Yuriy Kostyuchenko 1,2 , Maxim Yuschenko 1 , and Ilya Kravchuk 3

1. Yuriy Kostyuchenko1,2, Maxim Yuschenko1, and Ilya Kravchuk3 1Scientific Centre for Aerospace Research of the Earth, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine 2Canadian Network for Research on Terrorism Security and Society (TSAS) 3Faculty of Geography, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv On the application of communication models in approaches to socio-environmental risks minimization EGU General Assembly 2019, Vienna (Austria) April 12, 2019, EOS5.2 (EGU2019-174)

2. Disaster risks & catastrophe losses: uncertainties & limits Modern global community facing on complex novel threats and challenges connected with development of important multi-scale tendencies of globalization, decentralization and social transformation. Development of these tendencies not only generates new types of nexus, nonlinear interdependencies and risks such as systems of chain risks, but also limiting the applicability of traditional approaches to risks assessment. Distribution of natural disaster losses vs. its estimation Distribution of highest detected disaster losses during 1991-2018

3. Disaster risks & catastrophe losses: uncertainties & limits demonstrates a difference between reality and perception caused by communications. This difference demonstrates not only the lack of education or awareness, but also to the distortion of patterns and distribution channels of information. Information about the earthquake in Romania or Turkey is spreading faster and more efficiently than information about the heat wave in Kiev. This leads to distortions as the patterns of risks perception as well as to the formation of the false communications patterns and practices. All this negatively affects to the crisis behavior of communities and increases the disaster losses.

4. Methodology: People engagement into common action The basic model describing the process by people engage in the collective action may described by the dynamics of fraction of active people in time: the growth and decay functions: a visibility of collective action is a step function:

5. Methodology: The stochastic model of people interaction The following model for information dissemination directed to mutual benefit intention was proposed - the coefficients of direct and indirect communications between members of i persons of different j and k groups

6. Methodology: The group size distribution model A stochastic structure of the communicative environment, determined by the rate of change of the proportion of groups of size i and distribution of the groups in time by size: Number of the groups at the moment Distributed by size

7. Methodology: The decision making model under the stress condition with dynamic communication A model of the decision making process in the group-structured dynamical multi-agent environment directed to the mutual benefit equilibrium through common action The model of decision for individual member of community: A decision process for groups:

8. Application Notes: Approach to control the group dynamics Analysis of group dynamics can be reducing and solved as the task of clustering of information in communication network

9. Application Notes: Possibility of simplified estimation on averaged parameters

10. Application Notes: Conceptual justification and calibration of the model For the analysis of the proposed model was chosen an extreme snowfall in Kiev March, 22-24, 2013. Presented distributions are demonstrating a good corresponding of the model to the observed data. At the same time it should be noted that the model underestimated (3%) a number of involved public, as well as shows little bit faster (12%) engagement into action than real data and faster (14%) decay of volunteer’s number. Distribution of number of volunteers, municipal and governmental rescue team members, involved into disaster relief during March 22-23, 2013 in Kiev

11. Discussion and Recommendations on the Risks Communication Presented models demonstrate the complex interdependence between methods and tools of risk communication and the socio-cultural and political characteristics of local communities. The general model allows to identify the main drivers and threats associated with risk communications and perception

12. Discussion and Recommendations on the Risks Communication the proposed modeling approach allows to formulate few recommendations directed to improvement of risk assessment and risk management practices basing on communication models: • A comprehensive systems-based intervention should be applied. This way recognizes community behavior is the outcomes of interaction between legislation, organizational policy and practice, social networks, engineering solutions, and community norms. • Successful strategies should be based on the greater use of "bottom-up" (participative) strategies. These focus on empowering and resourcing local groups and networks, to identify problems, define solutions and initiate action plans. • Successful strategies should be oriented to greater use of social marketing methods. Mass persuasion methods originally developed in the commercial marketing field are now widely used to foster positive behaviors. • Should be greater used the evidence-based approaches. Social research is replacing gut feeling in emergency risk communication. But we should remember that nature of evidence in modern society is changed.

13. Conclusions Described methodology shows the principal factors contribute to an effective community safety • The public and expert awareness on nature of the hazard and associated risk; • The perception of the risk and people’s willingness to act; • Identifying the stages of risk communication; • Identifying audiences and associated messages (analysis of demographics, psychological factors, experience of the hazard; vicarious experience, regional variability of social norms, diversity of personal and community discourses and narratives, audience segmentation) and • Community resilience (analysis of groups particularization, horizontal links density, efficiency, dynamics, etc., individual and community action factors, collaboration skills, local coalitions and networks, ownership and leadership). In each case successful risk communication strategy should be directed to fostering behavioral change, positive segmentation of specific audiences, and development of collective decision support tool – with strong process orientation, audience-focused communication content, a sequential process of deepening public engagement.

14. Acknowledgement The authors are deeply grateful to colleagues from the American Statistical Association (ASA), American Meteorological Society (AMS), Canadian Network for Research on Terrorism Security and Society (TSAS), and National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine for their critical and constructive comments and suggestions that resulted in important improvements to the study. Particular thanks authors express to colleagues from International Association for Promoting Geoethics (IAPG) for continuous support of this activity.

15. Thank you for your attention Dr. Yuriy V. Kostyuchenko Ukraine, 01054, Kiev, 55-b, O. Honchar str. Scientific Centre for Aerospace Research of the Earth National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine phone: (+38-044) 486 1148 (office); (+38-050) 380 4797 (handy); fax: (+38-044) 486 9405 e-mail: yvk@casre.kiev.ua; yuriy.v.kostyuchenko@gmail.com