Guidelines for the Scientific Evaluation of an NSHM: The Legacy of the MPS19 Italian Model

ABSTRACT In many countries, the acceptance of a new National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) to be used in risk reduction strategies usually comes after a deep scrutiny and analysis of the differences with the previous NSHM, in terms of their scientific reliability and of the practical applicability for building code purposes. These two requirements are fully legitimate, but they are conceptually very different and often mixed up in the scientific and public discussion. Although we acknowledge that any use of an NSHM in terms of risk reduction strategies ought to consider many additional nonscientific challenges, we claim that NSHM is a scientific model; hence, its credibility is intimately and exclusively related to its scientific reliability. Stimulated by how the last NSHM in Italy has been evaluated, in this article, we discuss in detail how to test the reliability of an NSHM with the available data, and the meaning of comparing the outcomes of the new and old NSHMs. Finally, we propose recommendations that may guide any scientists to navigate across the tumultuous process of assessing the scientific reliability of an NSHM and comparing, meaningfully, the outcomes of different NSHMs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published
2025-08-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1785/0120240248
Citations
2
Primary Topic
earthquake and tectonic studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.73
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Guidelines for the Scientific Evaluation of an NSHM: The Legacy of the MPS19 Italian Model

Bruno Pace, Giovanni Lanzano, Andrea N. Rovida, Francesco Visini et al.
2 citations
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
earthquake and tectonic studies
3.73
article

Guidelines for the Scientific Evaluation of an NSHM: The Legacy of the MPS19 Italian Model

Bruno Pace, Giovanni Lanzano, Andrea N. Rovida, Francesco Visini, Francesco Martinelli, Matteo Taroni, C. Meletti, Lucia Luzi, Warner Marzocchi, V. D’Amico
article en
2 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT In many countries, the acceptance of a new National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) to be used in risk reduction strategies usually comes after a deep scrutiny and analysis of the differences with the previous NSHM, in terms of their scientific reliability and of the practical applicability for building code purposes. These two requirements are fully legitimate, but they are conceptually very different and often mixed up in the scientific and public discussion. Although we acknowledge that any use of an NSHM in terms of risk reduction strategies ought to consider many additional nonscientific challenges, we claim that NSHM is a scientific model; hence, its credibility is intimately and exclusively related to its scientific reliability. Stimulated by how the last NSHM in Italy has been evaluated, in this article, we discuss in detail how to test the reliability of an NSHM with the available data, and the meaning of comparing the outcomes of the new and old NSHMs. Finally, we propose recommendations that may guide any scientists to navigate across the tumultuous process of assessing the scientific reliability of an NSHM and comparing, meaningfully, the outcomes of different NSHMs.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaVol. 115(6)
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (IT), University of Chieti-Pescara (IT), University of Naples Federico II (IT)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
earthquake and tectonic studies
3.73
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.