Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Landslide consequence analysis: a region-scale indicator-based methodology

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Landslides Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Consequence analysis is, together with hazard evaluation, one of the major steps of landslide risk assessment. However, a significant discrepancy exists between the number of published landslide hazard and landslide consequence studies. While various methodologies for regional-scale hazard assessment have been developed during the last decade, studies for estimating and visualising possible landslide consequences are still limited, and those existing are often difficult to apply in practice mainly because of the lack of data on the historical damage or on landslide damage functions. In this paper, an indicator-based GIS-aided methodology is proposed with an application to regional-scale consequence analysis. The index, called Potential Damage Index, allows describing, quantifying, valuing, totalizing and visualising different types of consequences. The method allows estimating the possible damage caused by landslides by combining weighted indicators reflecting the exposure of the elements at risk. Direct (physical injury, and structural and functional damage) and indirect (socio-economic impacts) consequences are individually analysed and subsequently combined to obtain a map of total consequences due to landsliding. Geographic visualisation of the index allows the delineation of the areas exposed to any type of possible impacts that could be combined with a corresponding map displaying landslide probability of occurrence. The method has been successfully applied to analyse the present consequences in the Barcelonnette Basin (South French Alps). These maps contribute to development of adequate land use and evacuation plans, and thus are important tools for local authorities and insurance companies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akbas SO, Blahut J, Sterlacchini S (2009) Critical assessment of existing physical vulnerability functions for debris flows. In: Malet JP, Remaitre A, Boogard TA (Eds) Landslide processes: from geomorphological mapping to dynamic modelling: 229–233. CERG Editions, Strasbourg, 2009. ISBN 2-9518317-1-4

  • Alexander D (2004) Vulnerability to landslides. In: Glade T, Anderson M, Crozier MJ (eds) Landslide hazard and risk. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd, Chichester, pp 175–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbolini M, Cappabianca F, Sailer R (2004) Empirical estimate of vulnerability relations for use in snow avalanche risk assessment. In: Brebbia C (ed) Risk analysis IV: 533–542. WIT, Southampton

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkmann J (2007) Risk and vulnerability indicators at different scales: applicability, usefulness and policy implications. Environ Hazards 7:20–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blong R (2003) A new damage index. Nat Hazard 30:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnard C, Forlati F, Scavia C (2004) Identification and mitigation of large landslide risks in Europe. Advances in risk assessment. Balkema, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • BUWAL/BWW/BRP (1997) Berücksichtigung der Massenbewegungsgefahren bei raumwirksamen Tätigkeiten. Herausgegeber: Bundesamnt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL), Bundesamnt für Wasserwirtschaft (BWR), Bundesamnt für Raumplannung (BRP), Bern, 42p

  • Cascini L (2008) Applicability of landslide susceptibility and hazard zoning at different scales. Eng Geol 102(3–4):164–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catani F, Casagli N, Ermini L, Righini G, Menduni G (2005) Landslide hazard and risk mapping at catchment scale in the Arno River basin. Landslides 2(4):329–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CENAT (2004) Glossary - Monte Verità Workshop: coping with risks due to natural hazards in the 21st century (2004) Online under http://www.cenat.ch/index.php?navID=824&userhash=41529&I=e

  • Del Gaudio V, Pierri P, Wasowski J (2003) An approach to time-probabilistic evaluation of seismically-induced landslide hazard. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93(2):557–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falemo S, Andersson-Sköld Y (2011) Landslide consequence analysis—mapping expected losses in the Göta river valley. In: Vogt, N., Schuppener, B., Straub, D & Bräu, G (eds): Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Geotechnical Risk and Safety (ISGSR), 2–3 June 2011, Munich, German Federal Waterways Engineering and Research Institute, BAW, 173–180

