Artigo em revista científica Q1
Building-level physical vulnerability in Europe: Exterior vs interior indicators and GIS–BIM approaches for multiple-hazard risks: A systematic review
Steffen Neuner (Steffen Neuner); Christopher Munschauer (Munschauer, C.); Alexander Fekete (Fekete, A.); Stefania Stellacci (Stellacci, S.); Lubos Buzna (Buzna, L.); Daniel Chovanec (Chovanec, D.); Katarina Holla (Holla, K.); Samuel Kockar (Kockar, S.); Ulrich Leopold (Leopold, U.); Rongling Li (Li, R.); Ali Reza Yaghoubi (Yaghoubi, A. R.); Derya Yilmaz (Yilmaz, D.); Catarina Ferreira da Silva (Ferreira da Silva, C.); et al.
Título Revista
Urban Climate
Ano (publicação definitiva)
2026
Língua
Inglês
País
Estados Unidos da América
Mais Informação
Web of Science®

N.º de citações: 0

(Última verificação: 2026-08-18 13:41)

Ver o registo na Web of Science®

Scopus

N.º de citações: 0

(Última verificação: 2026-08-07 14:41)

Ver o registo na Scopus

Google Scholar

N.º de citações: 0

(Última verificação: 2026-08-21 02:33)

Ver o registo no Google Scholar

Esta publicação não está indexada no Overton

Abstract/Resumo
This paper presents a systematic literature review of building-level physical vulnerability indicators in Europe, with a specific focus on the distinction between exterior and interior indicators and on the role of Building Information Modelling (BIM) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in assessment workflows. This study identifies existing gaps in the literature in regard to (i) the systematic integration of interior and exterior vulnerability indicators, (ii) pragmatic interoperability between GIS and BIM in assessment workflows, and (iii) more transparent weighting and validation procedures to improve transferability and comparability across different hazards and contexts. Across 26 peer-reviewed scientific publications (2000–2025), we extracted 121 indicators and analysed their use by hazard type, indicator location (interior/exterior), digital tools (GIS/BIM), weighting, and validation process. Most assessments rely on exterior indicators (e.g., material, number of floors, roof type, openings), while only three of the included studies explicitly incorporate interior indicators. GIS is widely used for data collection, mapping, and spatial analysis of vulnerable buildings. At the same time, BIM has so far been rarely leveraged despite its potential to capture interior characteristics and component-level detail needed for robust building-level assessments. The hazards most frequently addressed are landslides, floods, and dynamic flooding, whereas heatwaves – despite their high historic mortality rates in Europe – remain underrepresented. Indicator weighting approaches vary (expert-based, statistical, multi-criteria), and empirical validation is limited. These identified gaps show potential future research directions.
Agradecimentos/Acknowledgements
--
Palavras-chave
Physical vulnerability,Building resilience,Multi-risk,Vulnerability indicators,Natural hazard,GIS-BIM
  • Ciências da Terra e do Ambiente - Ciências Naturais
  • Sociologia - Ciências Sociais
  • Geografia Económica e Social - Ciências Sociais
Registos de financiamentos
Referência de financiamento Entidade Financiadora
101147113 Comissão Europeia
1/0220/25 VEGA
1/0696/26 VEGA
UIDB/04466/2025 Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
UIDP/04466/2025 Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia