Alpine Mass Movements: Implications for hazard assessment and mapping Seite 1 Seite 2 Inhalt Florian Rudolf-Miklau, Richard Bäk, Franz Schmid, Christoph Skolaut: Hazard Mapping for Mass Movements: Strategic Importance and Transnational Development of Standards in the ASP-Project ADAPTALP Seite 3 Imprint / Disclosure Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Marxergasse 2, 1030 Vienna, Austria. Verein der Diplomingenieure der Wildbach- und Lawinenverbauung, Bergheimerstrasse 57, 5021 Salzburg, Austria Editorial Team: Florian Rudolf-Miklau, Richard Bäk, Christoph Skolaut and Franz Schmid Coordination: Barbara Kogelnig-Mayer Layout: Studio Kopfsache, Mondsee Cite as: BMLFUW (2011): Alpine Mass Movements: Implications for hazard assessment and mapping, Special Edition of Journal of Torrent, Avalanche, Landslide and Rock Fall Engineering No. 166. This publication was implemented within the framework of EU-project AdaptAlp, Workpackage 5, and is co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) Florian Rudolf-Miklau: Principles of Hazard Assessment and Mapping Richard Bäk, Hugo Raetzo, Karl Mayer, Andreas von Poschinger, Gerlinde Posch-Trözmüller: Mapping of Geological Hazards: Methods, Standards and Procedures (State of Development) - Overview Mateja Jemec & Marko Komac: An Overview of Approaches for Hazard Assessment of Slope Mass Movements BLOCK 1: Key-note papers Roland Norer: Legal Framework for Assessment and Mapping of Geological Hazards on the International, European and National Levels Karl Mayer, Bernhard Lochner: Wolfram Bitterlich: Internationally Harmonized Terminology for Wildbachverbauung und Ökologie Widerspruch oder sinnvolle Ergänzung? Geological Risk: Glossary (Overview) Michael Mölk, Thomas Sausgruber, Richard Bäk, Arben Kociu: Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Rapid Mass Movements (Rock Fall and Landslide) in Austria Hugo Raetzo, Bernard Loup: Geological Hazard Assessment in Switzerland Cover picture: Großhangbewegung Rindberg, Gde. Sibratsgfäll, Vorarlberg Source: die.wildbach BLOCK 2 Stefano Campus: Landslide Mapping in Piemonte (Italy): Danger, Hazard & Risk Seite 102 Seite 94 Seite 82 Seite 70 Seite 64 Seite 48 Seite 24 Seite 14 Seite Seite12 6 Seite 4 Inhalt Marko Komac, Mateja Jemec: Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Rapid Mass Movements in Slovenia Seite 5 BLOCK 2: Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Karl Mayer, Andreas von Poschinger: Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Geological Dangers (Mass Movements) in Bavaria Didier Richard: Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Rapid Mass Movements in France Pere Oller, Marta González, Jordi Pinyol, Jordi Marturià, Pere Martínez: Goeohazards Mapping in Catalonia Claire Foster, Matthew Harrison & Helen J. Reeves: Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Mass Movements in Great Britain Karl Mayer, Bernhard Lochner: International Comparison: Summary of the Expert Hearing in Bolzano on 17 March 2010 Seite 158 Seite 150 Seite 142 Seite 130 Seite 118 Seite 108 Seite 6 Zusammenfassung: Massenbewegungen (Steinschlag, Rutschungen, Felsgleitungen) bedrohen den alpinen Lebensraum und verursachen zahlreiche Risiken. Durch die intensive Raumnutzung in den Bergtälern besteht ein zunehmender Bedarf an genauen Gefahrenkarten für diese Gefahrenarten. Aufgrund fehlender Daten und zuverlässiger Methoden für die Gefahrenbeurteilung wurden bisher keine generellen Standards für die Gefahrdarstellung von Rutschungen und Steinschlägen entwickelt. Die Unsicherheit in der Beurteilung der Gefahren wird durch den Einfluss des Klimawandels noch erhöht. Das Projekt ADAPTALP zielt darauf ab, diese Lücke durch die Entwicklung transnationaler Standards für die Gefahrenzonenplanung für Massenbewegungen zu schließen. “snow avalanches”. However there are no legal Alpine Space at risk: Importance of hazard maps FLORIAN RUDOLF-MIKLAU, RICHARD BÄK, FRANZ SCHMID, CHRISTOPH SKOLAUT In the Alpine countries, natural hazards constitute a security risk in many regions. Floods, debris flows, avalanches, landslides and rock falls threaten people, their living environments, their settlements and economic areas, transport routes, supply lines, and other infrastructure. They constitute a major threat to the bases of existence of the population. The increasing settlement pressure and area consumption, the opening up of transport routes in the Alps as well as strong growth rates in tourism have brought about a considerable spatial extension of endangered areas. With the rising demands on welfare and quality of life, the need for safety and protection (technical) standards available for the outline of areas endangered by mass movements (e.g. landslides, rock fall). The assessment of these processes concerning the frequency and intensity of events (disasters) is difficult and demanding due to the lack of measurements and basic data. In addition, the knowledge of geotechnical parameters, physical properties and triggering mechanisms of the displacement processes still are fragmentary, although wide progress were achieved by improved monitoring methods and the detailed analysis of past events. Recently the expansion of settlement areas in Alpine valleys and the growing vulnerability of human facilities have significantly increased the risk for natural disasters caused by mass movements. The growing demand for hazard maps that cover these risky processes has initiated strong efforts in all mountainous countries in Europe to develop exact methods and appropriate standards that enable the production of hazard maps for mass movements with sufficient accuracy. By bundling these initiatives the ASP (Alpine Space Program/Funding Initiative of the European Commission) project ADAPTALP – in cooperation with other projects like SAFELAND, PERMANET or MASSMOVE – aims at the development of technical standards and provision of harmonized quality criteria for all member states. Hazard Mapping for Mass Movements: Strategic Importance and Transnational Development of Standards in the ASP-Project ADAPTALP Gefahrendarstellung von Massenbewegungen: Strategische Bedeutung und länderübergreifende Entwicklung von Standards im Projekt ADALPTALP Summary: Mass movements (rock falls, landslides, rock slides) are major threats for the Alpine living space and cause various risks. Due to the intensive land use in the mountain valleys, there is an urgent need for reliable hazard maps for these types of hazards. Missing data and the lack of reliable methods for the assessment of hazards has obstructed the development of general standards in hazard mapping for landslides and rock fall. The uncertainties and inaccuracies of models are increased by the impact of climate change. The project ADAPTALP (within the Alpine Space Program) aims to close this gap by creating transnational standards for hazard mapping concerning geological risks (mass movements). of the population increased as well. Hazard maps that show areas at risk by natural hazards are of paramount importance for the development of Alpine regions. The maps count among the active planning measures in natural hazard management and serve to the safety of existing settlements and their inhabitants as well as to the steering of land-use only outside of endangered areas. Since the beginning of 1970’s, these maps have been established in several countries (Switzerland, Austria, France) for the hazards “flood”, “debris flow” and Seite 7 The magnitude of the gravitational force is related to the angle of the slope and the weight of slope sediments and rock. Mass movement occurs when the stresses exceed the internal strength. from waste piles and from buildings and other structures. Mass movements per definition are movements of bodies of soil. Saturation of soil materials can also reduce the cohesive bonds between individual soil particles resulting in the reduction of the internal strength of the slope. Mudflows occur when slope materials become so saturated that the cohesive bonds between particles is lost. Slopes consisting of silt and clay particles obtain it from particle cohesion. loss of productivity of agricultural lands affected by landslides. reduced real estate values in landslide prone areas. down slope movement of rock can also occur along welldefined joints or bedding planes. forestry. the type of movement (falling. spontaneous events. and human settlement. damming up bodies of water. 1: Rutschung in bindigem Boden resultierend aus Hanginstabilitäten und Wassersättigung des Bodens. Instable slopes can also become a hazard to humans if their materials move rapidly through the process of mass wasting. Slow movement of creep does more long term economic damage to roads. • Vibrations from machinery. The two most important parameters in mass movement is the angle of friction and the cohesion. the presence of bedding planes in the slope material can cause material above a particular plane below ground level to slide along a surface lubricated by percolating moisture. This type of movement is called rock slide. Instability is not always caused by an increase in stress. and where F is gravitational force. Failure of the slope material can occur over a range of time scales. Mass movement on hard rock slopes is often dramatic and quick.Seite 8 Mass movements: Hazard processes on slopes A variety of processes exist by which materials can be moved through the slope system. as a viscous stream. In a mudflow there is enough water to allow the mixture to flow easily. In the Alps. Landslides can suddenly rush down a steep slope causing great destruction across a wide area of habitable land and sometimes also floods by relationship between the stresses applied to the materials that make up the slope and their internal strength. One of the most common is prolonged or heavy rainfall. The stability of a slope depends on the Mass movements have direct indirect impact on a number of human activities. as well as loss of tax revenues on devalued properties. the internal strength of the materials can be reduced resulting in the triggering of a mass movement. which is controlled by the availability of moisture in the soil. The steepness and structural stability of slopes determines their suitability for agriculture. Mass movement can also be a less continuous process that occurs over long periods of time. sediments such as residual soil and bed rock which usually occur along steep-sided slopes and mountains. Larger scale. shape. such as: • Earthquake down. and arrangement Seite 9 . such as sand and gravel. These processes are generically known as mass movement or mass wasting. the enlargement of joints during weathering and/or freeze-thaw processes (rock fall). Sudden failures tend to occur when the stresses exerted on the slope materials greatly exceed their strength for short periods of time. Additionally. derive their internal strength from frictional resistance. The saturation of soil materials with water increases the weight of slope materials which then leads to greater gravitational force. 1: Land slide in cohesive soil resulting from slope instabilities and saturation of material by water. the lithological property of the slope materials. and the amount of water in the material. W is the weight of the material occurring at some point on the slope. traffic. Slow failures often occur when the applied stresses only just exceed the internal strength of the slope system. Lastly. Rock slopes generally have the greatest internal strength due to the crystalline structures. Expenses related to landslides include actual damages to structures or property. a large variety of other trigger mechanism for mass movement other than the gravitational are known. Slopes formed from clays and silt display somewhat unique mass sediments movement processes. Other factors that affect mass movements are the steepness of slopes. Not only rapid types of mass movements are harmful. Mass movements can be classified due to the rate of movement (rapid or slow). Rainfall can lead to mass movement through three different mechanisms. mass movements occur in a wide range of processes consisting of bedrock and soil or a mixture of both. • Human modification of the land or shocks cause sections of mountains and hills to break off and slide weathering and erosion help loosen large chunks of earth and start them sliding downhill. Abb. railroads. sediments or rock debris). The predominant source of stress is the gravitational force. In some cases. Slopes composed of loose materials. sliding or flowing) and to the type of material involved (soil. The following equation models this relationship: F = W sin Ø of the particles. and Ø is the angle of the slope. Some types of mass movement involve rather rapid. Mudflows can occur on very low slope angles because internal particle frictional resistance and cohesion is negligible. building structure and underground pipes. Often these mechanisms do not act alone. which depends on the size. Fig. and loss of industrial productivity because of interruption of transportation systems by landslides. Both of these processes occur over very short time periods. weight loading from accumulation of snow. The operation of mass movement processes relies upon the development of instability in the slope system. These processes can be caused by a variety of factors. Many factors can act as triggers for slope failure. Two common types of mass movements in these cohesive materials are rotational slips (slumps) and mudflows. They involve the downward movement of small rock fragments pried loose by gravitational stress. Rotational slips or slumps occur along clearly defined planes of weakness which generally have a concave form beneath the earth's surface. stockpiling of rock. Rock slides often occur when a fracture plane develops causing overlying materials to slide down slope. The most common mechanical reason for them to occur is erosion at the base of the slope which reduces the support for overlying sediments. A general “state-of-the-art” for hazard mapping concerning mass movements seems to be within reach. Switzerland. on land use planning): Typical cases are studies carried out by universities (research institutes). to a large extent. regional.Seite 10 An earth flow is slower moving than a mudflow and involves a mass of material that retains rather distinct boundaries as it moves. investigation methods. potential risks and the vulnerability of endangered areas (objects). The uncertainties and the increase of natural hazards due to the impacts of climate change require concerted management in the Alpine Space. The impact of climate change increases these uncertainties. It must be managed on a transnational. Norway). hazard index map.g. the more efficiently adaptation strategies on local and regional level can be implemented. 1: Typen von Massenbewegungen (Klassifikation) ASP-project ADAPTALP: Adaptation of natural hazard management to climate change Climate change is. da gefährdete Gebiete immer stärker genutzt werden. 2: Die Entwicklung von länderübergreifenden Standards in der Gefahrendarstellung ist bei der Prävention von Katastrophenereignissen von großer Bedeutung. Tab. • Hazards: Spatial and temporal probability. an important issue tackled by ADAPTALP is the provision of reliable data and models for this kind of processes. Landslide inventories can be made by means of a historical or morphological approach. A major impact on the intensity of mass movements at high altitudes (above 2300 m in the Alps) has thaw of permafrost and the retreat of glaciers due Seite 11 . national. France. The legal significance of these maps requires technical standards and a “stateof-the-art” concerning formal requirements (e. Germany. Tab. The transnational exchange of knowledge and the international harmonization in method and procedure will raise the quality of hazard assessment considerably. regional and local scale to effectively save human life. The more reliable the information basis. there is still a lack of precise data taking climate change into account. slope instabilities. local). 2. Along with the harmonization Hazard zones are designated areas threatened by natural risks such as avalanches. The basis for hazard maps is a comprehensive assessment of geological and hydro(geo)logical framework conditions. landslides or flooding. Slovenia) and other European states with a considerable share of mountain regions (Great Britain. Italy. 