Sie können Operatoren mit Ihrer Suchanfrage kombinieren, um diese noch präziser einzugrenzen. Klicken Sie auf den Suchoperator, um eine Erklärung seiner Funktionsweise anzuzeigen.
Findet Dokumente, in denen beide Begriffe in beliebiger Reihenfolge innerhalb von maximal n Worten zueinander stehen. Empfehlung: Wählen Sie zwischen 15 und 30 als maximale Wortanzahl (z.B. NEAR(hybrid, antrieb, 20)).
Findet Dokumente, in denen der Begriff in Wortvarianten vorkommt, wobei diese VOR, HINTER oder VOR und HINTER dem Suchbegriff anschließen können (z.B., leichtbau*, *leichtbau, *leichtbau*).
Rockfall susceptibility analysis through 3D simulations in marine protected areas of the Portofino coastline: case studies of San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays
Der Artikel konzentriert sich auf die Risikobewertung von Steinschlaggefahren im Naturpark Portofino, Italien, unter Verwendung fortgeschrittener 3D-Simulationen. Er diskutiert den geologischen und geomorphologischen Kontext des Gebiets, die Methodik zur Modellierung von Felsstürzen und die Ergebnisse detaillierter Simulationen in den Buchten von San Fruttuoso und Paraggi. Die Studie betont die Bedeutung naturbasierter Lösungen für den nachhaltigen Schutz und die Abmilderung dieser Gefahren und hebt das Potenzial fortschrittlicher Modellierungstechniken für den Erhalt des natürlichen und kulturellen Erbes der Region hervor.
KI-Generiert
Diese Zusammenfassung des Fachinhalts wurde mit Hilfe von KI generiert.
Abstract
The research focuses on the assessment of the potential geomorphological hazards affecting the stability of the Promontory of Portofino (Regional Natural Park of Portofino, Northern Italy), mainly on the bays of San Fruttuoso and Paraggi. The study area constitutes one of the most representative and most populated environments, both by locals and tourists, of the entire Liguria area. For this reason, there is a growing need for investigation on the natural dynamics of these landscapes, based on detailed topographic information. The research starts from a regional geological and geomorphological analysis specific to the study area, combined with a multi-model comparison algorithm (M3C2), which allows comparing two LiDAR datasets acquired in 2008 and 2020, respectively, to assess the overall dynamics of the promontory development. Then, a detailed study of San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays, two key points for visitors and therefore for management, is performed. Three-dimensional modeling of rockfalls is carried out, which allows the development of a specific management oriented to the use of nature-based solutions (NBSs) strategies, respecting the environment and increasing safety against instability processes in these areas.
Introduction
The paper focuses on the risk assessment of ongoing and potential rockfall hazard affecting the Regional Natural Park of Portofino (Roccati et al. 2021). Located at less than 20 km east of Genoa (Liguria region of Italy), the park covers a natural and cultural area of more than 18 km2 whose 13 km is of coastal strip. Along the whole area, it is possible to walk in a unique natural and cultural heritage, visiting small historical village and sites (e.g., Portofino, Camogli, San Fruttuoso, and Paraggi bays) and, at the same time, in a stunning landscape shaped for thousand years (e.g., track trails along the ancient terraces of vineyards and olive grove) (Brandolini et al. 2006; Faccini et al. 2018; Coratza et al. 2019).
Main geo-hazards that affect the site are rockfalls and landslides, both closely related to the increasing meteo-climatic extreme events, such as windstorms or extreme precipitation, driven by climate changes, and affected by marine erosion due to sea storms (Kabisch et al. 2016; Ruangpan et al. 2019; Roccati et al. 2020; Turconi et al. 2020). As a contribution to the short- and long-term sustainable conservation policies of sites, a research team was established in the framework of a collaboration among the Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale (ISPRA), Geographical Information System International Group (GISIG), Università di Genova (UNIGE) and Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU), under the RECONECT Project (www.reconect.eu). In this sense, a specific survey was carried out both in Paraggi and San Fruttuoso bays with the aim to test and calibrate the 3D simulation of rockfalls in the whole Park. The structural setting of the rock mass, related to the stratigraphical setting and to the geomorphological evolution of the slopes, was identified, collected, and classified. Additional information on local rock mass conditions, potentially triggering rockfall that may affect both the heritage itself and the visitors, were collected. Some focus areas and catchments were tested in order to assess the preliminary exposure and vulnerability level: the San Fruttuoso Abbey and the Paraggi Bay. Morphometric and geo-mechanical parameters, as input for the modeling, were calibrated along the most representative park trails to check the model’s reliability. The activities are characterized through a multidisciplinary approach (Perrone et al. 2021) including expertise in geomorphology, engineering geology, rock mechanics, nature and earth science, landslide risk assessment and management, as well as conservation, protection, and sustainable mitigation measures (Crosta et al. 2017; Calista et al. 2019; Pazzi et al. 2019). Reliable and true advanced modeling results are fundamental for proper conservation and mitigation intervention on the Natural Park heritage. The use of nature-based solutions (NBSs) (Naumann et al. 2014; Kumar et al. 2020; Villegas-Palacio et al. 2020) in areas of high cultural, natural, and landscape value is strongly recommended, also because of the high reduction of cost and impact (Debele et al. 2019; Kumar et al. 2020). The above-mentioned collaborative activities, between the different research teams, are aimed at the conservation and protection of cultural landscape sites (Jongman 2002), with the ultimate target of making the area accessible to the public in a complete state of safety from rockfalls and slides (Margottini and Spizzichino 2021).
Anzeige
Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) technologies developed in this research are now widely used in geological risk management, including rockfall hazard assessment (Kenner et al. 2014; Rieg et al. 2014). LiDAR techniques can provide high-resolution and spatially accurate point clouds making them indispensable tools for accurately capturing dense information to facilitate detailed topographic analysis. With this base information, the point clouds modified using cloud processing tools such as CloudCompare allow the comparison of different LiDARs with specific algorithms, to determine the regional evolution of the terrain. In this sense, adjusted and georeferenced models can be developed, which combined with three-dimensional simulation software for rockfalls and georeferenced aerial orthophotographies in the same common reference system, let realistic modeling of each studied area.
In our research, we pursue making progress in the recognition of instability processes in the Portofino Park, which preserve a natural environment including San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays, with the aim of proposing nature-based solution strategies. At this point, this paper focuses mainly on rockfalls, which are a highly recurrent process, and whose fast development makes it advisable to implement protection measures in agreement with the values of the environment. The main objective is to advance in the combined use of in situ and remote analysis techniques for the development of three-dimensional models that allow the establishment of specific management measures, adapted to each space, combining constructive friendly actions (Morales et al. 2021), where necessary, within the framework of a global approach based on efficient, environmentally, socially, and economically beneficial solutions, which contribute to increasing resilience (European Commission 2015).
The Portofino cultural heritage site
Thanks to its wide recognized landscape, natural, and cultural values (Fig. 1), the Portofino Promontory has been protected since 1935 with the establishment of the Portofino Natural Park (Coratza et al. 2019). Since 1995, the protected area has been managed by the Regional Park Authority: current protected area is approximately 1056 ha wide, covering the territory of the municipalities of Camogli, Portofino, and Santa Margherita Ligure.
Fig. 1
Geographical context of the study area in Italy and the location of San Fruttuoso, Paraggi, and Portofino bays, along with the cultural heritage in Portofino Promontory
The resident population of the Portofino Park is about 750 (Turconi et al. 2020), while the total population of the three municipalities is about 15,000. The number of tourists is very high throughout the year: along the coast, in Portofino town, there are more than one million tourists/year, while in San Fruttuoso, the boat connections from the Tigullio and Paradiso Gulfs provide around 400,000 tourists/year (Faccini et al. 2018). In addition to tourists, there are also hikers along the more than 80 km of paths (Brandolini et al. 2006): the section from “Portofino Vetta” to “Pietre strette” is travelled by more than 70,000 hikers/year.
Anzeige
In addition to the Portofino Park, there is the Portofino Marine Protected Area, established in 1999; finally, in 2017, the process to convert Portofino into a National Park was started, even if the boundaries are still to be well defined.
The entire promontory is also extraordinarily rich in cultural heritage, not only represented by the seaside towns of Camogli and Portofino, but above all linked to the ancient medieval religious trails that connected various monastic centers (Figs. 1 and 3): on the western side, there is the Church of San Nicolò di Capodimonte (Fig. 2a), dating back to the twelfth century; in San Fruttuoso, there is the Benedictine abbey (Fig. 2b) dating back to the tenth to eleventh century; and on the eastern side, there is the Cervara monastery complex (Fig. 2c), built in 1361 and maintained by Benedictine monks. Other important buildings of great cultural interest are the Hermitage of S. Antonio di Niasca and the Church of Divo Martino in Portofino (Figs. 1 and 3).
Fig. 2
Some examples of Portofino’s cultural heritage: a Church of San Nicolò di Capodimonte; b San Fruttuoso Benedictine abbey; c Cervara monastery complex
Most of this cultural heritage is however threatened by geomorphological hazards: many of these centers were built on ancient and relict landslides (San Nicolò, Divo Martino, S. Antonio di Niasca, Abbazia della Cervara), but occasionally they are reactivated, especially by heavy, short-term rainfall triggered by the atmospheric low depression over the gulf of Genoa (the so-called Genoa Low) (Roccati et al. 2020). On September 25, 1915, an intense and concentrated rainfall triggered a debris-mud flow that channeled into the hydrographic network and partially destroyed the San Fruttuoso abbey and surrounding houses (Paliaga et al. 2022). In fact, it is located exactly at the mouth of the Fontanini valley, which is also subject to frequent rockfall phenomena (Faccini et al. 2008b, 2009). Noteworthy is the event that occurred in 2016, where a 3-m-diameter block impacted a house in San Fruttuoso, causing considerable material damage (Roccati et al. 2021). The Cervara complex was severely threatened by the effects of the 2018 Vaia sea storm surge (Turconi et al. 2020; Betti et al. 2021).
Geological setting
The geology of the whole area is dominated by two formations (Fig. 3): the “Mt. Antola Flysch” on the north (Elter and Pertusati 1973; Corsi et al. 2001), dated between 90 and 55 million years ago, and the “Portofino Conglomerate” at the south, dated about 30 million years ago (Terranova 1964). Conglomerates, which outcrop at the entire southern slope of the promontory, are made by of heterogeneous pebbles, mainly from marly limestone and secondarily from other lithotypes, in a sandy-limestone matrix (Faccini et al. 2008a). The formation shows a fragile tectonic deformation, with several fault and fracture systems oriented mainly NW–SE and NE-SW (Fig. 3) (Bonaria et al. 2016; Terrone et al. 2021). Regarding the quality indexes of the Portofino Conglomerate, its high resistance stands out (Table 1). At rock mass scale, the Geological Strength Index (GSI) (Marinos and Hoek 2000) ranges from 65 to 70, consequence of the good surface conditions together with a blocky structure (Faccini et al. 2008a). In a detailed scale, field tests using the Schmidt hammer, distinguishing between limestone, arenaceous clasts, and matrix (Cevasco et al. 2004), with a modal rate between 25 and 50 were calculated (Faccini et al. 2008a). Besides, laboratory tests have been developed using a point load test, carried out directly on rock samples, and providing compressive strength ranges between 50 and 100 MPa (Faccini et al. 2008a).
Table 1
Rock mass characteristics
Materials
Date
GSI
Schmidt rebound number (modal)
Uniaxial compressive strength (σci)
Mt. Antola Flysch
55–90 M.a
35–40
15–35
30–70 MPa
Portofino Conglom
30 M.a
65–70
25–50
50–100 MPa
This characterization serves as a basis for the definition of different terrains in the modeling part, depending on the values obtained by the techniques used, in addition to the calibration and adjustment process. The tectonic structures, along with the high resistance of the conglomerate, control the development of instability processes along the entire coastline, which are especially evident in the south-facing conglomeratic outcrops, such as those identified in San Fruttuoso area (Fig. 3).
At present, the bays of San Fruttuoso and Paraggi, respectively, located to the south and east of the promontory, have different morphologies. San Fruttuoso has local outcrops of conglomerate, which are found among abundant vegetation of various types, where a deeper terrain is developed, which means that during heavy rainfall, several debris and mudflow processes have historically developed. Shallow landslides often occur in terraced areas with dry stone walls (Paliaga et al. 2016, 2020). In the case of the rocky outcrops, which are relatively isolated and with metric continuity of fractures in the rock mass, rockfalls with a largely spherical shape (Roccati et al. 2021) develop, not exceeding 1 m in diameter. These dimensions of spacing and block sizes were obtained during the days of fieldwork developed in the area, with a classical tape measure, in order to make more accurate measurements for the simulation. On the other side, in Paraggi Bay, the coastal zone draws practically a continuous line of rocky cliffs, where diverse processes of rockfalls with decimeters size take place.
Methodology
Large-scale base data and analysis
The study began with the acquisition of the basic topographic information of the ground surface, in order to carry out a general morphometric and geomorphological analyses at the scale of the Promontory of Portofino. This preliminary study was conducted to perform then detailed analyses of the areas of greatest activity and interest, in those that demonstrate modifications on a general scale, and where numerous events have been identified over the last few years.
In the regional context, a comparison was made between the LiDARs 2008 (by the Italian Ministry of the Environment) and 2020 (acquired by EUROSENSE in the framework of RECONECT project), after the necessary Coordinate Reference System alignment using the Open Access Geographical Information System QGIS 3.14 Pi. This preliminary work was made based on the multiscale model-to-model cloud comparison (M3C2) algorithm through CloudCompare software (James et al. 2017; DiFrancesco et al. 2020; Bernard et al. 2021; Hu et al. 2022).
Detailed topographic information
Once the general framework was completed, based on this information, a local study of San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays, south sector of the Promontory, was carried out. Using the free CloudCompare v.2.12 Alpha software, the original LiDAR was modified and the specific digital terrain model (DTM) of each zone was elaborated, for analysis in raster format, by projecting the point cloud perpendicularly onto a flat raster surface, with a cell size of 0.5 m. The raster was then combined with georeferenced orthophotos, which is combined with above-mentioned information through QGIS 3.14 Pi.
From the detailed DTMs, the basic point cloud was extracted and, by means of a triangulation process using the Delaunay method performed in RocPro3D software (RocPro3D 2018), a three-dimensional mesh reflecting the real relief of the environment was obtained. All the data regarding terrain properties and instability processes were added to the model, and were represented over the orthophoto, allowing working with detailed realistic three-dimensional models of the study area.
Modeling and simulation of rockfalls
The development on the ground of rockfalls is limited by the dispersion of their energy, which is usually approximated by two coefficients (Pfeiffer and Bowen 1989; Morales et al. 2021): the normal coefficient of restitution (Rn), which indicates the degree of elasticity in a collision perpendicular to the slope surface; and the tangential coefficient of restitution (Rt), which is a measure of the resistance to movement parallel to the slope (Pfeiffer and Bowen 1989). Both values are calculated using the following expressions (Li et al. 2020; Wang et al. 2020; Morales et al. 2021; Zhang et al. 2021):
where \(R\) is the radius of the rock, \({\omega }_{\left(1\right)}\) is the initial rotational velocity, \(m\) is the rock mass, \({v}_{t,i}\) is the initial tangential velocity, \(FF\) is the friction function, \(SF\) is the scaling factor, and \(I\) is the rock moment of inertia.
By means of these two equations, the restitution coefficients that will be fundamental in the rockfall modeling process and which are characteristic of each differentiated terrain are acquired, in addition to other factors such as dynamic friction (k) and vertical and lateral deviation acquired from contrasted previous researches.
Three-dimensional rockfall modeling
The modeling process was approached by using RocPro3D software (RocPro3D 2018). This software performs three-dimensional simulations of individual trajectories from a digital terrain model (DTM), which is extracted from the above-mentioned acquired topography. Software permits generating a mesh developed by triangulation as stated before. The mesh is the beginning of the model, which represents the real relief of the studied environment, on which the simulation of rockfall from the identified source areas is carried out. This type of modeling allows including the lateral evolution of rockfalls (Li and Lan 2015).
For the definition of the source areas, it is essential to carry out fieldwork to identify and locate exactly the origin of the rockfalls, evaluating scars in the rock mass (Palmstrom 2005; Corominas et al. 2017), which will then be reflected in the models. Regarding the volume of blocks, in the absence of a specific inventory of rockfalls, priority has been given to the study of spherical blocks of 1-m diameter, which is the largest size recorded in the area during the fieldwork and, therefore, the one with the highest energy (Corominas et al. 2017; Morales et al. 2021). In our case, a rigid body approach was used for the modeling. In order to calibrate the input parameters of the modeling, the first step has been to carry out a recent papers review of several authors working in different terrains (Ji et al. 2020, 2021; Tang et al. 2021; Ye et al. 2021; Prades-Valls et al. 2022; Sardana et al. 2022; Shadabfar et al. 2022), with the aim of framing each of those defined in San Fruttuoso and Paraggi within established limits. From this starting point, rebound values were calibrated via 3D back analysis to achieve the best agreement between observations and modeling estimates (Sarro et al. 2018; Fanos and Pradhan 2019).
Finally, it should be noted that in the modeling the densely vegetated areas have also been characterized and established, since they represent a degree of protection that less abundant vegetation does not provide. Likewise, in this case, land uses as such have not been taken into account, since this section is contemplated in the proposed solutions of the mitigation plan. However, anthropic materials are defined, such as roads and walkways, with resistance values different from other identified materials, since they condition the rebound and evolution of the blocks in a completely different way.
Results
Large-scale DTM comparison through M3C2 algorithm
The DTM assessment, obtained via the CloudCompare (v. 2.12 Alpha) software, has been established using the multiscale model-to-model comparison (M3C2) algorithm, which is a robust way to compute distances directly between two point clouds, established with limits of − 1 to 1 m, since, being 12 years apart, it is estimated that the vast majority of ground movements are local and with a decimeter difference (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4
Comparison between the elevations of the 2008 and 2020 DTMs on the Portofino’s Promontory
This comparison makes it possible to identify that the study area is relatively stable from the viewpoint of slope stability and erosion, since differences close to zero (green color) predominate throughout the sector. However, significant differences can be identified between the northern area, with less evolution, and the southern area, where significant settlements of around 1 m (blue color) and raise of up to 1 m (red color) can be identified. Often, especially remarkable in San Fruttuoso, these zones of gain or losses of terrain elevation are aligned to NW–SE orientation (structural patterns that control hydrographic network evolution) that fits with the ground movements highlighted by the ISPRA (2018) in the “Dissesto idrogeologico in Italia: pericolosità e indicatori di rischio – Edizione 2018”, where the landslide hazard of the area under study was collected (Fig. 5).
Fig. 5
Comparison between a the landslide hazard analysis map developed by the ISPRA and b our comparison between DTMs
In order to perform a detailed analysis of the rockfall processes in San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays, specific models of both areas have been generated from the topographic information described above.
For an accurate representation of the rockfalls occurring in the study area, the terrains must be differentiated and defined in the field (Pfeiffer and Bowen 1989), as well as their values of dynamic friction (k), normal and tangential restitution coefficients (Rn and Rt, respectively) and final degree of lateral and vertical deviation (Guzzetti et al. 2003), which absolutely affect the development of the rock fragments. These parameters were calibrated by 3D back analysis to achieve the highest similarity between the spatial distribution of the recorded events and modeling estimates (Sarro et al. 2018; Fanos and Pradhan 2019; Clemente et al. 2023). Calibration accuracies were found to be 95%, ending with the values for each differentiated terrain shown in Table 2. These values are within the ranges given in the literature for similar materials in comparable environments (Bourrier et al. 2012).
Table 2
Terrain properties and adjusted parameters in San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays
Material properties
Porto. conglomerate
Loose soil with vegetation
Access area
Water surface
Restitution coefficients (R)
Units
Mean normal value \(\mu\) _Rn
0.55
0.3
0.5
0
Mean tangential value \(\mu\)_Rt
0.9
0.8
0.8
0
Std.-Dev. \(\sigma\)_R
0.011
0.012
0.016
0
Limit velocity V_R (lim)
(m/s)
10
10
10
0
Limit Std.-Dev. \(\sigma\)_R (lim)
0.0055
0.006
0.012
0
Lateral deviation(\(\varvec{\theta h}\))
Std.-Dev. \(\sigma\_\theta h\)
(°)
10
5
7.5
0
Limit velocity V_\(\theta h\)
(m/s)
10
10
10
0
Limit Std.-Dev.\(\sigma\_\theta h\) (lim)
(°)
5
2.5
3.75
0
Vertical deviation(\(\varvec{\theta v}\))
Std.-Dev. \(\sigma\_\theta v\)
(°)
1
1
1
0
Limit velocity V_\(\theta\)v
(m/s)
10
10
10
0
Limit Std.-Dev. \(\sigma\_\theta v\) (lim)
(°)
2
2
2
0
Friction coefficient (k)
Mean value \(\mu\)_k
(m/s)
0.45
0.6
0.5
0
Std.-Dev. \(\sigma\)_k
0.036
0.045
0.045
0
Limit velocity V_k (lim)
10
10
10
0
Limit Std.-Dev. \(\sigma\)_k (lim)
0.03
0.03
0.03
0
3D local simulation of rockfalls: San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays
With this baseline information, 350 fall trajectories have been simulated from the 14 source areas identified in San Fruttuoso and 120 trajectories from the 8 areas recognized in the Paraggi. Regarding block size, a necessary input for developing a model (Hungr et al. 1999), although there are areas with relatively smaller blocks, a diameter of 1 m has been standardized for spherical blocks detached from conglomeratic outcrops. Only one exception has been made, and that is the source area identified in 25 October 2016 rockfall in San Fruttuoso, where a detached block of 3-m diameter, much larger than those currently identified in the bay, destroyed a house (Fig. 7f).
The development of the trajectories obtained from the simulation were ground-truthed with field observations, and geomorphological and historical evidences. Thus, due to the geomorphology of the San Fruttuoso Bay, and mainly on its northwest flank, rockfall trajectories tend to concentrate in small canyons, identifiable with the field survey, which are in turn the preferential waterways. The southeastern flank, however, due to the proximity and the verticality of the conglomeratic cliffs to the sea, develops almost straight trajectories (Fig. 6a). Paraggi Bay, on the other hand, depicts a much more direct rockfall dynamic, with vertical cliffs close to the main road and the sea, which address this evolution (Fig. 6b).
Fig. 6
3D model showing scarp main active source areas (orange lines) and trajectories (red lines) of a San Fruttuoso Bay and b high rocky coast on the eastern side Paraggi Bay
Given that the Paraggi sector has undergone numerous instability processes in recent years, it is an area where the managing authorities have carried out numerous constructive actions, making it a relatively less natural area and therefore less suitable for the study presented. Thus, a more in-depth analysis was proposed in the San Fruttuoso area, where instability processes are taking place, but on largely natural spaces that have not yet been acted upon, which facilitates the proposal of actions based on the NBSs.
Two trajectories have been selected in San Fruttuoso Bay, representing a higher degree of exposure and hazard for both the structures, tourist and residents in the area. On the one hand, there is an area of special interest and need for protection, which is represented by trajectory 198 (Fig. 7a), on the northwest flank, where a spherical block of 1-m diameter could potentially fall, whose path ends in the restaurant at the foot of the slope (Fig. 7e). On the other hand, trajectory 304 (Fig. 7c) represents the most important recent episode that has occurred in the bay in 2016 (back analysis approach), where a spherical block 3 m wide hit a house and destroyed it (Fig. 7f). The large amount of data collected in this episode allows for a more calibrated and robust model. An individual analysis of these trajectories has been modeled, analyzing the total kinetic energy during their entire trajectory (He et al. 2020), the rebound zones, and the stopping zone (Fig. 7b, d).
Fig. 7
Analysis of individual trajectories of rockfalls: a rockfall trajectories (red lines); trajectory 198 (colored line) in the 3D simulation; b energy profile of trajectory 198; c trajectory 304 (colored line) in the 3D simulation; d energy profile of trajectory 304; e potential rockfall trajectory 198; and f house destroyed by rockfall in 2016, trajectory 304
In addition to the simulation of individual trajectories, three-dimensional modeling allows the production of maps of different parameters that can address the management of these spaces (Sarro et al. 2018; Fanos and Pradhan 2019; Akin et al. 2021). For the elaboration of these analysis maps, the terrain is divided into cells of 5 × 5 m, which in the case of San Fruttuoso were 308 horizontal and 377 vertical cells, giving almost 120,000 simulation cells. In this way, the fundamental parameters are calculated for each cell resulting from the rockfall modeling (Akin et al. 2021; Clemente et al. 2021a, b). In the case of the present study, all analysis maps are performed for a confidence limit (CL) of 95%, such as (a) energy, representing the maximum kinetic energy recorded; (b) height, the maximum vertical height of the trajectories; (c) density, number of rocks passing through each cell; (d) impacts, the number of impacts by cell; (e) velocity, maximum speed reached by the falls; and (f) minimum time, the time interval between the rock detachment and its stop (Fig. 8).
Fig. 8
Cell-based analysis maps of simulated rockfall parameters for a confidence limit (CL) of 95% in the San Fruttuoso Bay: a energy; b height; c number of trajectories; d impacts; e velocity; and f minimum path time
As for the energy map, the maximum kinetic energy reached is, in specific and scattered cases, 1600 kJ, although practically all the detachments collected in the cells comprise energies of a few hundred at the origin, 800–1200 in the impact zones, which usually evolve towards 1400 kJ (Fig. 8a). Regarding the vertical height of the rockfalls, which is a fundamental input parameter for sizing the mitigation measures (e.g., barriers, meshes, walls) needed to stop the most dangerous blocks, rarely it is greater than 5 m, except in specific cases where the coastal strip is more verticalized, which are mainly located far from the accessible areas (Fig. 8b). The number of trajectories per cell (Fig. 8c) and the impacts (Fig. 8d) are mainly concentrated on the levels previously recognized in the individual trajectories. With respect to the speed of the falls calculated in the maps, three phases are evidenced: the first 5–10 m of the trajectories, with speeds of less than 5 m/s; an intermediate and longest zone, between 60 and 90 m, with speeds around 16 m/s where the blocks accelerate; and final part, 10–30 m long, where speeds of more than 30 m/s are reached (Fig. 8e), exhibiting maximum fall times of 70 s, although times around 30 are more common (Fig. 8f).
Proposal for a short- and long-term low impact (NBSs) mitigation master plan
In the whole investigated area, the present and active morphological processes should be framed within a management and conservation master plan having two different timeline references: emergency mitigation measures, to be defined and undertaken in the short-medium term, and preventive mitigation measures to be implemented in the medium-long term (Spizzichino et al. 2016).
Short-medium-term actions should be always preceded by an investigation phase including the following:
Field survey and detailed geomatics terrestrial laser scanner (TLS) acquisition coupled with UAV flight acquisition, in order to provide high-resolution 3D topographical models of the whole heritage area.
Laboratory and in situ test execution.
Detailed geomorphological and geo-mechanical survey of the rock slope.
Global kinematic analysis of the rock including the calculation of the most probable rockfall trajectories (3D rockfall modeling).
Exposure and vulnerability assessment and mapping of the natural and cultural heritage in the area.
Detailed landslide hazard and risk assessment.
Slope stability modeling (2D and 3D) for specific blocks and/or unstable portions of the cliff.
Temporary supports of unstable rock portions.
Urgent reinforcement in the most instable volumes to avoid detachments.
Redefinition of touristic paths and accesses, to prevent tourists from being exposed to potential collapses or instabilities.
New communication plan and billboard for touristic management.
The long-term actions include the following:
General master plan with detailed design of mitigation through NBSs approach.
Design of an integrated monitoring system. The adopted monitoring integrated system could also be set, with some small modifications and thresholds definition, as a warning system for flash flood as well as for detection of large rock block deformations.
In both cases, the mitigation options must be supported by scientific and technical analysis in a holistic framework. The proposed numerical 3D rockfall modeling is a fundamental tool to support the above-mentioned strategies in the case of rockfalls, the process that is the focus of this work. The incorporation of complementary studies more focused on landslide susceptibility analysis (e.g., Roccati et al. 2021), will complete the information for the development of comprehensive management strategies.
Discussion
The management of coastal areas needs to advance in methodological approaches that allow detailed studies of the current dynamics, in order to develop specific management plans for each environment, based on the guidelines of the NBSs (Villegas-Palacio et al. 2020; Kumar et al. 2021; Vojinovic et al. 2021). In previous works, a large number of authors have assessed these strategies as a line of action for natural hazards in different environments (Pontee et al. 2016; Castelle et al. 2019; Van der Meulen, 2022), but rarely dedicated to geological hazards.
The proposed study in the Portofino Natural Park has allowed the development of a methodology that combines remote sensing techniques with local digital terrain models, as long as with data collection through fieldwork. This detailed topographic information is derived to the design of three-dimensional point clouds, which are modified and adjusted by means of specific software, which serve as a basis for the elaboration of investigations on slopes that present complex morphology (Abellán et al. 2010; Pham et al. 2016; Ansari et al. 2018), such as the coastline of Portofino, and especially the San Fruttuoso Bay, where a realistic representation of the relief is the only way to develop geo-hazard studies useful in future management strategies (Ratter 2013; Jia et al. 2016; Preti et al. 2021).
The advance of adding a third dimension to traditional 2D rockfall modeling involves taking into account the lateral deviation of block trajectories (Bourrier et al. 2012; Asteriou and Tsiambaos 2018; Ji et al. 2020), which was previously overlooked considering only terrain profiles, and which is essential to understand the processes in detail in order to mitigate their negative impacts (Volkwein et al. 2011). This is especially important in coastal environments, where sometimes the shape of the cliffs tends to develop trajectories with lateral evolutions almost in their entirety.
With respect to the detached blocks, the worst-case scenario is generally that of the largest rock which remains intact while traveling down a slope (Pfeiffer and Bowen 1989), attaining the highest energy (Akin et al. 2021; Morales et al. 2021). In addition, the shape of the blocks determines the mechanical responses on impact with the ground, which has a remarkable implication for rockfall hazard assessment (Bonneau et al. 2019; Caviezel et al. 2021). In the case of spherical blocks, which are the prevalent ones throughout the study areas in this research, the shape is especially relevant, because it yields a maximum volume for a given radius, which will tend towards the worst case (Pfeiffer and Bowen 1989).
The detailed analysis of the most important rockfall trajectories studied in the past (most of them of 1 m3) that reach high energies and volumes up to 3 m3, even destroying local structures, lead to study and recognize the potential new events in the selected environments, with which evaluate, adjust, and simulate detachments occurring in the near and far future. Thus, it will be possible to develop management strategies that adhere to the environment in a more respectful, environmentally friendly, controlled, and efficient way, improving in turn the safety against geo-hazards (Morales et al. 2021; Domínguez-Cuesta et al. 2022). These actions that combine constructive elements with warning campaigns and delimitation of access and use areas, will result in establishing a base methodology applicable to other environments with similar characteristics, where the population’s negative perception because of these interventions will be significantly reduced (Touili et al. 2014; Gray et al. 2017).
The development of analysis maps of different parameters that define rockfalls makes it possible to analyze the necessary height and the minimum kinetic energy that the hypothetical control structures to be installed in the area should withstand, or the response time and velocity against possible block falls (Sarro et al. 2018; Fanos and Pradhan 2019; Akin et al. 2021). This information provides a deeper understanding of the dynamics of instability processes in the environment, which in any case must constantly update its data and add new information, in order to progressively generate more realistic and accurate models of the environment.
Conclusions
The investigated area of Portofino Natural Park covers a wide natural and cultural area where it is possible to visit remarkable heritage sites walking in an incredible high-value landscape. The entire area is characterized by the presence of conglomerate rocks. The geological and geo-mechanical characteristics of this formation affect the potential instability of the natural and cultural heritages sites, especially during heavy rainfall and extreme events.
In the present paper, a comprehensive analysis of potential instability mechanisms (rockfall) and their spatial evolution (e.g., runout distance, trajectories and impact energy) is described for the selected area of San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays. Such approach and methodology allow to carry out further studies and analysis supporting the adoption of the so-called nature-based solutions (NBSs), aiming to reduce the impact by the construction of mitigation measures and to increase resilience in high-value natural and cultural areas.
At the same time, the proposed advanced modeling constitutes a useful tool for the verification and calibration of the adopted design choices (e.g., size and correct location of the barriers, hypothesis of structural interventions for the protection of exposed elements such as paths, terraces, and cultural heritage), as well as a useful guidance for the implementation of medium-/long-term non-structural measures, such as in situ monitoring systems to be eventually transformed into early warning systems.
The detailed knowledge of the morphological dynamics of the area is in fact a fundamental cognitive element to develop participatory planning, directly involving stakeholders and providing the tools for a correct cost–benefit analysis to policy makers and funders. A co-creation process, in fact, runs across all the steps for the implementation of NBS interventions, from the initial co-design, to co-monitoring of their performance, to maintenance and finally decommissioning.
The advanced 3D modeling phase here proposed, in addition to being a real digital twin of the natural dynamics of the area, is expected to be integrated into this co-creation process for the sustainable management of high-value areas.
Acknowledgements
This study has been carried out in the framework of a collaboration among ISPRA, GISIG, Università di Genova, and Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU, IT1678-22 Research Group, PES-18/92 Project) within the RECONECT Project (Regenerating ECOsystems with Nature-based solutions for hydro-meteorological risk rEduCTion).
Declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Rockfall susceptibility analysis through 3D simulations in marine protected areas of the Portofino coastline: case studies of San Fruttuoso and Paraggi bays
Verfasst von
Jon Ander Clemente
Daniele Spizzichino
Gabriele Leoni
Alessandra Marchese
Jesus A. Uriarte
Tomás Morales
Rolf Wilting
Zoran Vojinovic
Francesco Faccini
Abellán A, Calvet J, Vilaplana JM, Blanchard J (2010) Detection and spatial prediction of rockfalls by means of terrestrial laser scanner monitoring. Geomorphology 119:162–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.03.016CrossRef
Akin M, Dinçer I, Ok AO, Orhan A, Akin MK, Topal T (2021) Assessment of the effectiveness of a rockfall ditch through 3-D probabilistic rockfall simulations and automated image processing. Eng Geol 283: 106001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106001
Ansari MK, Ahmad M, Singh R, Sing TN (2018) 2D and 3D rockfall hazard analysis and protection measures for Saptashrungi Gad Temple, Vani, Nashik, Maharashtra – a case study. J Geol Soc India 91:47–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-018-0819-8CrossRef
Asteriou P, Tsiambaos G (2018) Effect of impact velocity, block mass and hardness on the coefficients of restitution for rockfall analysis. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 106:41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.04.001CrossRef
Bernard TG, Lague D, Steer P (2021) Beyond 2D landslide inventories and their rollover: synoptic 3D inventories and volume from repeat LiDAR data. Earth Surf Dynam 9:1013–1044. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-9-1013-2021CrossRef
Betti F, Venturini S, Merotto L, Cappanera V, Ferrando S, Aicardi S, Mandich A, Castellano M, Povero P (2021) Population trends of the fan mussel Pinna nobilis from Portofino MPA (Ligurian Sea, Western Mediterranean Sea) before and after a mass mortality event and a catastrophic storm. Eur Zool J 88(1):18–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750263.2020.1850891CrossRef
Bonaria V, Faccini F, Galiano IC, Sacchini A (2016) Hydrogeology of conglomerate fractured-rock aquifers: an example from the Portofino’s Promontory (Italy). Rendiconti Online Soc Geol Ital 41:22–25. https://doi.org/10.3301/ROL.2016.83CrossRef
Bonneau DA, Hutchinson DJ, DiFrancesco PM, Coombs M, Sala Z (2019) Three-dimensional rockfall shape back analysis: methods and implications. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 19:2745–2765. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2745-2019CrossRef
Bourrier F, Berger F, Tardig P, Dorren L, Hungr O (2012) Rockfall rebound: comparison of detailed field experiments and alternative modelling approaches. Earth Surf Process Landf 37:656–665. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3202CrossRef
Brandolini P, Faccini F, Piccazzo M (2006) Geomorphological hazard and tourist vulnerability along Portofino Park trails (Italy). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 6:563–571. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-6-563-2006CrossRef
Calista M, Miccadei E, Piacentini T, Sciarra N (2019) Morphostructural, meteorological and seismic factors controlling landslides in weak rocks: the case studies of Castelnuovo and Ponzano (North East Abruzzo, Central Italy). Geosciences 9(3):122. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9030122CrossRef
Castelle B, Laporte-Fauret Q, Marieu V, Michalet R, Rosebery D, Bujan S, Luban B, Bernard JP, Valance A, Dupont P, Oul El Moctar A, Narteau C (2019) Nature-based solution along high-energy eroding sandy coasts: preliminary tests on the resinstatement of natural dynamics in reprofiled coastal dunes. Water 11:e2518. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11122518
Caviezel A, Ringenbach A, Demmel SE, Dinneen CE, Krebs N, Bühler Y, Christen M, Meyrat G, Stoffel A, Hafner E, Eberhard LA, von Rickenbach D, Simmler K, Mayer P, Niklaus PS, Birchler T, Aebi T, Cavigelli L, Schaffner M, Rickli S, Schnetzler C, Magno M, Benini L, Bartelt P (2021) The relevance if rock shape over mass – implications for rockfall hazard assessments. Nat Commun 12:5546. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25794-yCrossRef
Cevasco A, Faccini F, Nosengo S, Olivari F, Robbiano A (2004) Valutazioni sull’uso delle classificazioni geomeccaniche nell’analisi della stabilit`a dei versanti rocciosi: il caso del Promontorio di Portofino (Provincia di Genova). GEAM 11:31–38
Clemente JA, Uriarte JA, Apraiz A, Morales T (2021a) Modelización de caída de rocas en los acantilados carbonatados “tipo flysch” de la playa de Atxabiribil (Sopela, Bizkaia): análisis tridimensional. Rev Soc Geol Esp 34(2):52–63
Clemente JA, Uriarte JA, Spizzichino D, Faccini F, Morales T (2021b) Rockfall hazard mitigation in coastal environments using dune protection: a nature-based solution case on Barinatxe beach (Basque Coast, northern Spain). Eng Geol 314:107014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2023.107014
Coratza P, Vandelli V, Fiorentini L, Paliaga G, Faccini F (2019) Bridging terrestrial and marine geoheritage: assessing geosites in Portofino Natural Park (Italy). Water 11:2112. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11102112CrossRef
Corominas J, Mavrouli O, Ruiz-Carulla R (2017) Rockfall ocurrence and fragmentation, in: Sassa, K., Mikoš, M., Yin, Y. (Eds), Advancing culture of living with landslides. Springer, Cham 75–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59469-9_4
Corsi B, Elter FM, Giammarino S (2001) Structural fabric of the Antola Unit (Riviera di Levante, Italy) and implications for its Alpine versus Apennine origin. Ofioliti 26:1–8
Crosta GB, Agliardi F, Rivolta C, Alberti S, Dei Cas L (2017) Long-term evolution and early warning strategies for complex rockslides by real-time monitoring. Landslides 4(5):1615–1632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-017-0817-8CrossRef
Debele SE, Kumar P, Sahani J, Marti-Cardona B, Mickovski SB, Leo LS, Porcù F, Bertini F, Montesi D, Vojinovic Z, Di Sabatino S (2019) Nature-based solutions for hydro-meteorological hazards: revised concepts, classification schemes and databases. Environ Res 179:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.108799CrossRef
DiFrancesco PM, Bonneau D, Hutchinson J (2020) The implications of M3C2 projection diameter on 3D semi-automated rockfall extraction from sequential terrestrial laser scanning point clouds. Remote Sens 12(11):1885. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12111885CrossRef
Domínguez-Cuesta MJ, González-Pumariega P, Valenzuela P, López-Fernández C, Roríguez-Rodríguez L, Ballesteros D, Mora M, Meléndez M, Herrera F, Marigil MA, Pando L, Cuervas-Mons J, Jiménez-Sánchez M (2022) Understanding the retreat of the Jurassic Cantabrian Coast (N. Spain): comprehensive monitoring and 4D evolution model of the Tazones Lighthouse landslide. Mar Geol 449:106836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2022.106836
Elter P, Pertusati PC (1973) Considerazioni sul limite Alpi-Appennino e sulle relazioni con l’arco delle Alpi occidentali. Mem Soc Geol It 12:359–375
European Commission (2015) Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Towards an EU research and innovation policy agenda for nature-based solutions & re-naturing cities: final report of the Horizon 2020 expert group on ‘nature-based solutions and re-naturing cities’, Publications Office. https://doi.org/10.2777/763305
Faccini F, Piccazzo M, Robbiano A, Roccati A (2008a) Applied geomorphological map of the Portofino Municipal Territory (Italy). J Maps 4(1):451–462. https://doi.org/10.4113/jom.2008.1023CrossRef
Faccini F, Piccazzo M, Robbiano A (2008b) Environmental geological maps of San Fruttuoso Bay (Portofino Park, Italy). J Maps 4(1):431–443. https://doi.org/10.4113/jom.2008.1018CrossRef
Faccini F, Piccazzo M, Robbiano A (2009) Natural hazards in San Fruttuoso of Camogli (Portofino Park, Italy): a case study of a debris flow in a coastal environment. Bollettino della Società Geologica Italiana 128:641–654
Faccini F, Paliaga G, Piana P, Gabellani N, Angelini S, Coratza P (2018) The Geoheritage map of the Portofino Natural Park (Italy) as a tool for the management of a highly frequented protected area. J Maps 14(2):87–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2018.1433561CrossRef
ISPRA (2018) Dissesto idrogeologico in Italia: pericolosità e indicatori di rischio – Edizione 2018. ISPRA reports 287/2018, Rome
Gray JDE, O’Neill K, Qiu Z (2017) Coastal residents’ perceptions of the function of and relationship between engineered and natural infrastructure for coastal hazard mitigation. Ocean Coast Manag 146:144–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.07.005CrossRef
Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Wieczorek GF (2003) Rockfall hazard and risk assessment in the Yosemite Valley, California, USA. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 3:491–503. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-3-491-2003CrossRef
He K, Li Y, Ma G, Hu X, Liu B, Ma Z, Xu Z (2020) Failure mode analysis of post-seismic rockfall in shattered mountains exemplified. Landslides 18:425–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01532-1CrossRef
Hu L, Navarro-Hernández MI, Liu X, Tomás R, Tang X, Bru G, Ezquerro P, Zhang Q (2022) Analysis of regional large-gradient land subsidence in the Alto Guadalentín Basin (Spain) using open-access aerial LiDAR datasets. Remote Sens Environ 280:13218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2022.113218
Hungr O, Evans SG, Hazzard J (1999) Magnitude and frequency of rock falls and rock slides along the main transportation corridors of southwestern British Columbia. Can Geotech J 36:224–238. https://doi.org/10.1139/t98-106CrossRef
James MR, Robson S, Smith MW (2017) 3-D uncertainty-based topographic change detection with structure-from-motion photogrammetry: precision maps for ground control and directly georeferenced surveys. Earth Surf Process Landf 42(12):1769–1788. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4125CrossRef
Ji ZM, Chen ZJ, Niu QH, Wang TH, Wang TJ, Chen TL (2020) A calculation model of the normal coefficient of restitution based on multi-factor interaction experiments. Landslides 18:1531–1553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01556-7CrossRef
Ji ZM, Hu SM, Chen ZJ, Niu QH, Wang TH, Wu FQ (2021) Laboratory investigation of the effect of the rotational speed on the coefficient of restitution. Eng Geol 292:106196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106196
Kabisch N, Korn H, Stadler J, Bonn A (2016) Nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas. Springer, Cham, Switzerland
Kenner R, Buhler Y, Delaloye R, Ginzler C, Phillips M (2014) Monitoring of high alpine mass movements combining laser scanning with digital airborne photogrammetry. Geomorphology 206:492–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.10.020CrossRef
Kumar P, Debele SE, Sahani J, Aragao L, Barisani F, Basu B, Bucchignani E, Charizopoulos N, Di Sabatino S, Domeneghetti A, Edo AS, Finér L, Gallotti G, Juch S, Leo LS, Loupis M, Mickovski SB, Panga D, Pavlova I, Pilla F, Prats AL, Renaud FG, Rutzinger M, Sarkar A, Shah MAR, Soini K, Stefanopoulou M, Toth E, Ukonmaanaho L, Vranic S, Zieher T (2020) Towards an operationalization of nature-based solutions for natural hazards. Sci Total Environ 731:138855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138855
Kumar P, Debele SE, Jeetendra S, Rawat N, Marti-Cardona B, Alfieri SM, Basu B, Basu AS, Bowyer P, Charizopoulos N, Jaakko J, Loupis M, Menenti M, Mickovski SB, Pfeiffer J, Pilla F, Pröll J, Pulvirenti B, Rutzinger M, Sannigrahi S, Spyrou C, Tuomenvirta H, Vojinovic Z, Zieher T (2021) An overview of monitoring methods for assessing the performance of nature-based solutions against natural hazards. Earth Sci Rev 217:103603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103603
Li X, Dong M, Jiang D, Li S, Shang Y (2020) The effect of surface roughness on normal restitution coefficient, adhesion force and friction coefficient of the particle-wall collision. Powder Technol 362:17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2019.11.120
Margottini C, Spizzichino D (2021) Traditional knowledge and local expertise in landslide risk mitigation of world heritages sites. In: Sassa K, Mikoš M, Sassa S, Bobrowsky PT, Takara K, Dang K (eds) Understanding and reducing landslide disaster risk. WLF 2020. ICL Contribution to Landslide Disaster Risk Reduction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60196-634
Marinos P, Hoek E (2000) GSI: a geologically friendly tool for rock mass strength estimation. GeoEng2000. Technomic Publ 1422–1442
Morales T, Clemente JA, Damas Mollá L, Izagirre E, Uriarte JA (2021) Analysis of instabilities in the Basque Coast Geopark coastal cliffs for its environmentally friendly management (Basque-Cantabrian basin, northern Spain). Eng Geol 283:106023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106023
Naumann S, Kaphengst T, McFarland K, Stadler J (2014) Nature-based approaches for climate change mitigation and adaptation. In: The challenges of climate change – partnering with nature. German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN). Ecologic Institute, Bonn
Paliaga G, Giostrella P, Faccini F (2016) Terraced landscape as cultural and environmental heritage at risk: an example from Portofino Park (Italy). Annales Ser Hist Sociol 26(3):1–10. https://doi.org/10.19233/ASHS.2016.32
Paliaga G, Luino F, Turconi L, De Graff JV, Faccini F (2020) Terraced landscapes on Portofino Promontory (Italy): identification, geo-hydrological hazard and management. Water 12(2):435. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12020435CrossRef
Paliaga G, Luino F, Turconi L, Profeta M, Vojinovic Z, Cucchiaro S, Faccini F (2022). Terraces Landscapes as NBSs for Geo-Hydrological Hazard Mitigation: towards a Methodology for Debris and Soil Volume Estimations through a LiDAR Survey. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14153586CrossRef
Pazzi V, Morelli S, Fanti R (2019) A review of the advantages and limitations of geophysical investigations in landslide studies. Int J Geophys 2. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/2983087
Perrone A, Canora F, Calamita G, Bellanova J, Serlenga V, Panebianco S, Tragni N, Piscitelli S, Doglioni A, Simeone V, Sdao F, Lapenna V (2021) A multidisciplinary approach for landslide residual risk assessment: the Pomarico landslide (Basilicata Region, Southern Italy) case study. Landslides 18:353–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01526-zCrossRef
Pfeiffer T, Bowen TD (1989) Computer simulation of rockfalls. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 26:135–146
Pham BT, Pradhan B, Tien Bui D, Prakash I, Dholakia MB (2016) A comparative study of different machine learning methods for landslide susceptibility assessment: a case study of Uttarakhand area (India). Environ Model Softw 84:240–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.07.005CrossRef
Pontee N, Narayan S, Beck MW, Hosking AH (2016) Nature-based solutions: lessons from around the world. Inst Civ Eng Proc Marit Eng 169:29–36. https://doi.org/10.1680/jmaen.15.00027CrossRef
Prades-Valls A, Corominas J, Lantada N, Matas G, Núñez-Andrés MA (2022) Capturing rockfall kinematic and fragmentation parameters using high-speed camera system. Eng Geol 302:106629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2022.106629
Preti F, Errico A, Castelli G (2021) Terraced landscapes and hydrological-geological hazards: innovative approaches and future perspectives. Water 13(13):1728. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131728CrossRef
Ratter BMW (2013) Surprise and uncertainty- framing regional geohazards in the theory of complexity. Humanities 2:1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/h2010001CrossRef
Rieg L, Wichmann V, Rutzinger M, Sailer R, Geist T, Stotter J (2014) Data infrastructure for multitemporal airborne LiDAR point cloud analysis—examples from physical geography in high mountain environments. Comput Environ Urban Syst 45:137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2013.11.004CrossRef
Roccati A, Paliaga G, Luino F, Faccini F, Turconi L (2020) Rainfall threshold for shallow landslides initiation and analysis of long-term rainfall trends in a Mediterranean area. Atmosphere 11:1367. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11121367CrossRef
Roccati A, Paliaga G, Luino F, Faccini F, Turconi L (2021) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for land use planning and risk assessment. Land 10:162. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10020162CrossRef
Ruangpan L, Vojinovic Z, Di Sabatino S, Leo LS, Capobianco V, Oen AMP, McClain M, Lopez-Gunn E (2019) Nature-based solutions for hydro-meteorological risk reduction: a state-of-the-art review of the research area. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci Discuss. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2019-128
Sardana S, Sinha RK, Verma AK, Jaswal M, Singh TN (2022) A semi-empirical approach for rockfall prediction along the Lengpui-Aizawl highway Mizoram. Geotech Geol Eng, India. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-022-02229-zCrossRef
Sarro R, Riquelme A, García-Davalillo JC, Mateos RM, Tomás R, Pastor JL, Cano M, Herrera G (2018) Rockfall simulation base don UAV photogrammetry data obtained during an emergency declaration: application at a cultural heritage site. Remote Sens 10(12):1923. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10121923CrossRef
Shadabfar M, Mahsuli M, Zhang Y, Xue Y, Huang H (2022) Probabilistic data-driven framework for performance assessment of retaining walls against rockfalls. Probabilistic Eng Mech 70:103339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2022.103339
Spizzichino D, Margottini C, Chiessi V, Boldini D (2016) Assessment of the stability conditions of a large-volume sandstone block in the northern sector of the Siq of Petra. Landslides and Engineered Slopes. Experience, Theory and Practice 1851–1858
Tang J, Zhou X, Liang K, Lai Y, Zhou G, Tan J (2021) Experimental sutyd on the coefficient of restitution for the rotational sphere rockfall. Environ Earth Sci 80:419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-021-09684-6CrossRef
Terranova R (1964) Le frane del Castellaro e di S.Rocco sul versante occidentale del Promontorio di Portofino. Atti Ist Geol Università di Genova 342–376
Terrone M, Paliaga G, Bazzurro N, Marchese A, Faccini F (2021) Groundwater resources in a fractured-rock aquifer. Conglomerate of Portofino, J Maps 17(2):268–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2021.1911868CrossRef
Touili N, Baztan J, Vanderlinden JP, Kane IO, Diaz-Simal P, Pietrantoni L (2014) Public perception of engineering-based coastal flooding and erosion risk mitigation options: lessons from three European coastal settings. Coast Eng 87:205–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2014.01.004CrossRef
Turconi L, Faccini F, Marchese A, Paliaga G, Casazza M, Vojinovic Z, Luino F (2020) Implementation of nature-based solutions for hydro-meteorological risk reduction in small Mediterranean catchments: the case of Portofino Natural Regional Park. Italy Sustainability 12(3):1240. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031240CrossRef
Van der Meulen F, Ijff S, Van Zetten R (2022) Nature-based solutions for coastal adaptation management, concepts and scope, an overview. Nord J Bot e03290. https://doi.org/10.1111/njb.03290
Villegas-Palacio C, Berrouet L, Marsiglia S (2020) Adaptive capacity of households to degradation of ecosystem services: a case study in the Colombian Andes. Environ Manag 66:162–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01305-5CrossRef
Vojinovic Z, Keerakamolchai W, Torres AS, Weesakul S, Meesuk V, Alves A, Babel MS (2021) Towards holistic and multifunctional design of green and blue infrastructure for climate change adaptation in cultural heritage areas. In: Babel, M., Haarstrick, A., Ribbe, L., Shinde, V.R., Dichtl, D. (Eds.), Water security in Asia - opportunities and challenges in the context of climate change. Springer Water Series, Cham 381–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54612-4_28
Volkwein A, Schellenberg K, Labiouse V, Agliardi F, Berger F, Bourrier F, Dorren LKA, Gerber W, Jaboyedoff M (2011) Rockfall characterisation and structural protection – a review. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11:2617–2651. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-11-2617-2011CrossRef
Wang L, Zheng Z, Yu Y, Liu T, Zhang Z (2020) Determination of the energetic coefficient of restitution of maize grain based on laboratory experiments and DEM simulations. Powder Technol 362:645–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2019.12.024CrossRef
Ye Y, Zeng Y, Chen X, Sun H, Ma W, Peng Z (2021) Development of a viscoelastoplastic contact model for the size- and velocity-dependent normal restitution coefficient of a rock sphere upon impact. Comput Geotech 132: 104014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104014
Zhang JY, Li HB, Yang XG, Jiang N, Zhou JW (2021) Quantitative assessment of rockfall hazard in post-landslide high rock slope through terrestrial laser scanning. Bull Eng Geol Environ 80(10):7315–7331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-021-02426-9CrossRef