, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 419–436 | Cite as

A systematic review of landslide probability mapping using logistic regression

  • M. E. A. BudimirEmail author
  • P. M. Atkinson
  • H. G. Lewis
Review Article


Logistic regression studies which assess landslide susceptibility are widely available in the literature. However, a global review of these studies to synthesise and compare the results does not exist. There are currently no guidelines for the selection of covariates to be used in logistic regression analysis, and as such, the covariates selected vary widely between studies. An inventory of significant covariates associated with landsliding produced from the full set of such studies globally would be a useful aid to the selection of covariates in future logistic regression studies. Thus, studies using logistic regression for landslide susceptibility estimation published in the literature were collated, and a database was created of the significant factors affecting the generation of landslides. The database records the paper the data were taken from, the year of publication, the approximate longitude and latitude of the study area, the trigger method (where appropriate) and the most dominant type of landslides occurring in the study area. The significant and non-significant (at the 95 % confidence level) covariates were recorded, as well as their coefficient, statistical significance and unit of measurement. The most common statistically significant covariate used in landslide logistic regression was slope, followed by aspect. The significant covariates related to landsliding varied for earthquake-induced landslides compared to rainfall-induced landslides, and between landslide type. More importantly, the full range of covariates used was identified along with their frequencies of inclusion. The analysis showed that there needs to be more clarity and consistency in the methodology for selecting covariates for logistic regression analysis and in the metrics included when presenting the results. Several recommendations for future studies were given.


Landslides Logistic regression Covariates Systematic literature review search 



We would like to acknowledge all authors mentioned in the Appendix 1 reference list for their publications of logistic regression analysis of landslide susceptibility and hazard.


  1. Akgun A, Kincal C, Pradhan B (2012) Application of remote sensing data and GIS for landslide risk assessment as an environmental threat to Izmir city (west Turkey). Environ Monit Assess 184:5453–5470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson PM, Massari R (1998) Generalised linear modelling of susceptibility to landsliding in the central Apennines, Italy. Comput Geosci 24:373–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson PM, Massari R (2011) Autologistic modelling of susceptibility to landsliding in the Central Apennines, Italy. Geomorphology 130:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphology 65:15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baeza C, Corominas J (2001) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility by means of multivariate statistical techniques. Earth Surf Proc Land 26:1251–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bednarik M, Magulova B, Matys M, Marschalko M (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment of the Kralovany-Liptovsky Mikulas railway case study. Phys Chem Earth 35:162–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bommer JJ, Rodriguez CE (2002) Earthquake-induced landslides in central America. Eng Geol 63:189–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boslaugh S (2012) Statistics in a nutshell. O’Reilly MediaGoogle Scholar
  9. Brabb EE (1984) Innovative approaches to landslide hazard and risk mapping. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium of Landslides, 1984 Toronto, Canada. 307–324Google Scholar
  10. Brabb EE (1991) The world landslide problem. Episodes 14:52–61Google Scholar
  11. Brabb EE (1993) Proposal for worldwide landslide hazard maps. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference and Field Workshop on Landslides in Czech and Slovak Republics, 28 August–15 September 1993. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema, 1993:15–27Google Scholar
  12. Brenning A (2005) Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 5:853–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brunsden D (1979) Mass movement. In: Embleton, C. and THornes, J. (Eds.), Process inGeomorphology, Arnold, London, 130–186Google Scholar
  14. Carrara A, Cardinali M, Detti R, Guzzetti F, Pasqui V, Reichenbach P (1991) GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Earth Surf Proc Land 16:427–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carro M, De Amicis M, Luzi L, Marzorati S (2003) The application of predictive modeling techniques to landslides induced by earthquakes: the case study of the 26 September 1997 Umbria-Marche earthquake (Italy). Eng Geol 69:139–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Castellanos Abella EA, van Westen CJ (2007) Generation of a landslide risk index map for Cuba using spatial multi-criteria evaluation. Landslides 4:311–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chacon J, Irigaray C, Fernandez T, El Hamdouni R (2006) Engineering geology maps: landslides and geographical information systems. Bull Eng Geol Env 65:341–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chacon J, Irigaray C, El Hamdouni R, Jimenez-Peralvarez JD (2010) Diachroneity of landslides. Proceedings of the 11th IAEG Congress, Auckland, New Zealand. In: Williams (ed) Geologically active, 999–1006Google Scholar
  19. Chacon J, Irigaray C, Fernandez del Castillo T, El Hamdouni R, Jimenez-Peralvarez J, Alameda P, Moya J, Palenzuela JA (2014) Urban landslides at the south of Sierra Nevada and coastal areas of the Granada province (Spain). In: Sassa K (ed) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment, 2014, Volume 3: Targeted Landslides: Part VI: 425–430Google Scholar
  20. Chang KT, Chiang SH, Hsu ML (2007) Modeling typhoon- and earthquake-induced landslides in a mountainous watershed using logistic regression. Geomorphology 89:335–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chung CJF, Fabbri AG, Vanwesten CJ (1995) Multivariate regression analysis for landslide hazard zonation. Geograp Inform Syst Ass Nat Hazard 5:107–133Google Scholar
  22. Dahal RK, Hasegawa S, Nonomura A, Yamanaka M, Masuda T, Nishino K (2008) GIS-based weights-of-evidence modelling of rainfall-induced landslides in small catchments for landslide susceptibility mapping. Environ Geol 54:311–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dai FC, Lee CF (2003) A spatiotemporal probabilistic modelling of storm-induced shallow landsliding using aerial photographs and logistic regression. Earth Surf Proc Land 28:527–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Das I, Sahoo S, van Westen C, Stein A, Hack R (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment using logistic regression and its comparison with a rock mass classification system, along a road section in the northern Himalayas (India). Geomorphology 114:627–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dilley M, Chen RS, Deichmann U, Lernerlam AL, Arnold M (2005) Natural disaster hotspots: a global risk analysis. Natural Disaster Hotspots: A Global Risk Analysis, 1–134Google Scholar
  26. Dorren LKA (2003) A review of rockfall mechanics and modelling approaches. Progr Phys Geogr 27:69–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C, Van Asch TWJ (2004) Landslide susceptibility zoning north of Yenice (NW Turkey) by multivariate statistical techniques. Nat Hazards 32:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fabbri AG, Chung CF, Napolitano P, Remondo J, Zezere JL (2002) Prediction rate functions of landslide susceptibility applied in the Iberian Peninsula. Risk Anal 5:703–718Google Scholar
  29. Fernandez CI, Del Castillo TF, El Hamdouni R, Montero JC (1999) Verification of landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study. Earth Surf Proc Land 24:537–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gorsevski PV, Gessler PE, Foltz RB, Elliot WJ (2006) Spatial prediction of landslide hazard using logistic regression and ROC analysis. Trans GIS 10(3):395–415Google Scholar
  31. Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Cardinali M, Galli M, Ardizzone F (2005) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale. Geomorphology 72:272–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Guzzetti F, Peruccacci S, Rossi M, Stark CP (2007) Rainfall thresholds for the initiation of landslides in central and southern Europe. Meteorol Atmos Phys 98:239–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hadji R, Boumazbeur A, Limani Y, Baghem M, Chouabi A, Demdoum A (2013) Geologic, topographic and climatic controls in landslide hazard assessment using GIS modeling: a case study of Souk Ahras region, NE Algeria. Quaternary Int 302:224–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hansen A (1984) Landslide hazard analysis. In: Brunsden D, Prior DB (eds) Slope instability. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 523–602Google Scholar
  35. Hervas J, Bobrowsky P (2009) Mapping: inventories, susceptibility, hazard and risk. In: Sassa K, Canuti P (eds) Landslides: disaster risk reduction. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  36. Hovius N, Meunier P (2012) Earthquake ground motion and the pattern of seismically induced landslides. In: Cleague JJ, Stead D (eds) Landslides: types, mechanisms and modeling, 2nd edn. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 24–36Google Scholar
  37. Irigaray C, Fernandez T, El Hamdouni R, Chacon J (2007) Evaluation and validation of landslide-susceptibility maps obtained by a GIS matrix method: examples from the Betic Cordillera (southern Spain). Nat Hazards 41:61–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Komac M (2006) A landslide susceptibility model using the Analytical Hierarchy Process method and multivariate statistics in penialpine Slovenia. Geomorphology 74:17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Korup O (2010) Earthquake-triggered landslides—spatial patterns and impacts. COGEAR, Module 1a - ReportGoogle Scholar
