Abstract
Little is known about the quantitative vulnerability analysis to landslides as not many attempts have been made to assess it comprehensively. This study assesses the spatio-temporal vulnerability of elements at risk to landslides in a stochastic framework. The study includes buildings, persons inside buildings, and traffic as elements at risk to landslides. Building vulnerability is the expected damage and depends on the position of a building with respect to the landslide hazard at a given time. Population and vehicle vulnerability are the expected death toll in a building and vehicle damage in space and time respectively. The study was carried out in a road corridor in the Indian Himalayas that is highly susceptible to landslides. Results showed that 26% of the buildings fall in the high and very high vulnerability categories. Population vulnerability inside buildings showed a value >0.75 during 0800 to 1000 hours and 1600 to 1800 hours in more buildings that other times of the day. It was also observed in the study region that the vulnerability of vehicle is above 0.6 in half of the road stretches during 0800 hours to 1000 hours and 1600 to 1800 hours due to high traffic density on the road section. From this study, we conclude that the vulnerability of an element at risk to landslide is a space and time event, and can be quantified using stochastic modeling. Therefore, the stochastic vulnerability modeling forms the basis for a quantitative landslide risk analysis and assessment.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Agarwal, N. C., & Kumar, G. (1973). Geology of the upper Bhagirathi and Yamuna valleys, Uttarkashi district, Kumaun Himalaya. Himalayan Geology, 3, 2–23.
Birkmann, J. (2007). Risk and vulnerability indicators at different scales: Applicability, usefulness and policy implications. Environmental Hazards, 7, 20–31.
Choubey, V. M., & Ramola, R. C. (1997). Correlation between geology and radon levels in groundwater, soil and indoor air in Bhilangana valley, Garhwal Himalaya, India. Environmental Geology, 32, 258–262.
Dai, F. C., Lee, C. F., Ngai, Y. Y. (2002). Landslide risk assessment and management: An overview. Engineering Geology, 64(1), 65–87.
Das, I., Sahoo, S., Van Westen, C. J., Stein, A., Hack, R. (2010). Landslide susceptibility assessment using logistic regression and its comparision with a rock mass classification system, along a road section in the northern Himalayas (India). Geomorphology, 114, 627–637.
Das, I., Srivastav, N., Lakhera, R. C. (2008). Rainfall threshold for landslide initiation: A probability based approach using historical landslides and rainfall records. Paper presented at the Indian Society of Remote Sensing Annual Symposium, 18–20 December, 2008, Ahmedabad, India.
Duzgun, H. S. B., & Lacasse, S. (2005). Vulnerability and acceptable risk in integrated risk assessment framework. In F. Edited by Hunger, Couture and Emberhardt. (Ed.), Landslide risk management (pp. 505–515). London: Taylor and Francis group.
Ebert, A., Kerle, N., Stein, A. (2009). Urban social vulnerability assessment with physical proxies and spatial metrics derived from air- and space borne imaging and gis data. Natural Hazards, 48(2), 275–294.
Elbers, C., & Gunning, J. W. (2003). Vulnerability in stochastic dynamic model. Paper presented at the Discussion paper Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam. TI2003-070/2.
EM-DAT. (2008). List of landslide in india. Excel sheet. www.Em-dat.Net. Accessed on: 2008-09-11.
Fuchs, S. H. K., & Hubl, J. (2007). Towards an empirical vulnerability function for use in debris flow risk assessment. Natural Hazards, 7, 495–506.
Galli, M., & Guzzetti, F. (2007). Landslide vulnerability criteria: A case study from Umbria, central Italy. Environmental Management, 40, 649–664.
Glade, T. (2003). Vulnerability assessment in landslide risk analysis. Beitrag zur erdsystemforschung, 134(2), 123–146.
Guzzetti, F. (2005). Landslide hazard and risk assessment. Gemany: University of Bonn.
Hosmer, D., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression (2nd edn. ed., Wiley series in probability and statistics). New York: Wiley.
Kaynia, A. M., Papathoma-Kohle, M., Neuhauser, B., Ratzinger, K., Wenzel, H., Medina-Cetina, Z. (2008). Probabilistic assessment of vulnerability to landslide: Application to the village of Lichtenstein, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. Engineering Geology, 101, 33–48.
Kohle, M. P., Neuhauser, B., Ratzinger, K., Wenzel, H., Howes, D. (2007). Element at risk as a framework for assessing the vulnerability of communities to landslides. Natural Hazards, 7, 765–779.
Liu, X. (2006). Site-specific vulnerability assessment for debris flows: Two case studies. Journal of Mountain Science, 3, 20–27.
Liu, X., & Lei, J. (2003). A method for assessing regional debris flow risk: An application in zhaotong of yunnan province (SW China). Geomorphology, 52, 181–191.
Liu, X., Yue, Z. Q., Tham, L. G., Lee, C. F. (2002). Empirical assessment of debries flow risk on a regional scale in Yunnan province, southwestern China. Environmental Management, 30, 249–264.
Naithani, A. K., Kumar, D., Prasad, C. (2002). The catastrophic landslide of 16 July 2001 in Phata Byung area, Rudraprayag district, Garhwal Himalayas. Current Science, 82(8), 122–130.
NRSA. (2001). Atlas:Landslide hazard zonation mapping in the Himalayas of Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh states using remote sensing and GIS. India: National Remote Sensing Agency, Hyderabad.
Papoulis, A. (1991). Probablity, random varibles, and stochastic processes, (p. 666). Boston: McGraw Hill.
Remondo, J., Bonachea, J., Cendrero, A. (2008). Quantitative landslide risk assessment and mapping on the basis of recent occurrences. Geomorphology, 94, 496–507.
Roberds, W. (2005). Estimating temporal and spatial variability and vulnerability (Landsldie risk management). London: Taylor and Francis group.
Saha, A. K., Gupta, R. P., Sarkar, I., Arora, M. K., Csaplovics, E. (2005). An approach for GIS-based statistical landslide susceptibility zonation—With a case study in the Himalayas. Landslides, 2, 61–69.
Shamaoma, H. (2005). Extraction of flood risk-related base-data from multi-source remote sensing imagery. Enschede: International Institute for Geo-information science and Earth observation (ITC), pp. 92.
United Nations, D. o. H. A. (1992). Internationally agreed glossary of basic terms related to disaster management, DNA/93/36, (pp. 1–6). Geneva.
Van Westen, C. J., Van Asch, T. W. J., Soeters, R. (2006). Landslide hazard and risk zonation—Why is it still so difficult? Bulletin Engineering Geology and Environment, 65, 167–184.
van Westen, C. J., Castellanos, E., Kuriakose, S. L. (2008). Spatial data for landslide susceptibility, hazard and vulnerability assessment: An overview. Engineering Geology, 102, 112–131.
Varnes, D. J. (1984). Landslide hazard zonation: A review of principles and practice. Review report. Paris: UNESCO.
Vinod Kumar, K., Bhattacharya, A., Martha, T. R., Bhaskar, P. V. (2003). Could Phata Byung, Uttarakhand landslide be prevented? Current Science, 85(6), 72–79.
Vinod Kumar, K., Lakhera, R. C., Martha, T. R., Chatterjee, R. S., Bhattacharya, A. (2008). Analysis of the 2003 Varunawat landslide, Uttarkashi, India using earth observation data. Environmental Geology, 55, 789–799.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
Das, I., Kumar, G., Stein, A. et al. Stochastic landslide vulnerability modeling in space and time in a part of the northern Himalayas, India. Environ Monit Assess 178, 25–37 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1668-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1668-0