Table 1.
Full list of disaster resilience indicators considered for the analysis.
Fig 1.
Comparisons between SVI from ISTAT and CDRI derived from AMP analysis.
(A) SVI from ISTAT. (B) CDRI. SVI results are inverted (i.e. opposite signal) to facilitate the visual comparison between the results.
Fig 2.
Degree of differences between SVI from ISTAT and CDRI derived from AMP analysis.
Fig 3.
Mapping the original data regarding distance-decay-based attributes.
(A) Travel distance to service centers. (B) Travel distance to fire brigades.
Fig 4.
ORNESS vs ANDNESS degrees for all the municipalities by using OWA-AMP.
(A) Uniform–all the municipalities. (B) Uniform–municipality 1001. (C) Linear–all the municipalities. (D) Linear–municipality 1001.
Fig 5.
Rank reversals corresponding to ORNESS variations for various OWA weights derived from the OWA-AMP method for municipality 1001.
(A) Uniform distribution. (B) Linear distribution.
Fig 6.
Rank reversals corresponding to ORNESS variations for various OWA weights derived from the OWA-AMP method for all municipalities.
(A) Uniform distribution. (B) Linear distribution.
Fig 7.
OWA scores derived from various types of normalized data for different combination of weights (ORNESS variations).
(A) Box-Cox transformed data normalized using AMP. (B) Original data normalized using AMP. (C) Box-Cox transformed data normalized using Topsis. (D) Box-Cox transformed data normalized using Z-score.
Fig 8.
Section of OWA scores derived from AMP normalized data for a different combination of weights for all the municipalities.
(A) Linear. (B) Uniform.
Fig 9.
Relative dominance scores derived from 512 OWA configurations.