  40. Lee CT, Huang CC, Lee JF, Pan KL, Lin ML, Dong JJ (2008a) Statistical approach to earthquake-induced landslide susceptibility. Eng Geol 100(1):43–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lee CT, Huang CC, Lee JF, Pan KL, Lin ML, Dong JJ (2008b) Statistical approach to storm event-induced landslides susceptibility. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 8:941–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Li Y, Chen G, Tang C, Zhou G, Zheng L (2012) Rainfall and earthquake-induced landslide susceptibility assessment using GIS and artificial neural network. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 12:2719–2729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lu GY, Chiu LS, Wong DW (2007) Vulnerability assessment of rainfall-induced debris flows in Taiwan. Nat Hazards 43:223–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Maharaj RJ (1993) Landslide processes and landslide susceptibility analysis from an upland watershed—a case-study from St-Andrew, Jamaica, West-Indies. Eng Geol 34:53–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Marano KD, Wald DJ, Allen TI (2010) Global earthquake casualties due to secondary effects: a quantitative analysis for improving rapid loss analyses. Nat Hazards 52:319–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Martha TR, van Westen CJ, Kerle N, Jetten V, Kumar KV (2013) Landslide hazard and risk assessment using semi-automatically created landslide inventories. Geomorphology 184:139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Marzorati S, Luzi L, De Amicis M (2002) Rock falls induced by earthquakes: a statistical approach. Soil Dynam Earthquake Eng 22:565–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Meunier P, Hovius N, Haines JA (2008) Topographic site effects and the location of earthquake induced landslides. Earth Planet Sci Lett 275:221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nadim F, Kjekstad O, Peduzzi P, Herold C, Jaedicke C (2006) Global landslide and avalanche hotspots. Landslides 3:159–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Neuhauser B, Terhorst B (2007) Landslide susceptibility assessment using “weights-of-evidence” applied to a study area at the Jurassic escarpment (SW-Germany). Geomorphology 86:12–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nilsen TH, Wright RH, Vlasic TC, Spangle WE (1979) Relative slope stability and land-use planning inthe San Francisco Bay region, California. U.S.G.S. Prof. Paper 944:96Google Scholar
  52. Oh HJ, Lee S (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping on Panaon Island, Philippines using a geographic information system. Environ Earth Sci 62:935–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ohlmacher GC, Davis JC (2003) Using multiple logistic regression and GIS technology to predict landslide hazard in northeast Kansas, USA. Eng Geol 69:331–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Popescu M (2001) A suggested method for reporting landslide remedial measures. Bull Eng Geol Env 60:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pradhan B, Lee B, Buchroithner MF (2010) Remote sensing and GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis and its cross-validation in three test areas using a frequency ratio model. PhotogrammetrieFernerkundung Geoinformation 1:17–32Google Scholar
  56. Radbruch-Hall DH, Varnes DJ (1976) Landslides—cause and effect. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 14:205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Regmi NR, Giardino JR, Vitek JD (2010) Modeling susceptibility to landslides using the weight of evidence approach: Western Colorado, USA. Geomorphology 115:172–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Robinson GD, Spieker AM (1978) Nature to be commanded…: earth-science maps applied to land and water management. Geol Surv Prof Pap 950:95, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  59. Santacana N, Baeza B, Corominas J, De Paz A, Marturia J (2003) A GIS-based multivariate statistical analysis for shallow landslide susceptibility mapping in La Pobla de Lillet area (Eastern Pyrenees, Spain). Nat Hazards 30:281–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sidle RC, Ochiai H (2006) Landslides: processes, prediction, and land use. Water ResourcesMonographGoogle Scholar
  61. Smith K, Petley DN (2009) Environmental hazards: assessing risk and reducing disaster. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  62. Soeters RS, Van Western CJ (1996) Slope instability recognition, analysis, and zonation. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides: investigation and mitigation. Special Report, vol. 247. TransportationResearch Board, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C 01/1996Google Scholar
  63. Suzen ML, Kaya BS (2011) Evaluation of environmental parameters in logistic regression models for landslide susceptibility mapping. Int J Digital Earth 5:338–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tangestani MH (2009) A comparative study of Dempster-Shafer and fuzzy models for landslide susceptibility mapping using a GIS: an experience from Zagros Mountains, SW Iran. J Asian Earth Sci 35:66–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Van Den Eeckhaut M, Moeyersons J, Nyssen J, Abraha A, Poesen J, Haile M, Deckers J (2009) Spatial patterns of old, deep-seated landslides: a case-study in the northern Ethiopian highlands. Geomorphology 105:239–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. van Westen CJ, Van Asch TWJ, Soeters R (2006) Landslide hazard and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult? Bull Eng Geol Env 65:167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Varnes DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. In: Special Report 176: Landslides: Analysisand Control (Eds: Schuster RL, Krizek RJ), Transportation and Road Research Board, National Academy of Science, Washington D. C., 11-33Google Scholar
  68. Von Ruette J, Papritz A, Lehmann P, Rickli C, Or D (2011) Spatial statistical modeling of shallow landslides—validating predictions for different landslide inventories and rainfall events. Geomorphology 133:11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wang LJ, Sawada K, Moriguchi S (2013) Landslide susceptibility analysis with logistic regression model based on FCM sampling strategy. Comput Geosci 57:81–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wilson RC, Wieczorek GF (1995) Rainfall thresholds for the initiation of debris flows at La Honda, California. Environ Eng Geosci 1:11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yilmaz I (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and their comparison: a case study from Kat landslides (Tokat-Turkey). Comput Geosci 35:1125–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zezere JL, Reis E, Garcia R, Oliveira S, Rodrigues ML, Vieira G, Ferreira AB (2004) Integration of spatial and temporal data for the definition of different landslide hazard scenarios in the area north of Lisbon (Portugal). Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 4:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Zezere JL, Trigo RM, Trigo IF (2005) Shallow and deep landslides induced by rainfall in the Lisbon region (Portugal): assessment of relationships with the North Atlantic Oscillation. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 5:331–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zezere JL, Trigo RM, Fragoso M, Oliveira SC, Garcia RAC (2008) Rainfall-triggered landslides in the Lisbon region over 2006 and relationships with the North Atlantic Oscillation. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 8:483–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. E. A. Budimir
    • 1
    Email author
  • P. M. Atkinson
    • 1
  • H. G. Lewis
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Social and Human SciencesUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  2. 2.Faculty of Engineering and the EnvironmentUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations