Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A regional scale quantitative risk assessment for landslides: case of Kumluca watershed in Bartin, Turkey

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

Abstract

The paper proposes a methodology for quantitative landslide risk assessment for regional-scale analysis. Each component of risk, i.e., hazard, vulnerability, and consequence analysis, is quantitatively assessed. The developed landslide risk assessment methodology is tested in Kumluca watershed, in Bartın, Turkey. Geographic information systems and remote sensing techniques are used to create landslide factor maps, to obtain susceptibility maps, hazard maps, elements at risk, and risk maps. Susceptibility maps are obtained by using a logistic regression model while adopting a grid-based mapping unit. In addition to spatial probability of occurrence of damaging events, landslide hazard calculation requires the determination of the temporal probability. Precipitation triggers the majority of landslides in the study region. The critical rainfall thresholds were estimated by using antecedent rainfalls and landslide occurrence dates based on Gumble Distribution approach. The elements at risk are extracted from existing digital cadastral databases and the vulnerabilities are obtained by adopting some generalization approaches. To conclude, quantitative risk maps were produced on a continuous scale where numerical values indicate the distribution of risk including the annual probability of expected losses in TL per pixel and the annual probability of life loss per pixel for property and life, respectively. For the considered case study, it is found that the annual probability of property loss is the highest for the provincial highway and the provincial road. The property loss map highlights that the annual expected loss to power network is medium. The annual probability of life loss map illustrates that the region surrounded by Kumluca town, Kızıllar, and Zafer villages have medium and high annual expected loss of population values, respectively.

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. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AGS (2000) Landslide risk management concepts and guidelines. Australian Geomechanics Society (AGS) Sub-Committee on Landslide Risk Management; pp. 59.

  • Akbar TA, Ha SR (2011) Landslide hazard zoning along Himalayan Kaghan Valley of Pakistan—by integration of GPS, GIS, and remote sensing technology. Landslides 8(4):527–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agliardi F, Crosta GB, Frattini P (2009) Integrating rock fall risk assessment and countermeasure design by 3D modeling techniques. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:1059–1073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Env 58:21–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard PL, Owen LA, Sharma MC, Finkel RC (2001) Natural and human-induced landsliding in the Garhwal Himalaya of Northern India. Geomorphology 40:21–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell R, Glade T (2004) Quantitative risk analysis for landslides—examples from Bildudalur, NW Iceland. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 4:117–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertolo P, Wieczorek GF (2005) Calibration of numerical models for small debris flows in Yosemite Valley, California, USA. Natural Hazards and Erath System Sciences 5:993–1001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinali M, Reichenbach P, Guzzetti F, Adrizzone F, Antonini G, Galli M, Cacciano M, Castellani M, Salvati P (2002) A geomorphological approach to estimate landslide hazards and risk in urban and rural areas in Umbria, Central Italy. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci 2:57–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrara A, Cardinali M, Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P (1995) GIS technology in mapping landslide hazard. In: Carrara A, Guzzetti F (eds) Geographical information systems in assessing natural hazards, advances in natural and technological hazards research. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 135–176

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellanos AEA (2008) Multi-scale landslide risk assessment in Cuba. Ph.D. Thesis University of Utrecht ITC Printing Department.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Z, Wang J (2006) Landslide hazard mapping using logistic regression model in Mackenzie Valley, Canada. Nat Hazards 42(1):75–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coe JA, Michael JA, Crovelli RA, Savage WZ (2000) Preliminary map showing landslide densities, mean recurrence intervals, and exceedance probabilities as determined from historic records, Seattle, Washington. US Geological Survey Open-File Report pp: 303.

  • Corominas J, Copons R, Vilaplana JM, Altimir J, Amigo J (2003) Integrated landslide susceptibility analysis and hazard assessment in the Principality of Andorra. Nat Hazard 30:421–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corominas J, Copons R, Moya J, Vilaplana JM, Altimir J, Amigó J (2005) Quantitative assessment of the residual risk in a rock fall protected area. Landslides 2:343–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crozier MJ and Eyles RJ 1980 Assessing the probability of rapid mass movement. In The New Zealand Institution of Engineers—Proceedings of Technical Groups (ed.) Proc Third Australia–New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics Wellington pp: 247–251

  • Dai FC, Lee CF, Ngai YY (2002) Landslide risk assessment and management: an overview. Eng Geol 64:65–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derbyshire E (2001) Geological hazards in loess terrain, with particular reference to the loess regions of China. Earth Sci Rev 54:231–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duman TY, Emre O, Can T, Ates S, Kecer M, Erkal T, Durmaz S, Dogan A, Corekcioglu E, Goktepe A, Cicioglu E, and Karakaya F (2001) Turkish Landslide Inventory Mapping Project: Methodology and results on Zonguldak quadrangle (1/500000), Working in progress 25 on the Geology of Turkey and its surroundings. In: Abstract Book of the 4th Int. Turkish Geology Symp 24:28:392

  • Duman TY, Can T, Emre Ö, Kecer M, Doğan A, Ateş S, Durmaz S (2005) Landslide inventory of northwestern Anatolia, Turkey. Eng Geol 77:99–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Düzgün HSB and Lacasse S (2005) Vulnerability and Acceptable Risk in Integrated Risk Assessment Framework, Proc. of International Conference on Landslide Risk Management and 18th Vancouver Geotechnical Society Symposium, May 31–June 4, Vancouver, Canada

  • Düzgün HSB and Grimstad S (2007) Reliability-based stability analysis and risk assessment for rock slides in Ramnefjell. Proc of Applications and Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering ICASP10 Tokyo, Japan. pp 189–198.

  • Düzgün HSB (2008) A Quantitative Risk Assessment Framework for Rock Slides. Procof 42nd US Rock Mechanics Symposium June 29–July 2 San Francisco USA

  • Ercanoğlu M (2005) Landslide susceptibility assessment of SE Bartin (West Black Sea region, Turkey) by artificial neural networks. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:979–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoğlu M, Gökçeoğlu C (2004) Use of fuzzy relations to produce landslide susceptibility map of a landslide prone area (West Black Sea Region, Turkey). Eng Geol 75:229–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoğlu M, Gökçeoğlu C, Van Asch ThWJ (2004) Landslide susceptibility zoning north of Yenice (NW Turkey) by multivariate statistical techniques. Nat Hazard 32:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erener A, Düzgün HSB (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment: what are the effects of mapping unit and mapping method? Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1297-0

  • Einstein HH (1988) Special lecture: landslide risk assessment procedure. Proc 5th Int Symp on Landslides Lausanne Switzerland 2: 1075–1090

  • Fell R (1994) Landslide risk assessment and acceptable risk. Can Geotech J 31:261–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fell R and Hartford D (1997) Landslide risk management. Landslide risk assessment. In: Cruden and Fell (eds). Balkema, Rotterdam. pp 51–110

  • Fell R, Ho KKS, Lacasse S, Leroi E (2005) A framework for landslide risk assessment and management. Taylor &Francis Group, London, 04 1538 043 X

    Google Scholar 

  • Fell R, Corominas J, Bonnard C, Cascini L, Leroi E, Savage WZ (2008) Guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land-use planning. Eng Geol 102(3–4):99–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrero AM, Migliazza M, Roncella R, Rabbi E (2011) Rock slopes risk assessment based on advanced geostructural survey techniques. Landslides 8(2):221–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finlay PJ (1996) The risk assessment of slopes. Ph.D. Thesis, School of Civil Engineering University of New South Wales

  • Finlay PJ, Mostyn GR, Fell R (1999) Landslide risk assessment: prediction of travel distance. Canadian Geotechnica Journal 36:556–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fourniadis IG, Liu JG, Mason PJ (2007) Landslide hazard assessment in the three gorges area, China, using ASTER imagery: Wushan–Badong. Geomorphology 84:126–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glade T (2003) Landslide occurrence as a response to land use change: a review of evidence from New Zealand. Catena 51:297–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, van Westen CJ, Carranza JEM, Jetten VG (2011) Integrating spatial, temporal, and magnitude probabilities for medium-scale landslide risk analysis in Darjeeling Himalayas, India. Landslides. doi:10.1007/s10346-011-0304-6

  • Gökçeoğlu C, Sönmez H, Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Can T (2005) The 17 March 2005 Kuzulu landslide (Sivas, Turkey) and landslide-susceptibility map of its near vicinity. Eng Geol 81:65–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gumble EJ (1954) Statistical theory of extreme values and some practicle applications. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series, 33

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunert J and Hardenbicker U (1997) The frequency of landsliding in the north Rhine area and possible climatic implications. In: Matthews, J.A., Brunsden, D., Frenzel, B., Gläser, B. and Weiß, M.M. (eds). Rapid Mass Movement as a Source of Climatic Evidence for the Holocene Palaeo climate Research. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart 19:17–31

  • Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Cardinali M, Galli M, Ardizzone F (2005) Landslide hazard assessment in the Staffora basin, northern Italian Apennines. Geomorphology 72:272–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hungr O (1997) Some methods of landslide hazard intensity mapping. In: Cruden D, Fell R (eds) Landslide risk assessment. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 215–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Hürlimann M, Copons R, Altimir J (2006) Detailed debris flow hazard assessment in Andorra: a multidisciplinary approach. Geomorphology 78(3–4):359–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaboyedoff M, Dudt JP, Labiouse V (2005) An attempt to refine rock fall hazard zoning based on the kinetic energy, frequency and fragmentation degree. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:621–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaiswal P, van Westen CJ, Jetten V (2010) Quantitative assessment of direct and indirect landslide risk along transportation lines in southern India. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10(6):1253–1267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaiswal P, van Westen CJ, Jetten V (2011) Quantitative estimation of landslide risk from rapid debris slides on natural slopes in the Nilgiri hills, India. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11(6):1723–1743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ko Ko C, Flentje P, Chowdhury R (2003) Quantitative landslide hazard and risk assessment: a case study. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 36:261–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Choi J, Min K, 11 (2004) Probabilistic landslide hazard mapping using GIS and remote sensing data at Boun, Korea. Int J Remote Sensing 25:2037–2052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee EM, Jones DKC (2004) Landslide risk assessment. Thomas Tilford, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Leone F, Aste JP, Leroi E (1996) Vulnerability assessment of elements exposed to mass-movement: working toward a better risk perception. In: Senneset K (ed) Landslides-Glissements de Terrain. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 263–270

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Lsao A (1996) Designs of medium scale hazard maps of mountain slopes in Japan. Geo Journal 38(3):365–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Marques R, Zezere J, Trigo R, Gaspari J, Trigo I (2008) Rainfall patterns and critical values associated with landslides in Povoaçao County (Sao Miguel Island, Azores): relationships with the North Atlantic Oscillation. Hydrol Process 22:478–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi SM, Omidvar B, Ghazban F, Feyzi R (2011) Quantitative risk analysis for earthquake-induced landslides—Emamzadeh Ali, Iran. Eng Geol 122(3–4):191–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H, Gorum T (2011) Medium-scale hazard mapping for shallow landslide initiation: the Buyukkoy catchment area (Cayeli, Rize, Turkey). Landslides 8(4):459–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohlmacher GC, Davis CJ (2003) Using multiple logistic regression and GIS technology to predict landslide hazard in northeast Kansas USA. Eng Geol 69:331–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remondo J, Bonachea J, Cendrero A (2005) A statistical approach to landslide risk modeling at basin scale; from landslide susceptibility to quantitative risk assessment. Landslides 2:321–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remondo J, Bonachea J, Cendrero A (2008) Quantitative landslide risk assessment and mapping on the basis of recent occurrences. Geomorphology 94:496–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terlien MTJ (1998) The determination of statistical and deterministic hydrological landslide-triggering thresholds. Environ Geol 35:124–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uromeihy A, Mahdavifar MR (2000) Landslide hazard zonation of the Khorshrostam area, Iran. Bull Eng Geol Env 58:207–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usul N (2005) Engineering hydrology. Metu, Ankara. ISBN 975-7064-43-2

    Google Scholar 

  • Uzielli M, Nadim F, Lacasse S, Kaynia AM (2008) A conceptual framework for quantitative estimation of physical vulnerability to landslides. Eng Geol 102(3–4):251–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu TH, Tang WH and Einstein HH (1996) Landslide hazard and risk assessment in Landslides Investigations and Mitigation, Transportation Research Board Special Report 247, National Research Council Washington DC.

  • WP/WLI (International Geotechnical Societies = UNESCO Working Party on World Landslide Inventory) (1993) A suggested method for describing the activity of a landslide. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 47:53–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong HN, Ho KKS, Chan YC (1997) Assessment of consequence of landslides. In: Cruden R, Fell R (eds) Landslide risk assessment. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 111–149

    Google Scholar 

  • van Westen CJ (2005) Introduction to risk assessment. Refresher course on geo-information for natural disaster reduction in Eastern Africa. Department of Geography, Makerere University. 12–23 September 2005. Available from http://www.itc.nl/PDF/Organisation/UNU%20DGIM/item1840/19_09_2005_a_introduction_to_risk_assessment.pdf. Accessed 17 Nov 2011.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varnes DJ (1978) Landslides types and processes. In: Landslides and engineering practice. EB Eckel (ed.) Highway Research Board Special Report 29:2–-47

  • Varnes DJ, IAEG Commission on Landslides and Other Mass Movements (1984) Landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice. UNESCO Press, Paris, p 63

    Google Scholar 

  • Zvelebil J, Sima J, Vilimek V (2010) Geo-risk management for developing countries—vulnerability to mass wasting in the Jemma River Basin, Ethiopia. Landslides 7(1):99–103. doi:10.1007/s10346-009-0191-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geomatics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey

    Arzu Erener

  2. Department of Mining Engineering, Middle East Technical University (METU), Ankara, Turkey

    H. B. Sebnem Düzgün

Authors
  1. Arzu Erener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. B. Sebnem Düzgün
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arzu Erener.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Erener, A., Düzgün, H.B.S. A regional scale quantitative risk assessment for landslides: case of Kumluca watershed in Bartin, Turkey. Landslides 10, 55–73 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-012-0317-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-012-0317-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation