What is your definition of "runways" - cleared space? sand? grass? gravel? asphalt? concrete?

83 airports have EMAS on one or more runways, worldwide (2019 numbers). There are about 10,000 airports with scheduled air service with aircraft of more than 50 seats. So about 0.8% of those have EMAS.

But call it "On the order of 1%" to allow some statistical wiggle-room - since someone is sure to claim that any grass glider strip counts as a "runway," or point out that a 9-seater BN2 Islander may count as "scheduled commercial service." ;)

Reading the comments on AVHerald, I got curious: what kind of braking action would that runway have? People are slipping on what looks like ice/compacted snow. I bet landing on that is a bit interesting even without a underrun! Also, is that why they seemingly deployed the reverser ?

RESAs and delethalization are already ICAO airport design standards which are in place and designed to reduce the risk of damage to an aeroplane undershooting or overrunning the runway.

Clearly this will not prevent all damage to the a/c, but is designed to increase the survivability of these types of accident, something which fortunately appears to have been the case here.

The a/c is replaceable, people are not.

For those who would like to inform themselves about ICAO standards (as opposed to rewriting them from scratch) for runway construction, aerodromes even, I recommend a jolly good read of CAP 168, Chapter 3, the UK CAA's publication, much easier to read and better presented than the ICAO equivalent (in which see 3.5.11). As you might guess, someone has already thought about aircraft touching down in the undershoot and running without damage onto the runway; bearing strength is one issue, obstructions also, and feathering the runway pavement edge, if needed, another.

If USK does not meet the ICAO standards for its published level of licensed operations, that's the issue, not the standards.

It looks to me as though they landed with Flap 15?
If so that would be a curious choice for a 2500m ice-contaminated runway.

Why not assume wind shear?

I was wondering when I saw the video, if the flaps were less than normal. As for landing short, I also wondered if there could have been a flat light situation combined with no PAPI/glideslope. It looks OK out the side window due to the trees but perhaps the forward view was more whiteoutish.

That being said, there does seem to be pavement visible for the runway instead of 100% snow cover so, who knows.

Eheh! Flat light may well be a player, I have little experience in landing visually in snow country on a snow covered runway but from what I have done can well understand they were so distracted with descrying runway from bundhu that they simply misssed calling 'Flap30'.
And if the airport had built up snowberms on the runway ends as they seem to have done than any undershoot turns into something altogether different.

Quote...'And if the airport had built up snowberms on the runway ends' These could have produced some turbulent windshear.
Also the snowed up runway would make it hard to spot where the white runway markers were.

Aviation Herald: Preliminary report is available.
Accident: UTAir B735 in Usinsk on Feb 9th 2020, landed short of runway, gear collapse and runway excursion on landing

The meat: Once on RNAV approach, airport was just a minimums. Aircraft was low on approach, EGWPS was functional, runway was visible at 700 ft AGL, PNF commented on low altitude twice, PF increased thrust but did not correct GS. Main gear hit 1.1m snow berm 32m before runway threshold, with vertical G of +1.6G and longitudinal G of -0.7G. Touchdown on runway (30m past threshold) at 1.86G, one main gear separated, the other collapsed. Runway condition noted as 2mm frost, friction factor 0.38.

Captain did not immediately recognize gear had been damaged.