  • Fell R, Ho KKS, Lacasse S, Leroi E (2005) A framework for landslide risk assessment and management. In: Hungr O, Fell R, Couture R, Eberhardt E (eds) Landslide risk management: 533–541. Taylor & Francis, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Fell R, Corominas J, Bonnard C, Cascini L, Leroi E, Savage WZ, on behalf of the JTC-1 Joint Technical Committee on Landslides and Engineered Slopes (2008) Guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land use planning. Engineering Geology 102:85–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French SP, Lee D, Anderson K (2011) Estimating the social and economic consequences of natural hazards: fiscal impact example. Nat Hazards Rev 11(2):49–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs S, Heiss K, Hübl J (2007) Towards an empirical vulnerability function for use in debris flow risk assessment. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 7:495–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs S, Kuhlicke C, Meyer V (2011) Vulnerability to natural hazards—the challenge of integration. Nat Hazard 58(2):609–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galli M, Guzzetti F (2007) Landslide vulnerability criteria: a case study from Umbria, Central Italy. Environ Manag 40:649–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glade T (2003) Vulnerability assessment in landslide risk analysis. Erde 134:121–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Glade T, Crozier M (2005) The nature of landslide hazard and impact. In: Glade T, Anderson M, Crozier M (eds) Landslide hazard and risk. Wiley, Chichester, pp 43–74

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Galli M, Reichenbach P, Ardizzone F, Cardinali M (2005) Landslide hazard assessment in the Collazzone area, Umbria, Central Italy. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 6:115–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugen ED, Kaynia AM (2008) Vulnerability of structures impacted by debris flow. In: Chen et al (eds) Landslides and Engineered Slopes. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 381–387

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hollenstein K (2005) Reconsidering the risk assessment concept: standardizing the impact description as a building block for vulnerability assessment. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:301–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaiswal P, van Westen CJ, Jetten V (2011) Quantitative assessment of landslide hazard along transportation lines using historical records. Landslides 8(3):279–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappes MS, Malet JP, Remaître A, Horton P, Jaboyedoff M, Bell R (2011) Assessment of debris flow susceptibility at medium-scale in the Barcelonnette Basin, France. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 11:627–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappes MS, Papathoma-Köhle M, Keiler M (2012) Assessing physical vulnerability for multi-hazards using an indicator-based methodology. Appl Geogr 32(2):577–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaynia AM, Papathoma-Köhle M, Neuhäuser B, Ratzinger K, Wenzel H, Medina-Cetina Z (2008) Probabilistic assessment of vulnerability to landslide: application to the village of Lichtenstein, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. Eng Geol 101(1–2):33–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Léone F, Asté JP, Leroi E (1996) Vulnerability assessment of elements exposed to mass movements: working toward a better risk perception, In: Senneset, K., Balkema (Eds.), Landslides, Rotterdam, 263–270

  • Leroi E (1996) Landslide hazard-risk maps at different scales: objectives, tools and developments. In: Senesset K (ed) Landslides, Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Landslides. Balkema, Rotterdam

  • Li Z, Nadim F, Huang H, Uzielli M, Lacasse S (2010) Quantitative vulnerability estimation for scenario-based landslide hazards. Landslides 7(2):125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malet J-P, Laigle D, Remaître A, Maquaire O (2005) Triggering conditions and mobility of debris-flows associated to complex earthflows. Geomorphology 66(1–4):215–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malet JP, Thiery Y, Maquaire O, Puissant A (2006) Landslide susceptibility, vulnerability and risk assessment through GIS procedures: a tentative application in the South French Alps. Rev Int Géomatique Eur J GIS Spat Anal 16(3–4):499–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maquaire O, Weber C, Thiery Y, Puissant A, Malet JP, Wania A (2004) Current practices and assessment tools of landslide vulnerability in mountainous basins. Identification of exposed elements with a semi-automatic procedure. In: Lacerda W, Ehrlich M, Fontoura SAB, Sayao ASF (eds) Landslides evaluation and stabilization, Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Landslides. Balkema, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • MATE/METL (1999) Plans de Prévention des Risques Naturels (PPR): Risques de Mouvements de Terrain. Ministère de l'Aménagement du Territoire et de l'Environnement, (MATE), Ministère de l'Equipement, des Transports et du Logement (METL). La Documentation Française, Paris

  • Mavrouli O, Corominas J (2010a) Vulnerability of simple reinforced concrete buildings in front of the rockfall impact. Landslides 7:169–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavrouli O, Corominas J (2010b) Rockfall vulnerability assessment for reinforced concrete buildings. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 10(10):2055–2066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papathoma-Köhle M, Neuhauser B, Ratzinger K, Wenzel H, Dominey Howes D (2007) Elements at risk as a framework for assessing the vulnerability of communities to landslides. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 7:765–779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papathoma-Köhle M, Kappes M, Keiler M, Glade T (2011) Physical vulnerability assessment for Alpine hazards—state of the art and future needs. Nat Hazard 58:645–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrascheck A, Kienholz H (2003) Hazard assessment and mapping of mountain risks in Switzerland. In: Rickenmann D, Chen CL (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Debris-Flow Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics, Prediction and Assessment. Millpress, Rotterdam