2: Transnational standards in hazard mapping are of major importance for the prevention of catastrophic events according to land use in endangered areas. Susceptibility/Hazard index/Hazard maps that have direct (obligatory) consequences for land use planning and building trade at different scale: The scale used to present the results of the hazard assessment depends on the desired product (susceptibility map. Spain. hazard zone map) and must be balanced with the precision requirements according to the spatial level of application (supra-regional. constituted by increasing temperatures and changed precipitation patterns. these theoretical concepts are well of terminology. Debris flows occur on slopes as well as in laterally confined channels. Scientific studies on mass movements with no legal implications (e. The ADAPTALP project (www. Abb. relevant triggering mechanisms. known by experts but may cause problems in practice when applied in a legal framework. The project is based on an integrated transnational approach. That means that a comprehensive comparison of all available standards and methods is carried out covering all countries in the Alpine region (Austria. morphology. Engineering soil predominantly … … coarse Fall Topple Slide Spread Flow Rock fall Rock avalanche Rock topple Rock slide Rock spread (Rock flow) (Debris fall) (Debris topple) Debris slide (Debris spread) Debris flow (in channels) … fine (Earth fall) (Earth topple) Earth slide (Earth spread) Earth flow to the increasing temperatures.g. 1: Types of mass movements (classification) after Raetzo. When geological mapping hazards inventory maps used as hazard Type Bedrock (mass movements) in principle we have to distinguish between two situations: 1.org) focuses on the harmonization of the various national approaches and methods for the assessment of hazards related to mass movements. Nevertheless. • Risks: Interaction between a threat having particular hazard and human activities. The result is an insufficient accuracy of available models and inaccurate prediction of natural hazard and menacing catastrophic events. documentation).adaptalp. inventory of mass movements). The aim of these studies is to understand the mechanical features of instability or to study different ways of evolution of the phenomenon (scenarios) in order to assess the susceptibility of investigated areas. Hazard maps for mass movements Fig. For example it is often to find landslide or risk maps. properties of displacement processes. intensity and forecasting of evolution (scenarios) are needed. Harmonized cross-sectoral hazard assessment and hazard mapping must be balanced on a transnational level. It is not unusual for unsuitable types of hazard maps to be applied for the wrong purposes. settlements and infrastructure. The term implies a heterogeneous mixture of materials including a considerable fraction of particles that are coarser than the particles in mud. Consequently it is essential to distinguish the three aspects of mass movement assessment and mapping: • Dangers (susceptibilities): Assessment and characterization of threat (typology. Any change of these critical factors has implications on the frequency and extent of natural hazards including mass movements. In principle. The formulation of these hazard zones is an important aspect of spatial planning. “Debris flow” is a term used generally for rapid mass movements consisting of water and residual soil. Taylor and Francis/Balkema. In: Bezzola
[email protected] DI Franz Schmid Bundesministerium für Land. John Wiley & Sons. 3: Beispiel einer Suszeptibilitätskarte der Arlbergregion (Vorarlberg/Österreich) nach Ruff hazards during land use planning by the local administrations and during the land use as well as for the planning of preventive measures. 2009. ADAPTALP (in Work Package 5) will harmonize and improve different evaluate. Therefore similarities should be worked out and the “least common denominator” in the methods of hazard mapping should be found.: (+43 1) 71 100 . 0707. They will include “minimum requirements for the creation of danger (susceptibility).R. • Development of tools for the reduction of the risk potential by consideration of the methods of hazard mapping applied in the Alpine area. BABERO S. Seite 13 . WYSS R. ANDERSON M.at/forst project contain the topics to work out the “minimum standards” (minimal requirements) for the creation of danger (susceptibility) and hazard maps for landslides. The first step is the evaluation of the “state of the art” in hazard mapping in each involved country. Enviroment and Water Management. Karlsruhe. 2006. Forestry. Florian Rudolf-Miklau Bundesministerium für Land. A.7399 Mail: franz. J. 2005. Abt. Marxergasse 2 Tel.skolaut@die-wildbach. BOVO S. water resources monograph 18.: (+43 1) 71 100 . Chichester.. OCHIAI H.: Landslides processes. Swiss Bull. 3: Example for a susceptibility map of the Arlberg region (Vorarlberg/Austria) after Ruff Abb.7399 Mail: florian.und Lawinenverbauung Federal Ministry for Agriculture. Wildbach.. Wildbach. Schäden und erste Einordnung.(0) 50536 .und Lawinenverbauung Federal Ministry for Agriculture.und Forstwirtschaft.: (+43 662) 871853 – 303 FAX: (+43 662) 870215 Mail: christoph.: Glossary of Geology. Enviroment and Water Management. Torrent and Avalanche Control 1030 Wien. Bundesamt für Umwelt BAFU. +43 . RUFF.: Anleitung zur Analyse von Rutschungen.lebensministerium. JACKSON J. Österreich). A – 9020 Klagenfurt. C. Richard Bäk Amt der Kärntner Landesregierung.at Homepage: http://www. a climate change adaptation strategy.lebensministerium.gv. CAMPUS S.): Evaluation and prevention of natural risks. C. Department IV/5. Teil 1 – Prozesse. In selected model regions methods to adapt risk analysis to the impact of climate change will be tested.41500 Mob.lebensministerium. which are used in several countries. (HRG. Marxergasse 2 Tel. (EDS. A main emphasis will be on a comparison of methods for mapping geological hazards in the individual countries. Abteilung IV/5.. RAETZO. These fields of research within the Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: DI Dr. Umwelt-Wissen Nr. hazard and risk maps”. (Hrsg. hazard and risk maps are officially applied in each country? • Which standards are these maps based on? The second step will be the “harmonization” of the different methods. GRUNER U. District Salzburg 5020 Salzburg.schmid@lebensministerium. Geol.8053631510 Mail: richard.7338 FAX: (+43 1) 71 100.(0) 50536 . RICKLI. Torrent and Avalanche Control 1030 Wien. Abteilung IV/5. prediction and land use. American Geographical Union. GLADE T.Seite 12 hazard assessment and procedures of the check and approval of the maps. Other important results – developed in cooperation with other projects as MASSMOVE – will be: • Definition of minimal requirements for the collection of the relevant data of endangered areas and cartographic representation of slides and rock falls. C.) 2007: Ereignisanalyse Hochwasser 2005. The final step will be the creation of guidelines and recommendation. Forestry. Eidgenössische Forschungsanstalt WSL.. Springer Verlag.31510 Fax: +43 .baek@ktn. Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft.. A glossary will facilitate interdisciplinary and multilingual cooperation as well as support the harmonization of the various methods. Two main questions will be answered by the project: • What kinds of danger (susceptibility). Fig.): Landslide Hazards and Risk.(0) 664 . angew.: GIS-gestützte Risikonanalyse für Rutschungen und Felsstürze in den Ostalpen (Vorarlberg. Diss.7333 FAX: (+43 1) 71 100. which include the results of this “harmonization”. Flatschacher Straße 70 Tel: +43 .und Forstwirtschaft. 2007. 14/1+2. Georisikokarte Vorarlberg.: Rutschungen. Vol.at Homepage: http://www. 3rd Edition. CROZIER M. ..at Homepage: http://www. SIDLE R. American Geological Institute.at/forst DI Christoph Skolaut Wildbach.. & Hegg. The results will be summarized in a synthesis report. FORLATI F. • Development of minimal requirements for the determination of the hazard potential of slides and rock falls.. 1987. Sektion Salzburg Torrent and Avalanche Control.und Lawinenverbauung. Univ. This should support the development of hazard zone planning towards Literatur / References: BATES A. 2005. • Specification of minimal requirements for the spatial description of the dangers. M. Department IV/5.at/forst Dr. Bergheimerstraße 57 Tel. H. L.. 15 Umwelt Unterabteilung Geologie und Bodenschutz. 2007. Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft. Weiters wird auf die strategische Bedeutung der „präventiven Planung“ hinsichtlich der Nutzung und Entwicklung von gefährdeten Gebieten im Gebirge eingegangen. (RUDOLF-MIKLAU.. The initial purpose of hazard assessment is the provision of basic knowledge for the planning of protection measures (e. and records of damages caused by past events (BRÜNDL ET AL.]) For the purpose of risk assessment. Abb. Zusammenfassung: Der Beitrag fasst die generellen Grundlagen der Analyse und Bewertung von Naturgefahren zusammen. data on past (historic) events represent a major source of information. According to the well-established basic concept of hazard assessment. Predictability Drought Floods Debris flow Earthquake Rockfall Avalanches Landslides Storm Wildfire Volcanism Deceases seconds minutes hours days weeks Advanced warning time(T) Fig. “meteo-data” (climate. geology.]) Another important demand is the prediction of the time of occurrence and duration of a catastrophic event (predictability FLORIAN RUDOLF-MIKLAU and advanced warning time. 2007 [9. 2009 [14. Abschließend erfolgt eine zusammenfassende Darstellung der wichtigsten Standards und Kategorien der kartographischen Darstellung von Naturgefahren. economic activities. 2009 [14. The main emphasis lies on the basic approaches and methods of hazard assessment with special attention to the “frequency-intensity-concept” (including the deficits of this approach). 1: Vorhersagbarkeit von Naturgefahren (RUDOLF-MIKLAU. Seite 15 . a summary of the most important standards and categories of hazard (risk) mapping is provided. 2009 [14. flood control. Der Schwerpunkt liegt im Bereich der grundlegenden Ansätze und Methoden für die Gefahrenbewertung.]).]). the procedure can be divided in three distinct steps (HÜBL ET AL.]). 2009 [14. The strategic importance of “preventive” planning with regards to the use and development of endangered areas in mountain areas is discussed.. In addition. 1: Predictability of natural hazards (RUDOLF-MIKLAU. avalanche control). 1) (RUDOLFMIKLAU.]). data for natural processes must be combined with data related to human activities. and groundwater) and “eco-data” (environmental parameters). data on land use and agriculture. The survey includes “geo-data” (topography. run-off. These sources of information include demographic and economic statistics. environment.Key-note papers Seite 14 Basic concept of hazard assessment Effective prevention against natural hazards requires a better understanding of the processes occurring in nature. Fig. Principles of Hazard Assessment and Mapping Grundlagen der Analyse und Bewertung von Naturgefahren Summary: The article summarizes the general principles for the assessment of natural hazards. 2009 [5. In addition. and cultural heritage. 2011 [18. weather). “hydrodata” (precipitation. AL. which requires quantitative information about the order and magnitude of catastrophic events and their probable damaging consequences on human health. The primary aim of hazard assessment is to gain a deep and comprehensive knowledge of these processes in order to provide accurate prognosis of the expected magnitude of hazardous events and the corresponding damaging effects.]: • The survey of basic information (data) • The analysis of hazards (and risks) • The valuation of hazards (and risks) As a rule. and soil). the survey of information related to natural hazards focuses on the acquisition of basic data on relevant factors in nature..g. (RUDOLF-MIKLAU in SUDA ET. wobei das „Häufigkeits-Intensitäts-Konzept“ besondere Beachtung findet (einschließlich der Defizite dieses Ansatzes). susceptibility maps. time series of extreme precipitation). intensity maps). are morphologic. the description of the triggering and displacement process and the potential effects (impact) on objects. The key problem of the method is the limited availability of measurements (data sets) that cover a sufficiently long period of time. (RUDOLF-MIKLAU in BOLLSCHWEILER ET AL. Intensity in colloquial use refers to strength or magnitude of a process or event. Thus the assessment of a hazard is not a mono-causal procedure but must take into account a large variety of more or less probable courses. Fig. • Models have to be calibrated with assessment historic. the valuation of hazards aims at the description of magnitude in a graded manner. it is attempted to conclude from properties of the sample to the rules of the “total population”. physical intensity criteria or intensity classifications count among the established methods to present the magnitude of events. their causes and effects.g. 2004 [7. but requires additional information concerning the order of magnitude of the relevant event. The design event (DE) is applied as reference value (criteria) for the planning of protection measures and hazard maps and represents the striven level of safety (acceptable risk). • or is fragmentary or both. 2011 [16. Besides this major disadvantage.g. flow depth. the identification of triggering factors. Gumbel.]) The underlying concept of intensity and frequency was originally established by WOLMAN & MILLER (1960) [19. Frequency and intensity are functionally correlated. pressure Risk assessment Validation of risks Risk acceptance (aversion) Presentation Process-/Suszeptibility maps Hazard (information) maps Hazard zone maps Risk map Cartographical presentation of risks Risk management Management Definition of protection goals Creation of protection concepts Management plans Protection measures Effectiveness / Efficiancy The analysis of hazards is subdivided into several tasks: the survey and localization of hazard sources. Fréchet. The extreme event represents the maximum magnitude observed in the concerning catchment or risk area. methods stochastic) (e. slides or falls (mass movements or avalanches).g. flood with return period of 100 years).. 2: System of hazard and risk management (RUDOLFMIKLAU/SAUERMOSER.]) The “scenario analysis” was established in risk management as an appropriate method to solve the complexity of comprehensive hazard assessment. random and representative samples (data sets) are needed (e. defined Hazard analysis Localization and topography Triggering mechanism Displacement processes/scenarios Frequency/intensitiy Analysis of damages: direct/indirect damage Damage potential Damage scenarios • Scenarios are checked concerning their plausibility. The frequency-intensity-concept is based on extreme value statistics and is appropriate for answering two basic questions: • How often does an extreme event of defined intensity occur statistically? • What is the expected extreme value for a defined time period? The two established methods to analyse extreme events are the “block-maxima-method” and the “peak-over-threshold-method” (KLEEMAYR in RUDOLF-MIKLAU & SAUERMOSER. Hazards scales. • The application of physical models is not only performed for one single data set but for a frequency range of the input values. 2011 [16. By means of statistical methods. Usually the intensity of a hazardous process is functionally related to the frequency of its occurrence. the frequencyintensity-function shows an “emergent” behavior implying a limited predictability of discharge from extrapolations of measurement data when a certain threshold value is exceeded. In practice this “frequencyintensity-concept” is the preferentially applied method for most natural hazards in order to value their effects (see below). (MAZZORANA ET AL. an unknown stochastic distribution function (e. In most cases the available data represents • either a too short observation (measuring) period.].. Seite 17 .]). (RUDOLF-MIKLAU in BOLLSCHWEILER ET AL. 2: System des Gefahrenund Risikomanagements (RUDOLF-MIKLAU/ SAUERMOSER. 2010 [8. In technical terms. Approaches to hazard assessment: The “frequencymagnitude-concept” for design events (DE) According to ONR 24800:2008 [13. pressure (process energy) or area (mass) of deposited debris. (HÜBL.]) Natural hazards in the Alpine environment are a complex system consisting of process chains with multiple interactions and dependencies.]) In practice this means: • Several applied. Abb. (RUDOLF-MIKLAU. 2009 [14. 2011 [16. (RUDOLF-MIKLAU in BOLLSCHWEILER ET AL. 2011 [3. For the statistic analysis. Weibull) is derived from an empirical distribution of measured values. extreme discharge in rivers and torrents of the extreme run-out distance of falls. The results of the hazard analysis are usually mapped in specific types of hazard maps (e.]) In general the frequency represents the period of recurrence between two events with comparable magnitude.]). Frequency is often expressed as return period.]) Validation Hazard assessment Levels of hazard (risk) Classification of intensity Intensity criteria: e. Especially for torrential processes. 2011 [3. The event disposition of a catchment or risk area.g. Intensity of natural events (hazards) can be expressed by physical criteria like discharge.] an event represents the entirety of all processes occurring in a temporal. the method of extreme value statistics shows other considerable short comings. (GEBÄUDEVERSICHERUNG GRAUBÜNDEN.g. areal and causal relationship and corresponds to a specific probability of recurrence and intensity. The most common field of application of the extreme value statistics is the prediction of weather extremes.]) Consequently. The analysis of natural hazards provides a comprehensive image of the processes..g. 2011 [3. which is equal to the reciprocal of the exceedance probability of extreme precipitation or discharge values..Key-note papers Seite 16 HAZARDS Survey RISKS Risk analysis regionally measurements and data from documented events ahead of application.]). As a rule the DE is determined according to a defined return period (e. Scenarios implicate that not only a single process but all relevant developments of an event within a defined period of recurrence are taken into account. 2009 [12. Due to the limited accuracy of numerical models. historic sources tend to be fragmentary and distorted due to subjective perception. quantity of data for a time representative (observation) According to these principles. the application always presupposes a calibration of regional measurements (data) and the validation of the results with expert opinions. the triggering mechanism and the extension of the process as well as the damages occurred. land use).]. Seite 19 . period. that an occured event will reoccur with comparable course and effects. Normally neither the physical properties of hazard processes are completely clarified. soils) and the variable disposition. transient flow conditions and influences of stream morphology. extreme floods can approximately be related to a certain return period. the determination procedure of the design flood requires the specification of the expected value of discharge by means of flood statistics and additional hydrological methods. 2010 [15. 2007 [9. 3: Principle approaches to hazard assessment (after KIENHOLZ. alternative concepts for the assessment of magnitude of events are sought that could replace the “frequency-intensity-concept”. it has to be taken into account that the period of recurrence of a triggering event can significantly differ from the frequency of the impact (damage) event. dendromophology Morphological Method extreme value statistics. precipitation. By dating historic events. which provide information (physical criteria) for the intensity of an event for a defined return period. trees).g. Method: of This method includes analysis measurements „silent witnesses“. spatial or causal reference. From this basic design discharge. Consequently. 2011 [3. However. In addition. 2009 [5.]) The practical procedure of specification of a design event can be lucidly explained by the example of a “design flood” (RUDOLF-MIKLAU & SEREINIG. witnesses Retrospective Indication is based on the assumption. and the disposition of the catchment area. which (besides other dating methods (BOLLSCHWEILER ET. geology. 2011 [16.])) provides Historical Method chronicles. As a rule. the trends prognoses a sufficient (monitoring) data by methods (e. comprehensive Statistical the and means of time series of past events. saturation of soil with water.]): Generally. or peak flood discharge. Abb. resulting in a possible transition of the predominant displacement process and a nonlinear increase of discharge. Morphological Method: This method is based on the identification of triggering/ displacement processes and the spatial distribution by means of “silent witnesses” (AULITZKY. the following procedures can be chosen and should be applied corresponding to the rule of redundancy (HÜBL et al.. If the variable disposition of a catchment or risk area is altered in the course of an event (e. modified). AL. exceedance of the water storage capacity of soil).g. 1992 [1.g. 2005 [10. but nevertheless contribute valuable information on hydrological extremes.]) in the morphology (deposition area) and at the vegetation (e. consists of the basic disposition (susceptibility) comprising all factors immutable over a long range of time (e.]). Especially the dating of historic flood events from chronicles or traces in nature (flood marks. This data provides evidences for the frequency of events. (significant) and requires Physical/Mathematical Method Numerical/empirical models derivation of reliable Expert opinion (estimation) Pragmatic Method Fig. 3): • The analysis of past events (retrospective indication). geändert). The applicability of the frequencyintensity-concept is strongly limited for all types of hazards for which measurements or observation data of extreme events are insufficiently or generally not available.]) Physical/Mathematical Method: These methods are mainly based on numerical or empirical models. Dendromorphology counts among these methods. testimonies and chronicles of past events (catastrophes). the debris potential increases erratically. Consequently.. “silent witnesses”) can provide precious additional information on return periods. The method presupposes knowledge about the triggering mechanism. (KLEEMAYR in RUDOLF-MIKLAU & SAUERMOSER.Key-note papers Seite 18 as the entirety of all conditions essential for the emergence of hazardous processes.. A causal supplement of information is gained if observed floods are analyzed with respect to their emergence regarding the weather conditions. In a first step. observation stochastic statistics). nor is sufficient data on extreme events available. 2005 [10. In addition. Two principle approaches are eligible for hazard assessment (Fig. extreme value Nevertheless. 2005 [10. This holds especially true for the assessment of extreme mass movements and avalanches where frequency hardly can be determined with sufficient accuracy. • The prognosis of future events (foresighted indication). triggering mechanism Statistical Method Foresightes Indication is based on the identification and analysis of factors and processes.g. levels of flooding. the most important principle of hazard assessment is the compliance of a high redundancy in the procedures and methods applied (KIENHOLZ.]). (HÜBL. the behavior of precipitation. which represent evidence for existing hazards according to gained experiences. Methods of hazard assessment The aim of hazard assessment is the determination of relevant scenarios and the related return period for the purpose of providing a prognosis of the substantial process. 2010 [8. a design flood [discharge in m³/s] with a return period of 100 years represents the striven level of safety for flood (torrent) control measures in European countries. which is the sum of all factors subject to a short-term or seasonal change (e.]): Historical Method: The method is based on the (qualitative and quantitative) analysis of reports. Flood statistics are based on the assumption that the observation period is representative for the long-term runoff behavior of the watershed. 3: Grundlegende Vorgehensweisen bei der Gefährdungsanalyse (nach KIENHOLZ. Expected values for a rainfall and flood events of a defined return period (including a corresponding confidence interval) can be derived from the hydraulic extreme value statistics. extreme flood events are qualified as “statistical outliers” that are not represented by the measured data collection (due to limited observation periods). the design flood can be derived by taking into account solid transport. In practice models are the preferred tool for the determination of design events in natural hazard engineering.]. Recently. the displacement process and the effect (impact) and includes the investigation of probability of recurrence (return period). the statistically deduced design criterion should be supported by additional information of temporal.g. the extension and intensity of an event as well as for the magnitude of hazard (BRÜNDL ET AL. Logically.g. Switzerland: frequency-intensity-matrix. it is essential to know the sources of uncertainties and methodical short-comings. such as floods. Also the suitability of planned building sites concerning the risk by natural hazards can be efficiently judged on the basis of hazard maps.]) In principle. the main emphasis of preventive planning lies in the sector of hazards spatially “delimited” in action. (RUDOLF-MIKLAU. without regard to the likelihood of exposure. In many countries hazard zone maps are not available. In addition.]). 2009 [14. 1997 [6. inundation areas). leaving hazard indication maps as the only source of spatial information. frequency) on the scale of the local cadastre (1. the intervention of the state is essential. monitoring. Consequently. but does not provide information about the frequency and expected intensity. but also provide the passivity to reduce hazards/risk by keeping endangered areas free from buildings or limiting the use of these zones (e. understood as a part of development planning.5000). preventive planning defines limits (border lines) for areas that are appropriate for building.]): • Limited availability of data • Limited observation (measuring) period • Lack of “direct” measurements (e. the localization of new settlements can be steered away from impending hazards. Mapping hazards in Alpine environment The cartographic outline of endangered areas according to KIENHOLZ (2005) [10. storm. process maps are transformed into intensity maps showing the process criteria graded according to the levels of impact intensity (e.]) In addition. the geographic information provided on triggering disposition and impact intensity of hazardous processes is used for the provision of hazard zone maps and their implementation in the process of development planning.g. Planning in relation to natural hazards and risks can also unfold active as passive protection effects. while no concrete information about the magnitude of the danger is provided.g. Consequently. Planning procedures concerning natural hazards are not limited to the cartographic outline of endangered areas (areas at risk). while the hazard zones become legally binding only by incorporating them into development planning documents (land use maps).]. Consequently. The primary goal of development planning concerning natural hazards is to keep the endangered areas free from buildings (passive protection function). Hazard assessment methods always suffer from major restrictions concerning their meaningfulness and accuracy. the total avoidance of hazard zones for spatial development is not possible. velocity of mass propagation during events. in the Alpine environment the usability of land for building purposes is limited according to the expansion of hazards. displacement and impact processes. mass movements.]) The environmental planning is of major preventive planning can be importance for the application of hazard maps. preventive planning is limited to rough-scale maps showing a general gradation of risks. 2009 [14. forest fire. avalanches. susceptibility maps show the disposition of an area for these events. Hazard zone maps show the impact of processes according to its magnitude (intensity. documentation) standards • Uncertainties in the selection of relevant scenarios • Misjudgement of the effeminacy and condition (usability) of existing protection measures • Misjudgement concerning the “residual risk” Preventive planning: principles and function “Prevention by planning” today is qualified as the most effective measure in natural hazard management.Key-note papers Seite 20 models should not only be applied for a single data set but for a range of scenarios as well as for a distribution of input parameters. hazard maps have no legal liability but are defined as “spatial expert opinions with prognosis character”. spatial Process maps show hazards by the distribution of physical parameters (criteria) describing the triggering. 2005 [10. In some countries.g. (RUDOLF-MIKLAU. 2005 [11.2000 – 1. Consequently. (BUWAL/BRP/BWW. The pragmatic method is applied if other methods are not applicable or do not meet the goal of satisfying hazard (risk) assessment. inundation areas) or in the provision of standards (limits) for the use of endangered areas in order to reduce the risk potential. hazard maps provide bases for standards and regulations for a hazard-adapted construction practice. the cartographic depiction of hazard zones provides the essential information (process intensity. In a second step. In development planning. these Seite 21 . In order to regulate the use and development of endangered areas. earthquake. Analogously. Susceptibility is defined as the extent to which an area suffers from the risk of emergence of a hazardous process if exposed to a triggering factor. Some of these deficiencies are summarized below (KIENHOLZ. A hazard (indication) map roughly indicates in which areas natural hazard have to be taken into account in land use and development activities. A comprehensive summary of available models for torrential processes is given in BERGMEISTER ET AL. As a rule. The active protection function of preventive planning lies in the reservation (provision) of areas for the spreading of hazardous processes (e. For the interpretation and validation of results.g. this method serves as a redundancy and is used for the validation of results of “exact” assessment methods (mentioned above). For natural hazards that do not allow an “exact” delimitation (e. The character of the map is only demonstrative. magnitude of impact forces) for the technical protection of existing buildings.]. impact pressure) • Incomplete or false documentation of past events • Inconsistent quality of information and data due to variable measuring (observation. LOAT. intensity) • Hazard (indication) maps • Hazard zone maps • Risk maps The following definitions are valid only with restrictions since terminology of hazard mapping substantially differs between countries and scientific branches. Thus legal liability of hazard zones may arise on the local level depending on the national legal framework. it is essential to adapt the standards of hazard mapping to the requirements and goal of development planning on the regional and local level. Thus preventive planning is the basis for the protection strategy “prevention by area”. In mountainous regions.] includes the elaboration of scientific and technical bases and the depiction in hazard (indication) maps. In the Alpine countries in general the following categories of maps for the outline of hazards and risks can be distinguished: • Process maps (susceptibility. These maps are most often the result of numerical or empirical modeling. Within these limits. snow load). Pragmatic Method: This method is based on the “expert opinion” of experiences practitioners and local experts. (2009) [2. for avalanches in RUDOLF-MIKLAU & SAUERMOSER (2011) [16. Seite 23 .und Forstwirtschaft. [3. (2007): Optimierung der Gefahrenzonenplanung. Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft. low – medium . Imst: Wildbach. 5: Hazard map for falls (rock fall) (Switzerland). SAUERMOSER S. qualitative or quantitative assessment of risks (levels of risk. KANONIER A. Department IV/5. 5: Gefahrenzonenplan Wildbäche (einschließlich des Hinweises von Rutschgebieten) (Österreich). avalanches and debris flow. BUNDESAMT FÜR WASSERWIRTSCHAFT BWW (1997): Berücksichtigung von Hochwassergefahren bei der raumwirksamen Tätigkeit. Enviroment and Water Management.und Steinschlagschutz).] BERGMEISTER K.] BRÜNDL M. Abb. Closing remarks Hazard (risk) assessment and mapping count among the most important tasks (measures) in natural hazard management. Verlag Lexis-Nexis Orac . formal requirements. 1999 [4. Umwelt-Materialien 107/I+II. [9. Sci. HÜBL J.. (Hrsg.und Lawinenverbauung Federal Ministry for Agriculture. Germany). Imst: Imst: Wildbach. (2009): Schutzbauwerke der Wildbachverbauung. [8. P.. 6: Hazard zone map for torrents (including indication of landslide areas) (Austria). (2010): Hochwässer in Wildbacheinzugsgebieten. [13. Abb. Florian Rudolf-Miklau event (period of recurrence) for the assessment of the relevant hazards. (2009): Festlegung des Bemessungshochwassers: Prozessorientierte Harmonisierung für Flüsse und Wildbäche. Erosions.] HÜBL J..] AULITZKY H.. a comprehensive understanding of the triggering and displacement processes of Alpine natural hazards is still Fig. Teil A: Allgemeine Darstellung des Risikokonzepts.) (2011): Technischer Lawinenschutz. 5: Gefahrenzonenplan Felssturz (Steinschlag) (Schweiz). Erosionsund Steinschlagschutz). In most countries.rudolf-miklau@lebensministerium. Hazard zone maps are regularly produced for the hazard types floods.] ONR 24800: 2008. G. Fig.g.7333 FAX: (+43 1) 71 100. As shown in this article. Wildbach.]) The elaboration of risk maps is based on the depiction of objects at risk (risk potentials) within endangered areas.] MAZZORANA B. Biel. [6.. the vulnerability and the exposition of objects/persons in the endangered area.. [15. 4: Hazard indication map for mass movements (Bavaria. Wien: Universität für Bodenkultur (unveröffentlicht). Verlag Ernst und Sohn/Wiley Berlin (in preparation). Forestry. Wiener Mitteilungen (in press).] SCHROTT L.) (2011): Gebäudeschutz vor Naturgefahren.und Lawinenverbau (Zeitschrift für Wildbach-. SUDA J. Hazards Earth Syst. Marxergasse 2 Tel. The maps provide the key information for most of the other mitigation measures in order to reduce risk to an acceptable level. e. [14... 135-151.] RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. BISCHOF N.] RUDOLF-MIKLAU F.. In addition.at Homepage: http://www. [17. Wald und Landschaft BUWAL..] SUDA J. This delay justifies the strong efforts within the Alpine space to establish and harmonize general standards for the assessment and mapping of hazards caused by mass movements. Literatur / References: [1. (2005): Gefahrenzonenplanung im Alpenraum – Ansprüche und Grenzen. HÜBL J. GIS technology provides a powerful tool to maps provide specific information about the usability of certain plots for building or other development purposes.. (Hrsg. MILLER J.7399 Mail: florian. [19.Key-note papers Seite 22 Overlaying this information makes feasible a comprehensive assessment of risks for human health.. (2008): Frequenz und Magnitude natürlicher Prozesse..high). AGNER P.]): • Risk maps only showing risk potential without assessing (value) them. missing due to the limited availability of “direct” measurements and observation. (2009): Improving risk assessment by defining consistent and reliable system scenarios.. FUCHS S. MERZ H. Bern: Nationale Plattform Naturgefahren PLANAT (vorläufige Fassung).] RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. Tagungsband der Internationalen Konferenz Interpraevent 1992. Abteilung IV/5. [2. environment and cultural heritage. Verlag Spring Wien (in preparation). and Italy) for mass movements as well. [18. Austrian Standards Institute. preventive planning concerning rock fall and landslides (unlike flood and avalanche hazards) is still “in situ nascendi”. This reservation especially holds true for hazard maps devoted to mass movements. HÜBL J. economic acidities.. ROMANG H. Weiterentwicklung der Methoden der Gefahrenzonenplanung. (1960): Magnitude and frequency of forces on geomorphic processes. (HÜBL ET AL. 139-174. Verlag Ernst und Sohn Berlin (Wiley VCH). Although hazard maps have gained a key role in the process of preventive planning. • Risk maps based on a graded. Anschrift des Verfassers / Author’s address: DI Dr. As the standards of hazard mapping in this field are still under development. Deutschland). 2007 [9. Abb.] BUNDESAMT FÜR UMWELT.. (2011): Tracking torrential processes on fans and cones. the methods for the assessment of natural hazards still suffer from major short-comings and significant sources of inaccuracy... in Flegentreff. [5. HOLTHAUSEN N. Nr. Nr. combine spatial information on natural hazards with other cartographic information concerning human activities and development actions. RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. approval procedure and implementation in the development planning.. Vienna. Schutzbauwerke der Wildbachverbauung – Begriffe und ihre Definition sowie Klassifizierung. Nat. RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. BUNDESAMT FÜR RAUMPLANUNG BRP.lebensministerium.): Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. Spektrum Akademischer Verlag Springer: 134 – 150. hazard zone maps are regulated by legal and technical standards concerning their content.: (+43 1) 71 100 . SEREINIG N. (2005): Die Gefahrenzonenplanung in der Schweiz. WALD UND LANDSCHAFT BUWAL. (2009): Risikokonzept für Naturgefahren – Leitfaden. and only in few countries (Switzerland. 4: Gefahrenhinweiskarte für Massenbewegungen (Bayern. 9: 145–159.. (1992): Die Sprache der "Stummen Zeugen". FUCHS S.] HÜBL J. (1999): Risikoanalyse bei gravitativen Naturgefahren.at/forst Fig. (2009): Naturgefahren-Management in Österreich. Some countries have also defined a specific design Bundesministerium für Land. IAN-Report 90. France.. 152. STOFFEL M. Journal of Geology 68 (1): 54 – 74. the information provided by these maps should still be treated with care and only be interpreted by experts. [7.] GEBÄUDEVERSICHERUNG GRAUBÜNDEN (2004): Vorschriften für bauliche Maßnahmen an Bauten in der blauen Lawinenzone. [16. S. Springer Dortrecht (in preparation). [10.. [12. RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. GLADE T.] LOAT R.und Lawinenverbau (Zeitschrift für Wildbach-. In principle there are two types of risk maps available (BORTER ET AL.] WOLMAN M. [4. Bern: Bundesamt für Umwelt. Torrent and Avalanche Control 1030 Wien.] BOLLSCHWEILER M.] BORTER P. [11. Glade (Eds. 77-92. These maps are elaborated by combining the impact intensity with the damage potential (value).] KIENHOLZ H.. ÖWAW 7-8: 29 – 32. 152. In the AdaptAlp project (Interreg IV B. Hingegen ist die Umsetzung in die Raumplanung und in das Risikomanagement auf europäischer Ebene sehr unterschiedlich. countries varies in its quality and quantity: In Introduction In Alpine regions. Because of the lack of memories of past landslide events. bzw. in sozio-ökonomischen Eigenheiten der Länder. Die wissenschaftliche Charakterisierung der Massenbewegungen basiert oft auf ähnlichen Methoden und ist deshalb eher vergleichbar. detailed landslide inventories exist and are the basis for susceptibility and hazard assessment. morphological and hydrological situations that have led to past failures. danger and hazard. Using various input data also handicaps the comparison of hazard assessment.1 Hazard Mapping . Im Projekt AdaptAlp (Interreg IV B. work package 5. Alpine Space) arbeiten die Alpenländer an gemeinsamen Grundsätzen. Within the INTERREG IV B project “Adaptation to Climate Change in the Alpine Space “ (acronym AdaptAlp). Whereas in Italy and Switzerland there are technical guidelines and legal acts regarding landslides and rock fall.Overview Geologische Gefahrenkartierung: Methoden. KARL MAYER. Consequently a multilingual glossary. HUGO RAETZO. In Germany a recommendation on how to create a susceptibility map was published. Indexkarten. makes comparison of hazard assessment products difficult. Information about landslides in alpine Seite 25 . Standards and Procedures (State of Development) . the susceptibility to mass movements is not considered accurate in land use. Some triggering mechanisms happen sporadically and are not readily obvious. the implementation in spatial planning and risk management differs considerably due to different regional legal acts. Während in Italien und in der Schweiz technische Richtlinien bzw. geological hazard mapping is accepted as a tool for hazard prevention in Europe. Aufgrund fehlender Regelungen in den alpinen Staaten Europas werden Ereigniskarten. in Austria only hazard mapping concerning floods and avalanches is regulated. But the effects of mass movements (damages) necessitate new strategies on how to manage the future potential of natural (geological) hazards in alpine regions. susceptibility and hazard maps are created in different scales with different contents and quality. The definitions of terms used regarding morphological and geological conditions are prone to landslides. responsibilities and pecularities. Lawinen Regelungen zur Ausweisung von Gefahrenzonen. Different approaches to hazard mapping are in practice. Verordnungen und Verantwortlichkeiten. ANDREAS VON POSCHINGER. Der Grund liegt primär in unterschiedlichen Gesetzen. danger and hazard make a comparison of the regional approaches difficult. This issue provides an overview of methods. Taking into consideration one of the geological principles for landslide hazard assessment – the past is the key to the future – future slope failures will probably occur in areas with similar geological.Key-note papers Seite 24 RICHARD BÄK. Scientific characterization of mass movements is based on similar methods with mostly comparable results. ordinances. as well as different defintions of terms such as susceptibility. Dies und unterschiedliche Definitionen erschweren den Vergleich. slopes of different some regions. GERLINDE POSCH-TRÖZMÜLLER Mapping of Geological Hazards: Methods. gibt es in Österreich nur für Hochwasser bzw. However. Gefahrenhinweiskarten und Gefahrenkarten als Grundlagen für die Gefahrenbeurteilung in verschiedenen Maßstäben mit unterschiedlichem Inhalt erarbeitet. Because of a lack of regulations in European Alpine states’ inventory maps. Alpine Space) the Alpine regions elaborate the common principles. gesetzliche Regelungen zur Erstellung von Gefahrenkarten bestehen. This fact and dissimilar meanings for terms like susceptibility. landslide inventories at regional authorities and minimal requirements as to how to create hazard maps (requirements concerning input data and purpose of assessment) are necessary. die Einrichtung von Ereigniskatastern bei der Verwaltung und die Festlegung von Mindestanforderungen zur Erstellung von Grundlagen und Gefahrenkarten (Anforderungen hinsichtlich Eingangsdaten und Zweck) sollten daher ein primäres Ziel sein. In Deutschland wurde eine Empfehlung für die Erstellung von Gefahrenhinweiskarten publiziert. Standards und Verfahren (derzeitiger Status) – ein Überblick Summary: In spite of different methods used.Geological Hazards is focusing on the transnational harmonization of standards (minimal requirements in the field of hazard assessment and mapping) by exchanging experiences in the partner regions. Ein multilinguales Glossar. Zusammenfassung: Die geologische Gefahrenkartierung ist in Europa trotz unterschiedlicher Methoden eine anerkannte Notwendigkeit für die Prävention. This. standards and procedures without a pretense of completeness. The work method included the collection of historical and archive data. subdivided into three levels of progressively deals with the basic data. Australia and the USA (Oregon. For hazard assessment. all of the countries considered for the literature survey have landslide inventories and maps. Slovenia. On the other hand. 1): Process index maps (map of phenomena “Prozesshinweiskarte”. and detailed mapping.g. Different methods of data acquirement are used to establish databases to assess hazards: Landslide inventories as an important tool for the assessment of the susceptibility of slopes to mass movements are created nowadays more and more using digital technology. For this reason the second goal of the work package 5. This national database is called “StorMe” and contains data on every natural hazard process: landslides. The aim of the IFFI Project (Inventario dei Fenomeni Franosi in Italia – “Italian Landslide Inventory”) implemented by ISPRA (formerly: APAT. sometimes even the monetary value of the damage and the costs of remediation measures. and who reported it (or made the database entry). For the comparison. field survey). information from the countries Austria (Geological survey of Austria. categorized according to the quality of the data. “Karte der Phänomene”) can have different scales (1:50. In most databases additional reports. scales and the state of completeness vary. Analysis of aerial photographs is also a classical and valuable technique to identify landslide features.000 (or even more) for a detailed study to 1:50. and hydrological conditions and processes have to be identified. if e. geological. Using digital DTM data in a GIS allows the production of hillshades with several geometries to detect typical landslide forms. In Austria the Geological survey of Austria. The scale used depends on the purpose the map is used for. Utah) was taken into account. They contain the basic data of natural hazard processes and should mainly include the facts. the need for a complete and homogeneous overview of the distribution of landslides was recognized after the disastrous event at Sarno. information on the activity. some provide a rating about the reliability of the degree of precision of the information. aerial photo interpretation. geometry and slope position of a landslide is recorded.000 as an indicative map ([32] Raetzo & Loup 2009).Key-note papers Seite 26 landslides sometimes differ contradictorily in literature and in practice. Most inventory forms also provide information about how the listed data was gathered (e. A “Landslide Data Sheet” was prepared for collecting the landslide information. This is surprising because inventory maps provide fundamental information on the location and size of landslides that is necessary in the assessment of slope stability at any scale. A general indication of landslide susceptibility can be obtained based on landslide inventories.g. the Italian Environment Protection and Technical Services Agency) and by the regions and selfgoverning provinces was to identify and map the landslides in accordance with standardized and shared methods.” Nevertheless. The event inventory (“Ereigniskataster”) records only those processes for which an event date is known (5W-questions). The second section give evidence.000 and bigger) and can be of varying quality. the generation of a “map of phenomena” is mandatory ([30] Raetzo 2002). The thematic inventory map contains only information related to a type of process. Landslide inventories Landslide inventories are the basis for all scientific and planning activities. landslide inventories are not yet very common. has created not just one “inventory map” but a “level of information” (Fig. even if contents. it shows the geologic-geomorphologic features. project MASSMOVE. [11] Guzzetti 2005 wrote about landslide inventories: “Despite the ease with which they are prepared and their immediateness. Modern methods for modelling processes are designed for the GIS environment. it is independent of a scale. In most regions of the Alps. when and why. the morphological. of Carinthia. soil and geomor- phological maps. and in any physiographical environment. it contains information about process areas and phenomena of mass movements that have already happened. geological. For this reason it is important that landslide inventories are induced to sustain landslide knowledge over time. Most inventories provide information on the causes or triggers of landslides. field surveys. More subtle signs of slope movement cannot be identified on the maps mentioned above. hydrogeological or hydrological conditions. The landslide conditions in the third section Seite 27 . Italy. inventories have been established by authorities and are to some extent available to the public. In order to predict landslide hazard in an area. In Carinthia. hazard assessment or risk analyses. Switzerland. Therefore all partner countries in the AdaptAlp Interreg project are working on landslide inventories. The requirements for acquired data are raised by the main goal: The accurateness and detail of input data and scale depends on the aim of the product – susceptibility map. Recorded geological information (fourth section) is sometimes specified in detail. sometimes only the information is given that geological information is being stored. ranging from 1:2. France. Washington. project DIS-ALP).1 named above is the elaboration of a multilingual glossary. Inventory maps are available for only a few countries and mostly for limited areas. In Switzerland. a digital landslide inventory was created with historical events of the last 50 years ([7] Bäk et al. as well as specific data such as the shadow angle are stored in the databases. mainly with the 5W-questions: What happened where. Slope stability and rock fall trajectories can be computed over large areas to get indications of the hazards. As with the Austrian “map of phenomena”. Field observation by experts is necessary for accurate assessment.1 gives information about what kind of data is stored in different landslide event inventories. 2005). Tab. In Italy. documentation and bibliography are included or mentioned. and what questions are asked on the landslide reporting form. Slovakia. snow avalanches and floods. An extensive manual with a digital GIS-legend was published on a DVD by BWG ([8]BWG 2002. [14] Kienholz & Krummenacher 1995). if The first section of table 1 shows inventories exist. a country with a particularly high landslide risk owing to its landform configuration and its lithological and structural characteristics. debris flows. The inventory map/event map (“Ereigniskarte”) contains only information about processes for which an event date is known. Germany. the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) manages a database with all the events where damages were recorded. In many cases additional information such as data on vegetation (land cover). in cooperation with the Geological Survey of Carinthia. In some cases the damages due to landslides are listed in the inventory. information about possible scenarios is needed. of Lower Austria. Their influence on the stability of the slopes has to be estimated. this probabilistic method is now commonly used for the statistical assessment of landslides. only in high mountainous areas or in lower populated areas is a scale of 1:25. damage caused by slide and additional comments. investigations and remedial measures. the extension. the internal cause and the external trigger. the damage caused. Besides information about the exact location (coordinates) of a landslide.). road cut. interpretation of topographic map contours. In France a database for mass movements is accessible on the internet. approximate original slope (e. predominant type of material (rock. estimated dimension (length. earthquake.. The processes taken into account are landslides.5°. flow. dormant-old. preexisting slide. dormant-young. rural area. width. type of movement. 2006). volume. geological and morphological mapping are the basis for weighting methods. agriculture). To get information about further landslides. The weight of evidence method is based on a statistical Bayesian bivariate approach. "Schuttströme").Key-note papers Seite 28 increasing detail (from: [13] ISPRA.800 have database. shallow landslides) can be used to identify the susceptibility of areas to mass movements. interpretation of aerial photographs and also by field reconnaissance. showing existing landslides and their activity (“Karten der Aktivitätsbereiche”). the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. since the sources for the inventory map of Slovenia are quite different from each other.000. earth. depth. It is based on the assumption that future landslides would be triggered or influenced by the same or similar controlling factors as previously registered landslides ([15] Klingseisen & Leopold 2006. estimated from e. subsidence and bank erosion. Karst.. The landslide material (rock. and review of geological and landslide mapping. fall/rock fall ("Steinschläge". These inventories provide the basis for analysing the spatial distribution of the geohazards and their causal factors. are working on the Landslide Inventory Pilot Project. information about the quality. [27] Nössing 2009) also has a landslide database that resulted from the IFFI Project. flow. estimated dimensions from: aerial photos. "Dolinen".000 used. "Hanganbrüche"). 1:24K USGS topo map). the precision and the origin of the data. each landslide is classified according to a “confidence” (definite. It can be regarded as a measure of likelihood that the landslide actually exists. each landslide was classified according to its activity: active or historic. [16] Klingseisen et al. has prepared an inventory form. topple. activity). debris flows. volcanic eruptions and secondary geohazards such as landslides. The following landslide processes are recorded: flow ("Hangkriechen". Digital modelling (rock fall. land use where slide occurred (forested area. steep natural slope. maps were created. among others. such as spatial positioning and technical data of mass movements.: 30° +/. GEORISK of landslides Bavaria. natural drainage. Topics of consideration are the cause of events. causes and activation date. return periods determined by analysis of past events. A scale of 1:10. As with many regions. the following detailed information can be retrieved: type of movement. as well as the induced damage are noted for each event. cause of slide (road construction. debris. human built drainage. "Felsstürze". geological. a brief summary of the event. date of occurrence (if known). A prototype landslide database has been established by Geoscience Australia in collaboration with the University of Wollongong and Mineral Resources Tasmania. the litho-logical unit. The Slovenian landslide inventory map is shown as a small inlet on the susceptibility map of Slovenia at a scale of 1:250. its cause and damage. 2008): • First level: contains the basic information (location. affected regions. slide ("Rutschungen". rotational slide. Statistical analysis (bivariante or multivariate) are used for the weighting. • Second level: contains the geometrical. verified by landslide inventories or evaluation through creating susceptibility maps. debris) and type of movement (slide. In California the landslide inventory maps are available at a scale of 1:24. the volume of the moving masses. urban area. "Senken". activity. Komac (Geo ZS) revealed Seite 29 . spread) are also classified. age and status of the landslides. questionable) assigned by the geological interpreter. Based on the inventory. In Germany a recommendation on how to create a susceptibility map is given by the “Geohazards” team of engineering geologists of German federal governmental departments of geology ([37] SGD 2007). In the USA the Landslide Inventory Steering Committee. translational slide. This understanding can be used to assess susceptibility. Now in the UK the BGS investigates geohazards by looking at primary geohazards such as earthquakes. detailed geographical data. Until now 2. "Schwinden". The purpose of this project is to provide a framework and tools for displaying and analyzing landslide inventory data collected in a spatially aware digital format from individual states. In England after the Aberfan disaster the UK government funded a number of research projects to look at the UK’s geohazards ([33] Reeves 2010). Susceptibility/hazard assessment in Alpine regions A literature study regarding susceptibility/hazard mapping ([29] Posch-Trözmüller 2010) shows the different approaches to hazard assessment in alpine regions. Currently BGS maintains two main shallow geohazard databases: the National Landslide and the Karst Database. rock fall. influence of regional geology. state of activity) and is mandatory for every landslide. subsidence ("Erdfälle". swelling/shrinking etc. Basic minimal requirements for inventory records are defined. earth. the causes for the movement and geological information as well as information about the survey of the phenomenon. land use. dormant-mature. the region of South Tyrol (Autonome Provinz Bozen Südtirol. the scales vary but landslides were always mapped at a quite detailed scale. spread). detailed information about the mass movement (size. In this case scientific reports. the following specifications should be listed: date of slide. probable. road fill. Also. • Third level: provides detailed information on the damage. is an essential step to been documented in the that. The inventory was prepared primarily by geomorphological analysis. harvested area. The type of movement. composed of members of USGS and State Geological Surveys and other state agencies.000 is used for surveying and mapping the landslides throughout most of Italy. fill). other). For each mass movement. soil. Personal information from M. An inventory is the first step in building an understanding of the occurrence of geohazards. fall. For the assessment of natural hazards (hazard maps) mainly heuristic methods are in practice. Furthermore. with information about the type of movement. displaying the location of the landslides on a map and providing information regarding the type of landslide.g. predominant type of movement (fall/topple. Originally developed for ore exploration.000. "Bergstürze"). and lithological parameters.g. field evaluation). The extensive landslide database. called GeoSure ([33] Reeves 2010). since the law refers to the standardized hazard map ([32] Raetzo & Loup 2009).300 km²) ([23] Mayer 2007). database national and geotechnical DTM. the local department of the Austrian Service for Torrent and Avalanche Control (WLV) creates “hazard maps” within the “hazard zonation plan”.000 using neural network analysis ([38] Tilch 2009). Seite 31 . information on studies or tests carried out as well as mitigation measures and the source of information (archives. [34] Rudolf-Miklau & Schmidt 2004) . vulnerability map. For example. The main focus lies on hazard assessment at the scale of a slope. source areas of rock fall are derived in a first step from landslide inventories and/or remote sensing (DTM). it includes a qualitative statement about the probability through a predefined “design event”.000. In Lower Austria susceptibility maps have been created until now using a heuristic approach based on geological expertise. The program is used for the evaluation of the hydrogeological hazard and risk and also to give a clear and updated view of the interventions made in the region to preserve vulnerable areas. deterministic methods by secondary geohazards. different approaches have been chosen to develop susceptibility maps (different scales.000 using statistical analyses ([20] Komac & Ribicic 2008). Indications of active/inactive landslides can be found by using registers. accumulation zone. they can be called “hazard maps” by definition. industrial or commercial areas ([13] ISPRA 2008). indication in extreme case. Naturali. skrink-swell. For the prediction of landslide susceptibility based on morphological and geological factors. the Geological Survey of Austria generated a susceptibility map at a scale of 1:50.. The method of assessment is based solely on geological expertise. geological. Alternatively areas prone to landsliding can be derived semi-automatically by a cross-over between DTM and a geological entity. Usually Alpine areas with an inclination > 45° are potential rock fall escarpments. none).Key-note papers Seite 30 field work. database-system about for the documenting different mass of movements in Austria (GEORIOS) containing information types processes. Using the digital geological map (1:50.yes or no. an “extended danger map” at a scale of 1:25. Regarding rock fall processes. of course. subsidence and uplift. the inventory map. The priority. historical data and interpretation of DTM and aerial photos ([36] Schweigl & Hervas 2009). expert judgement knowledge. without specification of classes. field work) is in use. map of phenomena and a lithological map. That means that. The legend for the rock fall danger map discerns between “indication of danger”. It doesn’t include information about intensity or probability. as well as with the PAI Project. Susceptibility maps in different scales and with different methods (heuristic approach. national landslide database. none). etc. Slovenia generated a susceptibility map of the whole country at a scale of 1:250. subrosion. Potential landslide areas (where landslides have not yet taken place) are determined by empirical methods in account of geological and morphological situation and land use. processes) derived from existing data sets and maps ([29] Posch-Trözmüller 2010): The main focus in Burgenland is concentrated on shallow landslides with an annual movement rate of 1-2cm. Detailed information on hazard maps in Switzerland is given by Raetzo & Loup in this issue [31]. In the second step.000 to 1:50. yes or no. which is a susceptibility class. For the whole Bavarian Alps (about 4. The regions in Italy also have programs in cooperation with the IFFI Project (IFFI started as a national project and is continued by the separate regions). the runout zone is depicted by empiric angle methods (shadow angle. 2006). collecting data from several different regional offices (in particular: Protezione Civile della Regione and the Direzione Centrale Risorse Agricole. As these maps include the intensity and the frequency of mass movements. Forestali e Montagna) as well as from other public subjects that work on the territory. The creation of an indicative map is not obligatory in Switzerland. It indicates the potential process areas of rock falls. The inventory map is included in the susceptibility map. mapping and/or remote sensing (DTM) methods. the legend for the danger map of superficial landslides discerns 3 entries (source area. For a small study area in Styria. Because of the lack of a regulatory or technical norm concerning framework statistics (landslides) and cost analysis (rock falls). landslides and debris flows. polygons and lines intersected with urban. information Probabilistic modified landslides and rock fall in Austria . geometric and geographical data. susceptibility maps for Carinthia were generated in collaboration with the Geological Survey of Austria (GBA) and the Geological Survey of Carinthia at a scale of 1:200. The guidelines also include flow processes.only the course of actions concerning floods. the deep-seated landslides danger map also discerns 3 entries (indication. still lacking information about intensity and recurrence period or probability of occurrence. a At the Geological Survey of Austria. in contrast to the susceptibility map (without information on intensity and probability). The data is recorded in an official GIS structure called Sitgeo (Geological Service Information System). was evaluated on the basis of the in-tensity and the probability of an event for each type of mass movement ([19] Kolmer 2009). hydrological. To provide the municipalities with assistance in spatial planning. The Swiss indicative map (“Gefahrenhinweiskarte”) is generated at a scale of 1:10. it was possible to carry out an initial evaluation of the “level of attention” on a municipal basis. In Vorarlberg risk maps (susceptibility map. the method called Weights of Evidence was chosen ([16] Klingseisen et al.the federal states all follow a different course of action. land use planning and mitigation measures. By using the information contained in the database of the IFFI Project and the Corine Land Cover Project 2000.000 ([17] Kociu et al.000 has already been presented or is being completed. In Upper Austria. The legend gives only the information “indication of hazard” . For modelling. neural network analysis) have already been generated. The level of attention was for example rated “very high”. It homogenizes the information according to national standards and surveys new data. risk map) were produced in the course of a university dissertation ([35] Ruff 2005). Nevertheless it has to be taken into account that the method of generating these maps did not include either field work or remote sensing techniques. These are. It was developed from the 50K digital geology polygons (DiGMap50). landslide susceptibility maps were generated for the main settled areas in Upper Austria (OÖ). the region of Friuli Venezia Giulia has a landslide inventory that originated within these two studies. 2006). avalanches and debris flows are regulated by law (ordinance of hazard zone mapping. BGS (England) developed a nationwide susceptibility assessment of deterministic geohazards such as landslides. Lower Austria and Burgenland. geometric slope angle) or physical deterministic methods. The national project of Italy. Also. when the landslide points. published information. also represents an important tool for landslide risk assessment. IFFI. working with a 25x25m grid. he used bivariate methods are used for hazard management by primary geohazards.000). In 2002. In order to have simple construction regulations. as well as the method applied in the state of Washington (USA). digital elevation models (DTM) of the areas were used to analyze the spatial characteristics of soil slip locations. as these define intensity and probability parameters. 2). geomorphological mapping and analysis (1:5. The following basic information was used to create the individual landslide hazard maps (note: In the report the maps are called “hazard maps”. the differential movement (D). landslide and engineering data compilation. For convenience. more detailed investigations and calculations are done (e. the soil-slip susceptibility values are assembled on 1:100. High intensity is defined as e≥300kJ. In Switzerland. low efforts were used for the swiss indicative map (level 1). Mazengarb ([24]. Concepts of hazard assessment in Switzerland In Switzerland the method to establish the hazard map was simplified as much as possible due to the objective of facilitating its integration into land use (planning). The Australian method of hazard assessment. building infrastructure and applying for development approvals ([25] Middleman 2007). Applying this concept. They do not attempt to show the extent of runout of the resultant debris flows. residual and neglectable hazard. or acceleration). Determining temporal probability is often not possible because of the lack of historical information ([25] Middleman 2007). Hazard maps are an accurate delineation of zones on scales from 1:2. Important efforts are taken when a hazard map is established or reviewed (level 2). The susceptibility maps were created in an iterative process from two kinds of information: locations of sites of past soil slips and aerial photographs taken during six rainy seasons that produced abundant soil slips. 3 gives an overview about hazard maps generated in the considered countries. state and local levels. These guidelines are tools that were made to be introduced into the legislative framework of Australian governments at national. nonetheless. 5 degrees of hazard are used. medium.): geological mapping (1:25.000 scale bases ([26] Morton et al. is also looked into (Tab.000. where the maps are accessible via the internet. Department of Infrastructure. the only criterion is the intensity. • For flowing processes like earth flows. These investigations include analyses. which is quite different from the first ones. but on the homepage. • For slides. scales and the risk in order to respect economic criteria. It does not imply that rock fall will not occur on lower slopes.000). Also. only 5 degrees of hazard were defined: high. 2003). For spontaneous processes the intensity and the probability both ranging from high to low in three classes (high – medium – low) are needed: • For rock falls.000). as well as slope management and maintenance. France and USA are considered in this section. These were used as the basis for a soil slip-debris flow inventory. the variation of the velocity (dv. including regional mapping. modelling and other methods. Assessment of the intensity (Switzerland/ Friuli Venezia Giulia) Intensities are assessed through a classification that is represented in table 2. It is planned to apply this concept of increased efforts for geological investigations when the assessment takes place on the second or third level. landslide hazard mapping is very limited. The Swiss method ([30] Raetzo 2002) and the method used in Italy ([21] Kranitz & Bensi 2009) are based on an intensity-probability matrix. Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT. State Government of Tasmania) is the only state government agency in Australia to undertake several activities with respect to landslides. the mean long-term velocity. A simple modelling approach was developed for modelling the rock fall runout area using the direction of maximum downhill slope defined by an aspect raster and calculating with a travel angle of 30°. In southwestern California. giving “hazard zones” in the legends. low. Comparison of hazard assessment methods Methods of hazard assessment used in Switzerland. but it becomes steadily less likely with reduced slope angles. Energy and Resources. Comparison of hazard assessment methods in Switzerland and Friuli Venezia Giulia (Italy) The hazard maps in Switzerland are compared especially to Friuli Venezia Giulia. a threshold slope value of 42° was chosen for modelling rock fall source areas. Tab. geomorphologic numerical monitoring. In Italy the hazard is rated in 4 classes (from very high [P4] to moderate [P1]). the individual maps are called “susceptibility maps”. the intensity is defined by the energy. 2005) describes in detail the methodology of creating the “Tasmanian landslide hazard map series” that started with a pilot area coinciding with the Hobart municipality. and they are also useful for land use planning.000 to 1:10. The assessment of intensities in Switzerland is different for each process. Slope and aspect values used in the susceptibility analysis were 10 metre DTM cells at a scale of 1:24. First the Swiss and the Italian methods are compared.Key-note papers Seite 32 A number of guidelines have been published in Australia by the Australian Geomechanics Society concerning mass movements and landslide risk management. Regional susceptibility mapping of areas prone to landsliding is not yet commonly undertaken in Australia: Because of a lack of good inventory maps and validated inventory databases. For example. also for floods and snow avalanches ([30] Raetzo 2002). which is approximately the limit of resistance of massive armored walls. geophysics. In general the methods used are related to the product.g. and the depth of the slide (T) are used to determine the intensity ([32] Raetzo & Loup 2009). For the planning of protection measures. Italy (Friuli Venezia Giulia). These show the relative susceptibility of hill slopes to the initiation of rainfall triggered soil slip-debris flows. but. Australia. More detailed information on the Swiss method is given by Raetzo & Loup in this issue [31]. For continuous landslide processes.000. They differ from each other in determining the intensity and the probability of a landslide event. Landslide mapping is generally done on a site-specific scale and is performed by geotechnical consultants for the purpose of zoning. geologic mapping. The degree of hazard is defined in a hazard matrix based on intensity and probability criteria ([32] Raetzo & Loup 2009). all energy classes). administration of declared landslide areas and monitoring of a small number of problematic landslides. the potential thickness and the possible depth of the depo-sition determine the intensity. Seite 33 . Detailed analyses and engineering calculations are foreseen for the planning of countermeasures or for expertises (level 3). soil-slip susceptibility maps have been produced. construction of digital elevation models (10x10m). The probability of an event has to be calculated or estimated: • Big events (“Bergsturz”. rock avalanches). • The probability for debris and earth flows is determined through field work and based on inventory data. (e.01 and 0. 300 years return period). which corresponds to yearly probabilities of 0. the energy should be determined. and historical data from local sources. only the block sizes and the velocity need to be determined. residual risk. e. quiescent – episodic with high frequency) • medium: 30-100 years (quiescent – episodic landslides with medium frequency) • low: 100-300 years (quiescent – episodic landslides with low frequency) • >300 years (ancient landslides or palaeolandslides). The scale of work is specified as 1:10. age and magnitude of the processes.03. Numerical modelling of flow processes is also used and the importance of these results is rising. meaning that the event is happening already. or • the total displacement or • the differential displacement or • the peak discharge per unit width (m3/m/ sec.000 kJ for rock falls). 2007). the hazard map is an interpretation of the type of processes. This qualitative method is based on the expert opinion of the scientist. all the energy values are taken into account. while in Switzerland the energy is calculated. For fall processes. This will be calibrated on geomorphologic observations. a table with definition of classes of the geometry is determined (after [12] Heinimann et al.Key-note papers Seite 34 For landslides and rock falls the Swiss evaluation is normally based on intensity maps where 3 or more classes can be chosen. ranging from 1. Whether landslide intensity is required for hazard zoning is to be determined on a caseby-case basis. the energy does not need to be calculated.…). The description of the hazard should include the classification and the volume or the area of the landslides. Comparison between the Swiss and the Italian intensity classification: The differences in determining the intensity between the Swiss ([32] Raetzo & Loup 2009) and the Friuli method ([21] Kranitz & Bensi 2009) are: • For fall processes in the Italian method. magnitude and frequency. different methods of assessment are used. • The Italian method does not differentiate for continuous processes. If protection measures are planned in Switzerland. the values will be assigned by a typological approach based on bibliographical data inherent to the characteristics of temporal return of the various typologies of landslides. Method of Friuli Venezia Giulia ([21] Kranitz & Bensi 2009): The possible frequency or occurrence probability is determined through the records of historical events. it is likely to be required. hazard and risk zoning for land use planning..g. For smaller events the probability is defined by the elements at risk. Other approaches to hazard assessment Australia In the Australian guidelines for landslide susceptibility. For rock fall hazard zoning. The hazard map is an interpretation of the type of processes. Switzerland uses the mean long-term velocity for these continuous landslides. and aerial pictures (which is also the case in the Swiss method) from the year 1954 up to now. In Italy. But for the advanced assessments of rock fall or debris flow hazard. Scenarios are defined when sudden landslide failure or acceleration can take place. the process is moving into a flow. activity. the number of events per length of source area per year (rock fall) or per square kilometer of source area per year (slides) is used for describing the hazard of small landslides. ([22] 2007) describes the French methodology for landslide risk zoning (Plan de Prévention des Risques). The intensity class. • For continuous slides the probability is 1 (or 100%).g. 1998). The classification takes into account the block size of the rocks ([21] Kranitz & Bensi 2009). No specific investigation is necessary. Those carrying out the zoning will have to decide which definition is most appropriate for the study”.003. the annual probability of active sliding or the annual probability that movement will exceed a defined distance or the annual probability that cracking within a slide exceeds a defined length is used to describe the hazard. In AGS ([3] 2007b) it is noted that “there is no unique definition for intensity. available data and reports are sufficient. The risk map is the crossing of the hazard map and the inventory map of major stakes ([22] Malet et al. Seite 35 . is then determined with the geometry-velocity matrix. analyses of historical photos. • The Swiss method determines 3 intensity classes to apply within the hazard matrix for the land use planning.000. only the velocity and volume might be assessed. For large landslides. 10-20. >1mio m3) do not recur. continuous and/or intermittent landslides. Assessment of the probability (Switzerland/ Friuli Venezia Giulia) Swiss method ([32] Raetzo & Loup 2009): The probability assessment of the Swiss method defines the probability in analogy to the recurrence periods used in flood and avalanche protection (30. Another table determines the velocity factor (v). activity.9. In this case the Swiss method takes into account the change from the first to the second move and criteria of the flow processes are applied (see below). 0. The landslide intensity is assessed as a spatial distribution of: • the velocity of sliding coupled with slide volume or • the kinetic energy (e. For example. When fast moving landslides (debris or earth slides according to Varnes) have long run-out distances. The probability is then classified in 4 classes: • high: 1-30 years (active landslides. 100. where 3 classes of risk (R1. also ranging from 1. R3) with specific rules for land use regulations and urbanism can be represented in a matrix depicting hazards and potential consequences. An event with a return period higher than 300 years is normally also considered for the assessment (risk analysis. using the definitions from Cruden & Varnes ([9]. Intensity assessment in Australia: France Malet et al. debris flows) For basic and intermediate level assessments of intensity. If there is a lack of sufficient historical data for the statistical evaluation of the return period.g. rock falls. Therefore the frequency assessment is much more important for hazard zonation than the intensity according to AGS. R2.3. It corresponds mainly to the flood prevention strategy. the regional method of Friuli Venezia Giulia ([21] Kranitz & Bensi 2009) for rock fall: The intensities are classified by different methods using several tables. The Italian method determines 9 intensity classes. 1996). The PPR gives information about the identification of danger zones. an appropriate magnitude-frequency relationship should in principle be established for every landslide type in the study area. For this map.…). Small landslide events often occur more frequently than large ones. The yellow hazard zone includes all other areas affected by avalanches and torrents. proxy data (e. aerial photographs 1:18.000 and 1:5. infrastructures cannot be maintained or can only be maintained with a very high effort due to the high intensity or a high recurrence of avalanches or torrential events. a magnitude-frequency curve is obtained. 2010). 3 gives an overview of hazard maps generated in the considered countries. “possible” or “unlikely”. data on catchment areas. This is regulated by law (Forest Act BGBL. The hazard zone map also delineates blue areas (for the implementation of technical or forestal measures as well as protective measures).g. to propose measures to develop hazard forecast. Protection against natural hazards takes place on the principle of integral risk management. vector format. the assessment of the frequency of a landslide event for the generation of hazard maps is usually determined from the assessment of the recurrence intervals (the average time between events of the same magnitude) of the landslides. In Spain the Geological Institute of Catalonia (IGC) is responsible to “study and assess geological hazards. The scale usually ranges between 1:2. The implementation is regulated by a decree (“Verordnung des Bundesministeriums für Land. assuming that deep seated landslides tend to occur in areas already affected by landslides in the past. The design event is determined by a return period of 150 years. In recognition of this uncertainty. to moderate (P1 “moderata”). whereas the susceptibility map for deep seated landslides was created empirically. fresh scarps.…). ranging from very high (P4 “molto elevata”). silent witnesses. The methods listed for determining the frequency include: historical records. PPR.Key-note papers Seite 36 Frequency assessment in Australia: In AGS ([3]. fauna assemblages in ponds generated by a landslide.000 and also maps in smaller scales where the detailed maps were not available. such as insurance companies. avalanches and debris flows within the “Hazard zonation plan” (“Gefahrenzonenplan”). The brown reference areas are areas presumably affected by other hazards than torrents or avalanches. earthquakes). prevention and mitigation and to give support to other agencies competent in land and urban planning. pollen deposition. BAFU) is responsible for creating guidelines concerning protection against natural hazards (floods. Different landslide types and mechanics of sliding have different triggers (e. 3 classes of risk with specific rules for land use regulations and urbanism can be represented. 10m raster data. avalanches and wood fires. subjective assessment. 2007b). Therefore. 2000) it is noted that “even if extensive investigation is carried out. including avalanches. duration and antecedent conditions. it has been common practice to report the likelihood of landsliding using qualitative terms such as “likely”. but taking into consideration that process areas can expand during reactivation of a landslide. the processes of rock falls. the IGC is charged with making official hazard maps with such finality.000 or 1:50. Nonobservance of the PPR has legal consequences.und Forstwirtschaft.g. The violet reference areas are areas. The basic data used for the investigations contained the following: topographic map 1:25.000 and orthophotos. 436/1976).” A row of useful references on frequency assessment are listed in AGS ([3]. is made by the local authorities (mayors). 440/1975). mass movements. The concepts are similar for these processes to reach a certain level of protection. The map gives information about the determined effects in the relevant area of catchment areas (torrent buffer areas) in red and yellow hazard zones. the plans need to be authorized by the prefects in collaboration with the local authorities and the civil society. it must not be smaller than 1:50. GEORISK data (BISBY). called “Gefahrenzonenkarte” or “hazard zone maps” for floods. This method is similar to the method planned by the Italian legislative body for hydrogeological risk assessment. lichen colonization. geomorphologic features (ground cracks. mass movements. There are PPRs for floods. In 2007. These maps comply with the Catalan Seite 37 . In the red hazard zone. The method is a qualitative method based on the expert judgment of the scientist. geological map 1:25. In some regions of Italy the hazard is assessed using the Swiss method ([30] Raetzo 2002).000. assessing the probability of landsliding (particularly for an unfailed natural slope) is difficult and involves much uncertainty and judgement. raster format. BGBl. where soil and terrain have to be protected in order to keep up their protective function. and in emergency management” ([28] Oller et al. the Federal Office for the Environment FOEN (Bundesamt für Umwelt. high (P3 “elevata”). Nr. In Switzerland. In AGS ([1]. DTM.000. 1976“. earthquakes of different magnitude and peak ground acceleration) with different recurrence periods. If the variation of recurrence interval is plotted against magnitude of the event. but with support by national agencies like CEMAGREF or agencies of the departments. In practice. It is further noted that “landslides of different types and sizes do not normally have the same frequency (annual probability) of occurrence. historical data. as well as brown and violet reference areas. sequences of aerial photographs and/or satellite images. like rock fall or landslides. medium (P2 “media”). 2007b). to quantify hazard. taking into account: • Prevention of an event • Conflict management during an event • Regeneration an event. It was introduced in 1995. rainfalls of different intensity. In Austria only the Austrian Service for Torrent and Avalanche Control (WLV) generates hazard maps. Appropriate changes have been introduced in order to standardize these aspects and contextualize the method for territorial jurisdiction ([21] Kranitz & Bensi 2009). Because of this. The French hazard map. The susceptibility maps for rock falls and superficial landslides were created using modelling. superficial landslides and deep seated landslides were treated separately.000. The constant use of these areas by infrastructures is affected due to these hazards. Made by the municipalities at a scale of 1:10.” Procedures of hazard mapping in the considered regions Tab. the LfU completed the Landslide susceptibility map of Oberallgäu (Bavaria). In Germany a recommendation on how to create a susceptibility map is given by the “Geohazards” team of engineering geologists of German federal governmental departments of geology ([37] SGD 2007). Four classes of hazards are distinguished. snow avalanches).000. correlation with landslide triggering events (rain storms. and reconstruction after The Swiss regulations are described in more detail by Raetzo in this issue [31]. the data available is often limited and this can only be done approximately.000 -1:25. data on forests. Plan de prevention des risques. Hazard Gefahrenpotentialkarte (Karte der potentiellen Wirkungsbereiche) quantitativ Gefahrenkarte Risikokarte Fig. ([18] Kociu et al.” In carrying out the literature survey. And further: “This is largely due to difficulties associated with the quantitative determination of landslide hazard. typically 1:5. and normalized to the period of study. For hazard mapping. moderate and high. based on existing landslides and slope angle thresholds for different geologic units.g. in spite of the title or the intention of the authors..000) scale with 5 hazard descriptors: very high – high – moderate – low – very low.000). the work is done on two scales: land planning scale (1:25. morphological.000 for deep seated landslides.000 -1:25. To assess landslide hazards. In California soil-slip susceptibility maps were produced at a scale of 1:24. building is not allowed. They give information about the relative susceptibility of hill slopes to the initiation sites of Prozesshinweiskarte (Karte der Phänomene) rainfall-triggered soil-slip debris flows ([26] Morton et al. The LFR is obtained by taking the number of delivering landslides per landform.000. The maps are generated in the framework of a mapping plan or as the final product of a specific hazard report.000. The differences call first for a national through time and represent the main resource for susceptibility/hazard assessment. Inventories are the essential base for accurate hazard/risk assessment and have therefore to be established by authorities. 