An epidemiological approach to determining the risk of road damage due to landslides
- 380 Downloads
Disruption of segments of roads can have a significant impact on the vulnerability of the entire network. Natural disasters are frequent causes of disruptions of this kind. This article focuses on determining the risk of road disruptions due to landslides. Our approach is based on methodology widely used in the field of epidemiology. We had available data on the location of the landslides, the road network and a list of the disrupted road segments. With the use of a 2 × 2 table, we determined the relationship between landslide data and road segment disruptions and derived the risk coefficient based on the number of landslides in the vicinity of the road and its length. The result is a disruption risk map with risk coefficients ranging from 0 to 47.94. In order to distinguish the most risky segments, we calculated a threshold of 12.40 with the use of a risk breakdown in a group of segments without damage. Nineteen percentage (402 km) of the road network in the Zlín region (Czech Republic), where the methodology was applied, is located beyond this threshold. The benefits of this approach stem from its speed and potential to define the most risky areas on which a detailed geomorphologic analysis can be focused.
KeywordsRisk Landslides Road network Epidemiology
This paper was prepared with the help of a project undertaken by the Transport Research Centre (OP R&D for Innovation No. CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0064) and the project “Quantification of the risk to the transport infrastructure of the Czech Republic by natural hazards” (No. VG20102015057), supported by the Ministry of the Interior of the Czech Republic. Our thanks go to Radek Berecka and Karel Kočíb, RMD employees in the Zlín region branch, for processing data on the damaged road segments, and to Jiří Sedoník for his help with the figures. Two anonymous referees are gratefully acknowledged for their valuable comments.
- Anděl J (1985) Matematická statistika (Mathematical statistics, In Czech). SNTL, Prague, Czech RepublicGoogle Scholar
- Caine N (1980) The rainfall intensity–duration control of shallow landslides and debris flows. Geografiska annaler. Series A. Phys Geogr 62A:23–27Google Scholar
- Krejčí O, Baroň I, Bíl M, Hubatka F, Jurová Z, Kirchner K (2002) Slope movements in the Flysch Carpathians of Eastern Czech Rep. Triggered by Extreme Rainfals in 1997: a case study. Phys Chem Earth 27(36):1567–1576Google Scholar
- Schuster RL (1996) Socioeconomic significance of landslides. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides. Investigation and mitigation. Transp. Res. Board, Spec. Rep. 247,Washington, DC, pp 12–35Google Scholar
- Sohn J (2006) Evaluating the significance of highway network links under the flood damage: an accessibility approach. Transp Res Part A 40:491–506Google Scholar
- Sullivan JL, Novak DC, Aultman-Hall L, Scott DM (2010) Identifying critical road segments and measuring system-wide robustness in transportation networks with isolating links: a link-based capacity-reduction approach. Transp Res Part A 44:323–336Google Scholar
- Van Westen CJ, Asch TWJ, Soeters R (2006) Landslide hazard and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult? Bull Eng Geol Environ 65:67–184Google Scholar
- Vanaut J, Leroueil S (2002) Analysis of post-failure slope movements within the framework of hazard and risk analysis. Nat Hazards 26:83–109Google Scholar
- Varnes DJ and International Association of Engineering Geology Commission on Landslides and Other Mass Movements on Slopes (1984) Landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar