Rainfall and land use empirically coupled to forecast landslides in the Esino river basin, central Italy

Gioia, Eleonora; Carone, T.; Marincioni, Fausto

doi:10.5194/nhess-15-1289-2015

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…LULCCs occur over a relatively short period, in addition to more long-term landslidecontrolling factors related to lithology, geological structure, geomorphology and soils (Persichillo et al, 2016;Pisano et al, 2016). Thus, LULCCs can be considered both as a conditioning as well as a triggering factor for the occurrence of mass movements (Gariano et al, 2018;Gioia et al, 2015;Promper et al, 2014;Vanacker et al, 2003), especially for rainfall-induced shallow landslides (Beguería, 2006;Cevasco et al, 2014;Chen and Huang, 2013;Glade, 2003;Malek et al, 2015;Persichillo et al, 2017Persichillo et al, , 2016Pisano et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the relation between land use changes and the 2018 landslide disaster in Kerala, India

Hao¹,

Westen²,

Rajaneesh³

et al. 2022

CATENA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the relation between land use changes and the 2018 landslide disaster in Kerala, India

Hao¹,

Westen²,

Rajaneesh³

et al. 2022

CATENA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In order to perform forecasting analyses, a complete risk assessment has to be carried out to evaluate cost/benefit ratio of pre-event actions; more refined models recently proposed by some authors (Bordoni et al, 2015;Gioia et al, 2015) would be recommended to improve both spatial and temporal prediction of landslides and induced damages on slope and large scales. However, the adoption of more refined tools could affect the costs of landslide prevention assessment; therefore, a cost/benefit analysis is always a primary crucial step before choosing between the numerous investigation methods proposed in the scientific literature (Dai et al, 2002, and references therein;Guzzetti et al, 2005a), which often lead to very similar results (Othman et al, 2015) depending mainly on site characteristics and available data .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detailed and large-scale cost/benefit analyses of landslide prevention vs. post-event actions

Salbego

Floris

Busnardo

et al. 2015

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The main aim of this paper is to test economic benefits of landslide prevention measures vs. post-event emergency actions. To this end, detailed-and large-scale analyses were performed in a training area located in the northeastern Italian pre-Alps that was hit by an exceptional rainfall event occurred in November 2010. On the detailed scale, a landslide reactivated after 2010 event was investigated. Numerical modeling demonstrated that remedial works carried out after the landslide -water-removal intervention such as a drainage trench -could have improved slope stability if applied before its occurrence. Then, a cost/benefit analysis was employed. It defined that prevention would have been economically convenient compared to a non-preventive and passive attitude, allowing a 30 % saving relative to total costs. On the large scale, one of the most affected areas after 2010 event was considered. A susceptibility analysis was performed using a simple probabilistic model, which allowed to highlight the main landslide conditioning factors and the most hazardous and vulnerable sectors. In particular, such low-cost analysis demonstrated that almost 50 % of landslides occurred after 2010 event could be foreseen and allowed to roughly quantify benefits from regional landslide prevention. However, a large-scale approach is insufficient to carry out a quantitative cost/benefit analysis, for which a detailed case-by-case risk assessment is needed. The here proposed approaches could be used as a means of preventive soil protection in not only the investigated case study but also all those hazardous areas where preventive measures are needed.

show abstract

“…In this work we performed quite simple analyses, which considered landslides occurred in the past (before and during the 2010 rainfall event), to point out possible benefits from landslide prevention on different scales. In order to perform forecasting analyses, a complete risk assessment has to be carried out to evaluate cost/benefit ratio of pre-event actions; more refined models recently proposed by some authors (Bordoni et al, 2015;Gioia et al, 2015) would be recommended to improve both spatial and temporal prediction of landslides and induced damages on slope and large scales. However, the adoption of more refined tools could affect the costs of landslide prevention assessment; therefore, a cost/benefit analysis is always a primary crucial step before choosing between the numerous investigation methods proposed in the scientific literature (Dai et al, 2002, and references therein;Guzzetti et al, 2005a), which often lead to very similar results (Othman et al, 2015) depending mainly on site characteristics and available data (Lagomarsino et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multi-scale approach to cost/benefit analyses of landslide prevention vs. post-event actions

Salbego¹,

Floris²,

Busnardo³

et al. 2015

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The main aim of this paper is to test economic benefits of landslide prevention measures vs. post-event emergency actions. To this end, small and large scale analyses were performed in a training area located in the North-Eastern Italian pre-Alps that was hit by an exceptional rainfall event occurred in November 2010. At the small-scale, landslide susceptibility was initially assessed using a simple probabilistic analysis, which allowed to highlight the main landslide conditioning factors and the most hazardous areas. However, this approach revealed to be quite insufficient to reach planned goals, so a large-scale case-by-case analysis was performed: a study case was defined, according to landslide occurrence frequency and assessment of elements at risk. Numerical modeling demonstrated that remedial works carried out after the landslide – water-removal intervention such as a drainage trench – could have improved slope stability if applied before its occurrence. Then, a cost-benefit analysis was finally employed. It defined that prevention would have been economically convenient compared to a non-preventive and passive attitude, allowing a 30% saving relative to total costs. Therefore, this kind of approach could be actually used as a mean toward preventive soil protection not only within the investigated case study, but also in all those hazardous areas where preventive measures are needed.

show abstract

Rainfall and land use empirically coupled to forecast landslides in the Esino river basin, central Italy

Cited by 13 publications

References 16 publications

Evaluating the relation between land use changes and the 2018 landslide disaster in Kerala, India

Evaluating the relation between land use changes and the 2018 landslide disaster in Kerala, India

Detailed and large-scale cost/benefit analyses of landslide prevention vs. post-event actions

A multi-scale approach to cost/benefit analyses of landslide prevention vs. post-event actions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About