  • Petrucci O, Gullà G (2010) A simplified method for assessing landslide damage indices. Nat Hazard 52(3):539–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puissant A, Malet JP, Maquaire O (2006) Mapping landslide consequence in mountain areas: a tentative approach with a semi quantitative procedure. In: Weber C., Gancarski P. (Eds): SAGEO 2006, Proceedings International Conference on Spatial Analysis and Geomatics, Strasbourg, France, 16p (on CR-ROM)

  • Quan Luna B, Blahut J, van Westen CJ, Sterlacchini S, van Asch TWJ, Akbas SO (2011) The application of numerical debris flow modelling for the generation of physical vulnerability curves. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11:2047–2060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheuer S, Haase D, Meyer V (2011) Exploring multicriteria flood vulnerability by integrating economic, social and ecological dimensions of flood risk and coping capacity: from a starting point view towards an end point view of vulnerability. Nat Hazard 58(2):751–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiery Y, Malet JP, Sterlacchini S, Puissant A, Maquaire O (2007) Landslide susceptibility assessment by bivariate methods at large scales: application to a complex mountainous environment. Geomorphology 92(1–2):38–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thywissen K (2006) Core terminology of disaster reduction: a comparative glossary. In: Birkmann J (ed) Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards—towards disaster resilient societies. United Nations University Press, Bonn, pp 48–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Twigg J, Bhatt MR (1998) Understanding vulnerability: South Asian perspectives. Intermediate Technology Publications, London, 290 p

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • UNDRO (1984) Disaster prevention and mitigation—a compendium of current knowledge. Preparedness Aspects, 11

  • van Westen CJ, van Asch TWJ, Soeters R (2006) Landslide hazard and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult? Bull Eng Geol Environ 65(2):167–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandine DF, Moore G, Wise M, Vanbuskirk C, Gerath R (2004) Technical terms and methods. In Wise M, Moore G, Vandine D (eds) Landslide risk case studies in forest development planning and operations. B.C., Ministry of Forests, Forest Science Program, abstract of land management Handbook 56, pp 13–26

  • Varnes DJ (1984) Landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice. Unesco, Paris, pp 63–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Zêzere JL, Garcia RAC, Oliveira SC, Reis E (2008) Probabilistic landslide risk analysis considering direct costs in the area north of Lisbon (Portugal). Geomorphology 94(3–4):467–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study has been carried out in the framework of the EU-FP6 Marie Curie Research and Training Network ‘Mountain Risks: from prediction to management and governance’ (grant agreement MCITN-35298) and the EU-FP7 project SafeLand ‘Living with landslide risk in Europe: Assessment, effects of global change, and risk management strategies’ (grant agreement 226479). The authors thank everybody that contributed to the collection of the information stored in the elements at risk database, and the staff of the ONF-RTM Service of Department Alpes-de-Haute-Provence for regular discussion meetings on the conceptual approach and the assignment of the index value.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire Image, Ville, Environnement, CNRS UMR 7362, Université de Strasbourg, 3 rue de l’Argonne, F-67083, Strasbourg, France

    A. Puissant

  2. Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Climate Risk Management Unit, Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission, IT-21027, Ispra, Italy

    M. Van Den Eeckhaut

  3. Institut de Physique du Globe de Strasbourg, CNRS UMR 7516, Ecole et Observatoire des Sciences de la Terre, Université de Strasbourg, 5 rue Descartes, F-67084, Strasbourg, France

    J.-P. Malet

  4. Laboratoire Géographie Physique et Environnement, CNRS UMR 6554, Littoral, Environnement Télédétection et Géomatique, Université de Caen-Basse-Normandie, Esplanade de la Paix, F-14032, Caen, France

    O. Maquaire

Authors
  1. A. Puissant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Van Den Eeckhaut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J.-P. Malet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. O. Maquaire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J.-P. Malet.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Puissant, A., Van Den Eeckhaut, M., Malet, JP. et al. Landslide consequence analysis: a region-scale indicator-based methodology. Landslides 11, 843–858 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0429-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0429-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation