat has triggered controversies and put decision makers in a dilemma of choosing between adaptive versus confrontational/control approaches. At least three strategies have been articulated and adopted in varying degrees and forms: (1) the establishment of a lahar monitoring-warning-evacuation system to deal with the lahar problem on an emergency basis; (2) relocation of settlements from the hazard zones; and (3) installation of engineering countermeasures to control/divert the lahar flows and protect settlements. A combination of the three appears to be the best, but the most effective and least costly mix remains to be determined.