Journal cover Journal topic
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 2.281 IF 2.281
  • IF 5-year value: 2.693 IF 5-year 2.693
  • CiteScore value: 2.43 CiteScore 2.43
  • SNIP value: 1.193 SNIP 1.193
  • SJR value: 0.965 SJR 0.965
  • IPP value: 2.31 IPP 2.31
  • h5-index value: 40 h5-index 40
  • Scimago H index value: 73 Scimago H index 73
Discussion papers
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2018-271
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2018-271
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Research article 13 Nov 2018

Research article | 13 Nov 2018

Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. It is a manuscript under review for the journal Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).

Simple rules to minimize exposure to coseismic landslide hazard

David G. Milledge1, Alexander L. Densmore2, Dino Bellugi3, Nick J. Rosser2, Jack Watt2, Gen Li4, and Katie J. Oven2 David G. Milledge et al.
  • 1School of Engineering, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
  • 2Institute of Hazard, Risk, and Resilience and Department of Geography, Durham University, Durham, UK
  • 3Department of Geography, University of California, Berkeley, USA
  • 4Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA

Abstract. Landslides constitute a hazard to life and infrastructure, and their risk is mitigated primarily by reducing exposure. This requires information on landslide hazard at a scale that can enable informed decisions about how to respond to that hazard. Such information is often unavailable to, or not easily interpreted by, those who might need it most (e.g., householders, local government, and NGOs). To address this shortcoming, we develop simple rules to identify landslide hazard that are understandable, communicable, and memorable, and that require no prior knowledge, skills, or equipment to evaluate. We examine rules based on two common metrics of landslide hazard, local slope and upslope contributing area as a proxy for hillslope location, and we introduce and test two new metrics: the maximum angle to the skyline and the hazard area, defined as the upslope area with slope >39° that reaches a location without passing over a slope of <10°. We then test the skill with which each metric can identify landslide hazard – the probability of being hit by a landslide – using inventories of landslides triggered by six recent earthquakes. We find that the maximum skyline angle and hazard area provide the most skilful predictions, and these results form the basis for two simple rules: minimize your maximum angle to the skyline and avoid steep (>10°) channels with many steep (>39°) areas that are upslope. Because local slope alone is a skilful predictor of landslide hazard, we can formulate a third rule as minimise local slope, especially on steep slopes and even at the expense of increasing upslope contributing area, but not at the expense of increasing skyline angle or hazard area. Upslope contributing area, by contrast, has a weaker and more complex relationship to hazard than the other predictors. Our simple rules complement, but do not replace, detailed site-specific investigation; they can be used for initial estimation of landslide hazard or guide decision-making in the absence of any other information.

David G. Milledge et al.
Interactive discussion
Status: open (until 08 Jan 2019)
Status: open (until 08 Jan 2019)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
[Subscribe to comment alert] Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
David G. Milledge et al.
David G. Milledge et al.
Viewed  
Total article views: 240 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
178 59 3 240 13 1 1
  • HTML: 178
  • PDF: 59
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 240
  • Supplement: 13
  • BibTeX: 1
  • EndNote: 1
Views and downloads (calculated since 13 Nov 2018)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 13 Nov 2018)
Viewed (geographical distribution)  
Total article views: 231 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 231 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Cited  
Saved  
No saved metrics found.
Discussed  
No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 13 Dec 2018
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
Mitigating landslide risk requires information on landslide hazard at a suitable scale to inform decisions. We develop simple rules to identify landslide hazard – the probability of being hit by a landslide – then test their performance using six existing landslide inventories from recent earthquakes. We find that the best rules are: minimize your maximum look angle to the skyline and avoid steep (> 10°) channels with many steep (> 39°) areas that are upslope.
Mitigating landslide risk requires information on landslide hazard at a suitable scale to inform...
Citation
Share