This manuscript engages with questions that lie at the heart of comprehensive disaster risk management. Against a backdrop of accelerating climate change and compounding multi-risks, it sets out a timely blueprint for tackling the systemic barriers that keep communities exposed.

This pair of manuscripts (2025-6539 and 6540) constitute a significant step forward in the modelling of ballistic hazards from volcanic explosive activity at a volcano that has an unparalleled dataset (collated by these authors, building on previous work) and where there is considerable tourist activity particularly in the summer months (with hiking trails - for which this paper assesses the hazard - going to the active summit craters). There is therefore both considerable scientific interest in this paper (in the methods and moving the field forward) but also wider public interest.

This perspective puts a focus on compound events which produce damage. Other than events caused by single extremes, these are related to a combination of influences, including co-located multivariate events, spatially compounding events arising from individual spatially separated events, temporally compounding events and preconditioned events. As the authors are directly working with stake-holders and decision makers on a regular basis, their view provides literature-based insight on the requirements that should be fulfilled for producing scientific results which effectively support early warning systems and stakeholder decisions.

The assessment of climate change impacts on rainfall-triggered shallow landslides in the Campania Region shows that, despite the trend toward drier conditions, landslide occurrence is projected to increase. In this study like in some previous ones conducted for a nearby region, projections indicate a greater increase in landslide frequency under the RCP4.5 scenario than under the RCP8.5 scenario. The authors show that this counter-intuitive result is related to the critical role of antecedent soil moisture in landslide initiation.

The paper discusses in a very timely manner the seismicity and risk from gas injection in the Groningen gas field. The results indicate that reductions in seismicity can be achieved in all analysed scenarios and that these reductions could be substantial also for relatively modest volumes of injection gas. The results also show that benefits may be lost if injection is stopped before reservoir-wide equilibration has been achieved. These are interesting findings which enables the paper to fulfil more than one newsworthy criteria of the EGU: i.a. timing, significance, proximity, and hot topic.