Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazard

<p>This work aims at investigating the consistency between a strain rate model and a long-term earthquake forecast at the European scale. We take advantage of the release of geodetic strain rate models by <span class="cit" id="xref_text.1"><a href="#bib1.bibx4...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: B. Donniol Jouve, A. Socquet, C. Beauval, J. Piña Valdès, L. Danciu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2025-06-01
Series:Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
Online Access:https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/25/1789/2025/nhess-25-1789-2025.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850241417176154112
author B. Donniol Jouve
A. Socquet
C. Beauval
J. Piña Valdès
L. Danciu
author_facet B. Donniol Jouve
A. Socquet
C. Beauval
J. Piña Valdès
L. Danciu
author_sort B. Donniol Jouve
collection DOAJ
description <p>This work aims at investigating the consistency between a strain rate model and a long-term earthquake forecast at the European scale. We take advantage of the release of geodetic strain rate models by <span class="cit" id="xref_text.1"><a href="#bib1.bibx41">Piña-Valdés et al.</a> (<a href="#bib1.bibx41">2022</a>)</span> and the release of the European Seismic Hazard Model 2020 (ESHM20) by <span class="cit" id="xref_text.2"><a href="#bib1.bibx14">Danciu et al.</a> (<a href="#bib1.bibx14">2024</a>)</span> to compare geodetic and seismic moment rates across Europe. Seismic moments are inferred from the magnitude–frequency distributions that constitute the ESHM20 source model. We explore the full ESHM20 source model logic tree to account for epistemic uncertainties. On the geodesy side, we use the strain rates to calculate the geodetic moment for each area source zone of the hazard model, considering associated epistemic uncertainties. We show that the parameters contributing the most to the overall uncertainty in the geodetic moment rate are the distance weighting scheme used in the spatial inversion, the equation used to convert surface strain to a scalar moment rate, and the effective seismic thickness. We compare the distributions of geodetic and seismic moment rates at different geographical scales. In highly seismic activity zones, such as the Apennines in Italy, Greece, the Balkans, and the Betics in Spain, primary compatibility between seismic and geodetic moment rates is evident. Discrepancies emerge in low- to moderate-seismic-activity zones, particularly in areas affected by the Scandinavian glacial isostatic adjustment, where geodetic moment rates exceed seismic moment rates significantly. We show that considering broader zones enhances the match between geodetic and seismic moment rate distributions. In zones where ESHM20 magnitude–frequency distributions are well-constrained (established on more than 30 complete events), the distributions of seismic and geodetic moments usually overlap significantly, suggesting the potential for integrating geodetic data into hazard models, even in regions with low deformation.</p>
format Article
id doaj-art-334a4eadf2e643228f68d5fce6834837
institution OA Journals
issn 1561-8633
1684-9981
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Copernicus Publications
record_format Article
series Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
spelling doaj-art-334a4eadf2e643228f68d5fce68348372025-08-20T02:00:37ZengCopernicus PublicationsNatural Hazards and Earth System Sciences1561-86331684-99812025-06-01251789180910.5194/nhess-25-1789-2025Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazardB. Donniol Jouve0A. Socquet1C. Beauval2J. Piña Valdès3L. Danciu4Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IRD, Univ. Gustave Eiffel, ISTerre, 38000 Grenoble, FranceUniv. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IRD, Univ. Gustave Eiffel, ISTerre, 38000 Grenoble, FranceUniv. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IRD, Univ. Gustave Eiffel, ISTerre, 38000 Grenoble, FranceDepartamento de Ciencias Geodésicas y Geomática, Escuela de Ciencias y Tecnología, Universidad de Concepción Campus, Los Ángeles, ChileSwiss Seismological Service, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland<p>This work aims at investigating the consistency between a strain rate model and a long-term earthquake forecast at the European scale. We take advantage of the release of geodetic strain rate models by <span class="cit" id="xref_text.1"><a href="#bib1.bibx41">Piña-Valdés et al.</a> (<a href="#bib1.bibx41">2022</a>)</span> and the release of the European Seismic Hazard Model 2020 (ESHM20) by <span class="cit" id="xref_text.2"><a href="#bib1.bibx14">Danciu et al.</a> (<a href="#bib1.bibx14">2024</a>)</span> to compare geodetic and seismic moment rates across Europe. Seismic moments are inferred from the magnitude–frequency distributions that constitute the ESHM20 source model. We explore the full ESHM20 source model logic tree to account for epistemic uncertainties. On the geodesy side, we use the strain rates to calculate the geodetic moment for each area source zone of the hazard model, considering associated epistemic uncertainties. We show that the parameters contributing the most to the overall uncertainty in the geodetic moment rate are the distance weighting scheme used in the spatial inversion, the equation used to convert surface strain to a scalar moment rate, and the effective seismic thickness. We compare the distributions of geodetic and seismic moment rates at different geographical scales. In highly seismic activity zones, such as the Apennines in Italy, Greece, the Balkans, and the Betics in Spain, primary compatibility between seismic and geodetic moment rates is evident. Discrepancies emerge in low- to moderate-seismic-activity zones, particularly in areas affected by the Scandinavian glacial isostatic adjustment, where geodetic moment rates exceed seismic moment rates significantly. We show that considering broader zones enhances the match between geodetic and seismic moment rate distributions. In zones where ESHM20 magnitude–frequency distributions are well-constrained (established on more than 30 complete events), the distributions of seismic and geodetic moments usually overlap significantly, suggesting the potential for integrating geodetic data into hazard models, even in regions with low deformation.</p>https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/25/1789/2025/nhess-25-1789-2025.pdf
spellingShingle B. Donniol Jouve
A. Socquet
C. Beauval
J. Piña Valdès
L. Danciu
Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazard
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
title Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazard
title_full Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazard
title_fullStr Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazard
title_full_unstemmed Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazard
title_short Consistency between a strain rate model and the ESHM20 earthquake rate forecast in Europe: insights for seismic hazard
title_sort consistency between a strain rate model and the eshm20 earthquake rate forecast in europe insights for seismic hazard
url https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/25/1789/2025/nhess-25-1789-2025.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT bdonnioljouve consistencybetweenastrainratemodelandtheeshm20earthquakerateforecastineuropeinsightsforseismichazard
AT asocquet consistencybetweenastrainratemodelandtheeshm20earthquakerateforecastineuropeinsightsforseismichazard
AT cbeauval consistencybetweenastrainratemodelandtheeshm20earthquakerateforecastineuropeinsightsforseismichazard
AT jpinavaldes consistencybetweenastrainratemodelandtheeshm20earthquakerateforecastineuropeinsightsforseismichazard
AT ldanciu consistencybetweenastrainratemodelandtheeshm20earthquakerateforecastineuropeinsightsforseismichazard