1: Workflow of hazard mapping. 2005) discusses hazard assessment in his thesis: “Despite the time [since the definition of “landslide hazard” given by Varnes and the IAEG Commission on Landslides and other Mass Movements ([39].000) and a site specific (>1:5. 2010) needs information about possible scenarios. deal with landslide susceptibility and not with landslide hazard”. [2]. assessment minimal requirements). Conclusion and recommendations Guzzetti ([11]. The LAR is the area of delivering landslides normalized to the period of study and the area of each landform. Landslide inventories sustain landslide knowledge Seite 39 . which indicates that in those places where a risk exists. The hazard assessment included evaluating a “landslide frequency rate (LFR)“ and a “landslide area rate for delivery (LAR)”. The evidence identified in the field are the facts dealing with natural hazards. this unfortunately proved to be true and contributed to the confusion existing with definitions ([29] Posch-Trözmüller 2010). The state of Utah prepared a landslide susceptibility map for the whole state at a scale of 1:500.000 -1:1. parameters. 2000. The variability of phenomena of mass makes regulations concerning movements methods of hazard assessment difficult. Guidelines regarding hazard assessment should declare the minimal requirements taking into account the final objective and the scale of product. Informationsebene Ereigniskataster Ereigniskarte Thematische Inventarkarte Standortparameter und -verhältnisse Gefahrenhinweiskarte qualitativ / semiquantitativ Dispostionskarte Grunddispositionskarte Erweiterte Dispositionskarte Interpretationsebene / Bewertungsebene harmonization and second for international comparable methods (minimal requirements). These scales imply different approaches and methods to obtain hazard parameters. The Australian AGS guidelines ([1] AGS. the geological. and urban scale (1:5. landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale is sparse.Key-note papers Seite 38 Urban Law (1/2005).000 or more detailed). 1: Flussdiagramm zum Prozess Gefahrenkartierung. hydrogeological and hydrological conditions must be known and analysed: The differences regarding acquisition of information and assessment of the susceptibility/ hazard of slopes to landslides and rock fall shown in the chapter above call for a “harmonization” of the different methods (e. 2010) Abb. ([18] Kociu et al. 1984)] and the extensive list of published papers – most of which.000 delineating the susceptibility in 3 classes: low.[6] AGS 2007a-e) provide for a hazard zonation at a local (1:5. The resulting values are multiplied by one million for easier interpretation. 2007). divided by the total area of that landform. The susceptibility is delineated in 4 classes: high – moderate – low – very low ([10] Giraud & Shaw. 2003). The state of Washington (USA) generated hazard zonation maps at a scale of 1:12. Trigger Precursory signs Silent witnesses Damage "Hazard" to infrastructure Remedial measures Costs of measures and investigation Methods used Degree of precision info/ reliability Reports etc. original slope x site description depth to bedrock depth to failure plane slope aspect slope Geology in general Geology. 1: Comparison of information collected for different inventories Tab. Tab. 1: Vergleich der Informationen in Ereigniskatastern x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Seite 41 .Seite 40 Countries Austria GBA Inventory Basic information when what why who reported when Landslide conditions geometry slope position approx. specified x x x x x x lithology/ stratigraphy x bedding attitude weathering geotechnical properties geologic/ tectonic unit x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x activity x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x where x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x NÖ K MM S By CH SLO IT F AUS O W U D CH SLO IT F AUS USA Key-note papers geotechnical parameters rock mass structure joints/ joint spacing discontinuities structural contributions Land cover/ use Hydrogeology Relationship to rainfall Classification of mass movements Classification type rate of movement material water content Causes. or The peak discharge per unit width (m3/m/sec. v=1 (meaning extremely slow. (<16mm/year).5m). rock avalanche slide flow Whether landslide intensity is required for hazard zoning is to be determined on a case-by-case basis.8m/hour) SG=2 (depth: 2-15m).52m). T dv. D. to 5m/sec. or: SG=1 (<0.8m/hour) SG=3 (depth>15m).8m/hour) SG=2 (d=0. v=1 (<16mm/ year) or: SG=1 (<0.Seite 42 Switzerland rock fall E=energy low intensity E<30kJ 30kJ<E<300kJ E>300kJ moderate intensity high intensity continous slides dv.) SG=3 (depth>15m). v=3 (3m/ min. v=3 (very high to extremely rapid: 3m/min to 5m/sec. v=1 (<16mm/ year) or: SG=1 (depth<2m). 2: Comparison of the intensity-assessment in Switzerland.5m extremely slow.<0. v=2 (16mm/year to 1. D. v=3 (3m/min. D.5m<M<2m. D. T v≤2cm/year 2cm/year<v<10cm/year v>10cm/year.) SG=2 (depth: 2-15m). v=3 (3m/min.5m 0. v=1 (16mm/ or: SG=1 year to 1. to 5m/ sec.8m/hour]) SG=3 (d>2m).5m 0. The landslide intensity is assessed as a spatial distribution of: The kinetic energy or or the total displacement or the differential displacement. T M>2m. v=2 hour) (16mm/year to 1.) SG=3 (d>2m).) SG=2 (meaning: block diameter 0. debris flows) For basic and intermediate level assessments of intensity only the velocity and volume might be assessed. to 5m/sec. to 5m/sec. Italy and Australia Tab. D.g. 2009) Australia rock fall. e. For rock fall hazard zoning it is likely to be required. h>1m dv. v=3 (3m/min. T dolines potentially existing or soluble rocks (gypsum. D. in Italien und in Australien source: AGS ([2]. h<1m flow (earth flow) v≤2cm/year dv.) presence of dolines verified intensity 3 intensity 4 intensity 1 intensity 2 dv. <16mm/ year) or v=2 (meaning: very slow (16mm/ year to rapid [1. T Key-note papers subsidence Italy dolines and danger of collapsing intensity 6 intensity 9 Raetzo & Loup ([32]. acceleration D=differential movement T=thickness M=thickness of potentially displaced mass h=thickness of accumulation of shallow slide or flow spontaneous slides M<0. T 2cm/year<v<10cm/year M<0.8m/ (<2m). v=2 (16mm/year to 1. Tab. h>1m creep (+Permafrost) v>10cm/year.5-2m). or The velocity of sliding coupled with slide volume or the total displacement or the differential displacement. h<1m M>2m.5m<M<2m. 2: Vergleich Intensität – Gefahrenabschätzung in der Schweiz. (or 1m dislocation per event) v=velocity dv=variation of v. v=3 (very high to extremely rapid: 3m/min to 5m/sec.8m/hour) SG=2 (d=0.5m) and v=2 (16mm/year to 1. 2009) rock fall SG=1 and v=1 (meaning: block diam. 2007a) Seite 43 . etc.) SG=geometry factor..52m).) Kranitz & Bensi ([21]. v=1 SG=1 (<0. but for advanced assessments of rock fall or debris flow hazard the energy should be assessed. dislocation per event >1m dv. v=velocity factor slide SG=2 (depth: 2-15m).5m). <16mm/ year). J. indication for landslides and rock fall quantitative. Countries/ projects Italy: Guzzetti x x x 5 x x 3 x Italy: Friuli.: Landslide hazard and risk assessment. Math. Australian Geomechanics. Vol 35. Salt Lake City 2007. Bern 1995. Hochwasserschutz. UND VARNES D. SUB-COMMITTEE ON LANDSLIDE RISK MANAGEMENT (2000): Landslide Risk Management Concepts and Guidelines. F.0001:5.: Harvester-cable yarder system evaluation on slopes: A Central European study in thinning operations. Australian Geomechanics Society. Mitteilungen des Bundesamtes für Wasser und Geologie Nr. A-1030 Wien Andreas von Poschinger Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt Abt..: Landslide types and processes. 3: Comparison of different hazard maps.000 Austria: WLV x 5 x 4 x Seite 45 . [8] BWG . Hazard and Risk Zoning for Land Use Planning. their scales and legends (levels of hazard) 30 years 100 years 300 years (Residual risk zones for RP>300y) quantitative. The Australian GeoGuides for slope management and maintenance. Vol 42. 41 S. modelling) Scale Tab.000 Switzerland: FOEN/BAFU eventually 2 (for torrent and debris flow).. [12] HEINIMANN. SHAW. H. [13] ISPRA INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND RESEARCH: Landslides in Italy. Schuster (eds): Landslide investigation and mitigation: 36-75. Australian Geomechanics. [7] BÄK. Utah Department of Natural Resources. [5] AGS (2007d). [2] AGS (2007a). Keith Turner & Robert L. Australian Geomechanics. Bonn. March 2000. Australian Geomechanics. Utah Geological Survey.): COFE Proceedings “Harvesting logistic: from woods to markets”.. 83/2008.AUSTRALIAN GEOMECHANICS SOCIETY. 20-23 July.E. Vol 42.000 (rural) France: PPR Gewässerschutz 2 (3) Ref. Australian Geomechanics Society. qualitative 1:10. No 1. Univ. Australian Geomechanics Society. qualitative (incl. Vol 42. No 1. In: Schiess. 1998. Maßstäben und Legenden (Grad der Gefahren) Literatur / References: [1] AGS . P.M. 61 Hochwasserschutz und alpine Naturgefahren Lazarettstraße 67 empirical. KOCIU. Commentary on Guideline for Landslide Susceptibility. special report 247. F. Arb. B. probabilistic national is possible. MAP 228DM. D – 80636 München Hugo Raetzo Federal Office for the Environment FOEN Bundesamt für Umwelt BAFU CH . statistic. Bonn 2005.M. Diss.1:10. Symbolbaukasten zur Kartierung der Phänomene. 1996. -1:25.3003 Bern. field investigation) 1:2.: Empfehlungen Symbolbaukasten zur Kartierung der Phänomene Ausgabe 1995.BUNDESAMT FÜR WASSER UND GEOLOGIE: Naturgefahren. Portland. Georisiken. GOLDSCHMIDT. Washington: National Academy Press.000. H. 6. [6] AGS (2007e). [14] KIENHOLZ. Commentary on Practice Note Guidelines for Landslide Risk Management 2007. [3] AGS (2007b).J.000 (urban). 15 Umwelt Unterabteilung Geologie und Bodenschutz statistic and empirical Australia: AGS 1:5.106 Ingenieurgeologie. regional D – 80636 München Gerlinde Posch-Trözmüller 5 Geologische Bundesanstalt Tab.R.0001:25. (Eds. March 2007.000 Richard Bäk Amt der Kärntner Landesregierung Abt. Fak.M. No 1. and Krogstad. Australian Geomechanics. In: A. K. Vol 42. STAMPFER. 3: Vergleich von verschiedenen Gefahrenkarten. R. No 1. Lazarettstraße 67.000 Flatschacher Straße 70.-Naturwiss. empirical 150 years 1:2. Transportation Research Board. Vol 42. Australian Geomechanics Society.. [4] AGS (2007c). KRUMMENACHER. Rome 2008.. statistical (incl.: Landslide Susceptibility Map of Utah. No 1. No 1. Special report 2008.Key-note papers Seite 44 Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: USA: Washington statistical 1:12. VISSER. A – 9020 Klagenfurt Karl Mayer Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt Abt.-A. 6 Wasserbau. [11] GUZZETTI. March 2007. Australian Geomechanics. Tagg. statistic. Schweiz 30 years 100 years 300 years >300 years detail Basic data: inventory Return periods considered for land use (probability) Basic data: susceptibility map Legend: Levels of hazard Comparison of hazard maps Method (assessment. 41-46. L. OR. 2002 [9] CRUDEN D. [10] GIRAUD. Hazard and Risk Zoning for Land Use Planning. field investigation) Fachabteilung Rohstoffgeologie Neulinggasse 38. Reihe Vollzug Umwelt VU-7502-D. March 2007. 10 Geologischer Dienst Ref.. March 2007. B. Practice Note Guidelines for Landslide Risk Management. March 2007. LETOUZE-ZEZULA & LIPIARSKI: Ereigniskataster und Karte der Phänomene als Werkzeug zur Darstellung geogener Naturgefahren (Massenbewegungen). EBERHART. Geol. Australian Geomechanics Society. Veneto quantitative. Guideline for Landslide Susceptibility. R. Gmünd 2005. . Geol. Ljubljana 2008. Bozen 2010. Geoscience Australia.: Maßnahme 3. Universität für Bodenkultur Wien. 2009. Luxembourg.. Forstliche Schriftenreihe. AND IAEG COMMISSION ON LANDSLIDES AND OTHER MASS-MOVEMENTS: Landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice. Ispra EU.2009.. Vortrag Workshop AdaptAlp. Geologische Bundesanstalt. Geol. K. St.: The Tasmanian Landslide Hazard Map Series: Methodology. Bozen 2010.Empfehlungen der Staatlichen Geologischen Dienste (SGD) zur Erstellung von Gefahrenhinweiskarten.. 2009. PH. van Asch. Mineral Resources Tasmania. Karlsruhe. S.1 Hazard Mapping . A. 2009. [19] KOLMER. Sept. [27] NÖSSING. BAFU: Schutz vor Massenbewegungen. 2003.: Landslide Susceptibility Map of Slovenia 1:250. 26. Riverside.2.. 2004.: Landslide risk zoning: What can be expected from model simulations? JRC Expert Meetings on Guidelines for Mapping Areas at Risk of Landslides in Europe 23-24 October 2007.H. 2005... Archiv.. [35] RUFF. [22] Malet. Pölten 2009. Wiss.: Hazard assessment in Switzerland – codes of practice for mass movements. 83-107. [23] MAYER. J. G. 26.. Ausweisung von Bereichen unterschiedlicher Suszeptibilität für verschiedene Typengruppen der Massenbewegung. [37] SGD. Vortrag im Rahmen des Landesgeologentages 2009. Vortrag Workshop AdaptAlp. Entwurf 9.. GRÖSEL. Vorhaben „Gefahrenhinweiskarte Oberallgäu“. Georisikokarte Vorarlberg. HERVAS. H. Literature Survey regarding methods of hazard mapping and evaluation of danger by landslides and rock fall.. Bd.3. ET AL. G.Jahresbericht 2009.M.: The BUWAL method. 2002..Geological Hazards. N. A. B. R. [24] MAZENGARB..2010. Rahmen des [28] OLLER.H.): Natural Hazards in Australia: Identifying Risk Analysis Requirements... Wien 2010. SCHWARZ L. 2005. J. B. Geological Survey of Slovenia. PH. 2006. Entwicklung einer GIS-basierten Gefahrenhinweiskarte betreffend Massenbewegungen auf Grundlage einer digitalen geologischen Karte (1:50. Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt. (ED..-P. N.J. Österreich). LEOPOLD. 17. Pölten 2009. PERSONENKREIS GEOGEFAHREN: Geogene Naturgefahren in Deutschland. Thiery.. K. 2009. P. 1984. 2010 [30] RAETZO. Tasmanian Geological Survey Record 2005/04..2009. B. Diss.2009.: Geogenes Baugrundrisiko Öberösterreich. München 2007. L.-A. S. M. TILCH. M. ALVAREZ. Vortrag im Landesgeologentages 2009. [36] SCHWEIGL. Geological Survey of Austria.. H. & LOUP. [29] POSCH-TRÖZMÜLLER. Univ. Gefährdungskarte. RIBICIC.W. application and enforcement of hazard zone maps for torrent and avalanches control in Austria.2. & SCHMIDT F. Paris. Attachment 4 to the second progress report.000) und eines georeferenzierten Ereigniskatasters.: GEORIOS . Technische Richtlinie als Vollzugshilfe. ISBN 978-92-79-11776-3. 2006 [18] KOCIU. Seite 47 . JRC. 61 pp. LETOUZE-ZEZULA.: Gefahrenzonenplanung in Südtirol.: Implementation. Sterlacchini.: Hazard mapping in Catalonia.: Preliminary soil-slip susceptibility maps. LEOPOLD..: Georisiko-Potenzial Kärnten.J. [25] MIDDELMANN.. H. B. Remaitre. 17.-GIM International 20 (12): 41-43. D.3.: Mapping Landslide Hazards in Austria: GIS Aids Regional Planning in NonAlpine Regions. Bund/Bundesländerkooperation KC-29.: GIS-gestützte Risikonanalyse für Rutschungen und Felsstürze in den Ostalpen (Vorarlberg. [31] REATZO. Endbericht. & LOUP. Y.: Landslide Hazard Mapping in Austria. [26] MORTON. (Ed. CAMPBELL. R. Vortrag im Rahmen des Landesgeologentages 2009. BENSI. MARTINEZ. L. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. 26.-A. 18... [21] KRANITZ. The UNESCO Press. St. Final Report. [33] REEVES.: Geohazards: The UK perspective.B. Bibl. M.2010. M. Puissant. southwestern California. M. C. PINYOL. O. J. 2007.: Datenmanagementsystem GEORIOS (Geogene Risiken Österreich).. St.2. USGS Open-File Report OF 03-17.. H. CH.: AdaptAlp WP 5. D.): Second Scientific Report to the INTERREG IV A project MASSMOVE . TILCH N.. 2007. ArcNews 28 (3): 16.M.Minimal standards for compilation of danger maps like landslides and rock fall as a tool for disaster prevention. [38] TILCH. 2006. In: Posch-Trözmüller. [20] KOMAC.: Geological hazard assessment in Switzerland (this issue) [32] RAETZO. P. F.. Wien. A. [17] KOCIU. International Association of Engineering Geology IAEG Bulletin. MELZNER S. J. p. H.2a „Schaffung geologischer und hydrologischer Informationsgrundlagen“. B. JRC Scientific and Technical Report EUR 23785 EN.Seite 46 [15] KLINGSEISEN. A. TSCHACH. [16] KLINGSEISEN.000. GONZALEZ. HABERLER A. Wien. M.P. Pölten. Maquaire. [34] RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. Th. Canberra 2007. [39] VARNES. van Beek. Wien. G..: Landslide Mapping in Austria. Key-note papers Seite 48 Zusammenfassung: In den Bergregionen treten an Steilhängen verschiedene Arten von Massenbewegungen auf, die Wasser und Sedimente mit sich führen: Muren, Bergsturz und Steinschlag. Das Ziel dieser Abhandlung ist es, einen kurzen Überblick über die vergangenen Analysen der Gefahren von Hangmassenbewegungen zu geben. Obwohl der Schwerpunkt auf Bergstürzen liegt, können die präsentierten Ansätze auch zur Gefahrenbeurteilung von Muren und Steinschlag verwendet werden. Insbesondere Bergstürze und Muren sind sehr häufig miteinander verflochten. Im Folgenden wird „Bergsturz“ im weiteren Sinn als ein Begriff verwendet, der nicht nur auf einen Erdrutsch zu beziehen ist, sondern auch auf andere Hangmassenbewegungen. Schlüsselwörter: Bergstürze, Muren, Felssturz, numerische Ansätze, Bergsturzgefahrenanalyse movements on slopes, including rock-fall, topples 1. The “Early Ages” MATEJA JEMEC, MARKO KOMAC The first extensive papers on the use of spatial information in a digital context for landslide susceptibility mapping date back to the late seventies and early eighties of the last century. Among the pioneers in this field were Carrara et al. (1977) in Italy and Brabb et al. (1978) in California. Nowadays, practically all research on landslide susceptibility and hazard mapping makes use of digital tools for handling spatial data such as GIS, GPS and Remote Sensing. These tools also have defined, to a large extent, the type of analysis that can be carried out. It can be stated that to a certain degree the capability of GIS tools and the accuracy of the in-situ and remote sensing data have determined the current state of the art in landslide hazard and risk assessment. Many publications about landslides and some worldwide landslide research problems can be found in the literature of Einstein (1988), Fell (1994), Dai et al. (2002) and Glade et al. (2005). 2. Terminology The term landslide was defined by Varnes and IAEG (1984) as “almost all varieties of mass and debris flow, that involve little or no true sliding”. Cruden (1991) moderated the accepted definition as “the movement of a mass of rock, earth or debris down a slope”. Later different working groups were established to support a specific level of standardisation in fields related to landslides (UNESCO, IUGS, ISSMGE, ISRM and IAEG) and created the JTC (Joint Technical Committee on Landslides and Engineered Slopes), which continues to work for the standardisation and promotion of research on landslides among the different disciplines. A large set of definitions was later presented by ISSMGE TC32 (Technical Committee on Risk Assessment and Management, 2004) where international terms recognized for hazard, vulnerability, risk and disaster can also be found. Since these definitions were published, many approaches have been implemented (Einstein, 1988; Fell, 1994; Soeters and van Westen, 1996; Wu et al., 1996; Cruden and Fell, 1997; van Westen et al., 2003; Lee and Jones, 2004; Glade et al., 2005) allowing one to conclude that nowadays definitions regarding landslides risk assessment are generally accepted. The latest information of guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning are published by JTC-1 (2008) and van Westen et al. (2008). An Overview of Approaches for Hazard Assessment of Slope Mass Movements Ein Überblick über die Ansätze zur Gefahrenbeurteilung von Massenbewegung Summary: In mountainous areas, various types of mass movements occur on steep slopes involving water and sediment: debris flows, landslides and rockfalls. The aim of this paper is to gather a short overview of the past analyses that dealt with the hazard assessment of slope mass movements. Although the main focus is on landslides, the approaches presented can be used to assess debris flows and rockfall hazards. In particular, landslides and debris flow are very often interlaced between each other. In the following text, the term “landslide” will be used as a term that might not always be strictly connected to only landslides but also to other slope mass movements. In a way it has a broader meaning. Keywords: landslides, debris-flows, rockfall, numerical approaches, landslide hazard assessment Seite 49 Key-note papers Seite 50 Data layer and types 1. Landslide occurrence Landslides Terrain mapping units Geomorphological units Digital elevation model (DEM) Slope map Aspect map Slope length Slope shape Internal relief Drainage density Lithologies Soils and material sequences Structural geological map Vertical movements Land use map Drainage Catchment areas Water table Accompanying data in tables Type, activity, depth, dimensions, etc Units description Geomorphological description Altitude classes Slope angle classes Slope direction classes Slope length classes Concavity/convexity Altitude/area classes Longitude/area classes Lithology, rock strength, weathering process Soils types, materials, depth, grain size, distribution, bulk density Fault type, length, dip, dip direction, fold axis Vertical movements, velocities Land use type, tree density root depth Type, order and length Order, size Depth of water table in time Precipitation in time Earthquakes database and maximum sesismic acceleration Number, sex, age, etc. Roads and railroad types, facilities types Types of lifeline network and capacity of fascilities Type of structure and occupation Industry production and type Number and type of health, educational, cultural and sport facilities Type of touristy facilities Area without natural resources combined Used methods for data collecting Fieldwork, orthophoto, satellite images In-situ survey (fieldwork), satellite images Ortophoto, fieldwork, high resolution DEM SRTM DEM data, topographic map With GIS form DEM With GIS form DEM With GIS form DEM With GIS form DEM With GIS form DEM With GIS form DEM Fieldwork and laboratory tests, archives, orthophoto Modelling form lithological map, geomorphological map and slope map, fieldwork and laboratory analysis Fieldwork, satellite images, orthofoto Geodetic data, satellite data Satellite images, orthofoto, fieldwork Orthophoto, topographic map Orthophoto, topographic map Hydraulic stations Meteorological stations and modelling Seismic data, engineering geological data and modelling Statistics information Atlas, topographic map, local information Atlas, topographic map, local information Topographic map, Housing information Atlas, topographic map, local information Atlas, topographic map, local information Atlas, topographic map, local information Atlas, topographic map, local information Landslide related data can be grouped into four main sets, Table 1 (Soeters and van Westen, 1996). have Debris several flows are processes and that sub-categories different flow are very often interlaced between each other (Fig.1). In many cases, heavy precipitation is recognised as the main cause, and thresholds under different climatic conditions have been empirically evaluated (Caine, 1980; Canuti et al., 1985; Fleming et al., 1989; Mainali and Rajaratnam, 1994; Anderson, 1995; Cruden and Varnes, 1996; Finlay et al., 1997; Crosta, 1998; Crozier, 1999; Dai et al., 1999; Glade, 2000; Alcantara-Ayala, 2004; Fiorillo and Wilson, 2004; Lan et al., 2004; Malet et al., 2005; Wen and Aydin, 2005). Landslides may mobilise to form debris flows by three processes: (a) widespread Coulomb failure within a sloping soil, rock, or sediment mass, (b) partial or complete liquefaction of the mass by high pore-fluid pressure, and (c) conversion of landslide translational energy to internal vibrational energy (Iverson et al., 1997). 2. Environmental (preparatory) factors characteristics. Debris flows are gravity-induced mass movements, intermediate between land sliding and water flooding, with mechanical characteristics different from either of these processes (Johnson, 1970). According to Varnes (1978), debris flow is a form of rapid mass movement of rocks and soils in a body of granular solid, water, and air, analogous to the movement of liquids. In the landslide classification of Cruden and Varnes (1996), debris flows are flow-like landslides with less than 80% of sand and finer particles. Velocities vary between very rapid and extremely rapid with typical velocities of 3 m/min and 5 m/sec, respectively. Landslides and debris 3. Triggering factors Rainfall and maximum probabilities Earthquakes and seismic acceleration 4. Elements at risk Population Transportation system and facilities Lifeline utility system Building Industry Services facilities Tourism facilities Natural resources Fig. 1: Classification of slope mass movements as a ratio of solid fraction and material type. Modified after Coussot and Meunier (1996). Abb. 1: Klassifikation von Massenbewegungen als Verhältnis von Geschiebefraktion und Materialart. Modifiziert nach Coussot und Meunier (1996). Tab. 1: Summary of data needed for landslide hazard and risk assessment. Adapted from Soeters and van Westen (1996). Tab. 1: Zusammenfassung der Daten für Erdrutsch-Gefährdungs- und Risikoanalyse. Adaptiert von Soeters und van Westen (1996). Seite 51 Key-note papers Seite 52 Rockfall is one of the most common mass movement processes in mountain regions and is defined as the free falling, bouncing or rolling of individual or a few rocks and boulders, with volumes involved generally being < 5 m3 (Berger et al., 2002). Numerous studies exist concerning various aspects of rockfall, such as the dynamic behaviour (Ritchie, 1963; Erismann, 1986; Azzoni et al., 1995), boulder reaction during ground contact (Bozzolo et al., 1986; Hungr and Evans, 1988; Evans and Hungr, 1993), or runout distances of falling rocks (Kirkby and Statham, 1975; Statham and Francis, 1986; Okura et al., 2000). Much research was also done on the possible triggers of rockfall, such as freeze-thaw cycles (Gardner, 1983; Matsuoka and Sakai, 1999; Matsuoka, 2006), changes in the rock-moisture level (Sass, 2005), the thawing of permafrost (Gruber et al., 2004), the increase of mean annual temperatures (Davies et al., 2001), tectonic folding (Coe and Harp, 2007) or the occurrence of earthquakes (Harp and Wilson, 1995; Marzorati et al., 2002). In addition, several studies exist on the long-term accretion rates of rockfall (Luckman and Fiske, 1995; McCarroll et al., 1998). Furthermore, since the late 1980s, the field of numeric modelling has become a major topic in the field of rockfall research (Zinggerle, 1989; Guzzetti et al., 2002; Dorren et al., 2006; Stoffel et al., 2006). 3. Numerical approaches to landslide hazard assessment According to Van Westen (1993), the landslide hazard assessment methods have been divided into four groups of analysis. We’ve added an additional group – Artificial Neural Networks. The selection of one method over another depends on several factors (the data costs and availability, the scale, the output requirements, the geological and geomorphological conditions, the tectonogenetic and morphogenetic behaviour of the landslides, and computing capabilities of software and hardware tools). Firstly, inventory analysis, which are based on the analysis of the spatial and temporal distribution of landslide attributes and such inventories are the basis of most susceptibility mapping techniques. On detailed landslide inventory maps, the basic information for evaluating and reducing landslide hazards on a regional or local level may be provided. Such maps include the state of activity, certainty of identification, dominant type of slope movement, primary direction, and estimated thickness of material involved in landslides, and the dates of known activity for each landslide (Wieczorek, 1984). Secondly, the popular heuristic analysis (Castellanos and van Westen, 2003; R2 Resource Consultants, 2005; Ruff and Czurda, 2007; Firdaini, 2008) based on expert criteria with different assessment methods. The landslide inventory map is accompanied with preparatory factors to be the main input for determining landslide hazard zoning. Experts then define the weighting value for each factor. Many researchers utilize statistical analysis (Neuland, 1976; Carrara, 1983; Pike, 1988; Carrarra et al., 1991; van Westen, 1993; Chung & Fabbri, 1999; Gorsevski et al., 2000; Dhakal et al., 2000; Zhou et al., 2003; Saha et al., 2005; Guinau et al., 2007; Komac and Ribičič, 2008; Magliulo et al., 2008; Miller and Burnett, 2008; Pozzoni et al., 2009; Komac et al., 2010), where several parameter maps are surveyed to apply bivariate and multivariate analysis. The key of this method is the landslide inventory map when the past landslide occurrences are needed to forecast future landslide areas. The next approach is deterministic analysis (van Westen, 1994; Terlien et al., 1995; van Westen and Terlien, 1996; Soeters and Westen, 1996; van Asch et al., 1999; Zaitchik et al., 2003; Mazengarb, 2004; Schmidt and Dikau, 2004; Mayer et al., 2010), which is based on hydrological and slope instability models to evaluate the safety factor. Montgomery et al. (1994, 1998 and 2000) have attributed a great importance to precipitation and many other investigations have also been carried out about the relationship between rainfall and landslides (Crozier, 1999; Lida, 1999; Dai and Lee, 2001; Guzzetti et al., 2007). For rainfall induced failures, these models couple shallow subsurface flow caused by rainfalls of various return periods, predicted soil thickness and soil mantle landslides. Numerous studies have used rainfall characteristics, such as duration, intensity, maximum and antecedent rainfall during a particular period, to identify the threshold value for landslide initiation. Many authors (Caine, 1980; Caine and Mool, 1982; Brabb, 1984; Cannon and Ellen, 1985; Jakob and Weatherly, 2003) applied the rainfall intensity duration equation to estimate the threshold. With regard to specific rainfall characteristics, Wieczorek and Sarmiento (1983) used total rainfall duration before specific rainfall intensity occurs; Govi et al. (1985) applied total rainfall during a specific period after rainfall starts; and Crozier (1986) utilized the ratio of total rainfall to antecedent rainfall. Guzzetti et al. (2004) identified the local rainfall threshold on the basis of local rainfall and landslide record and concluded that landslide activity in Northern Italy initiates 8-10 hours after the beginning of a storm. However, many other investigations have been published about the relationship between rainfall and landslides and attribute a large impact to precipitation for the time duration of landslides (Carrara, 1991; Mongomery et al., 1994, 1998; Terlien et al., 1995; Crozier, 1999; Laprade et al., 2000; Alcantara-Ayala, 2004; Coe et al., 2004; Fiorillo and Wilson, 2004; Lan et al., 2004; Wen and Aydin, 2005; Zezere et al., 2005; Giannecchini, 2006; Jakob et at., 2006). While some of them deal with specific cases, others are more concerned with the statistical relationship for creating correlations models and even produce forecasting models based on rainfall threshold values. One of the relatively new methods applied to landslide hazard and susceptibility assessment are artificial neural network (ANN) tools. ANN is a useful approach for problems such as regression and classification, since it has the capability of analyzing complex data at varied scales such as continuous, categorical and binary data. The concept of ANN is based on learning form data with known characteristics to derive a set of weighting parameters which are used subsequently to recognize the unseen data (Horton, 1945). Lee et al. (2003b) developed landslide susceptibility analysis techniques using a multilayered perception (MLP) network. The results were verified by ranking the susceptibility index in classes of equal area and showed satisfactory agreement between the susceptibility map and the landslide location data. Lee et al. (2003a) obtained landslide susceptibility by using neural network models and compared neural models with probabilistic and statistical ones. They also show a combination of ANN for determination of weights used spatial probabilities to create a landslide susceptibility index map (Lee et al., 2004). Rainfall and earthquake scenarios as triggering factors for landslides have been used in hazard assessment with ANNs (Lee and Evangelista, 2006; Wang and Sassa, 2006). Several studies recognize ANN as a promising tool for these applications and most of them use a Multi layer Perceptron (MLP) network and a back propagation algorithm for training the network (Rumelhart et al., 1986; Arora et al., 2004; Ercanoglu, 2005; Ermini et al., 2005; Seite 53 Key-note papers Seite 54 Numerical approach Inventory analysis Basic description of approach Analysis of the spatial and temporal distribution of landslide attributes Based on expert criteria with different assessment methods References Wieczorek (1984) Castellanos and van Westen (2003); R2 Resource Consultants (2005); Ruff and Czurda (2007); Firdaini (2008) Neuland (1976); Carrara (1983); Pike (1988); Carrarra et al. (1991); van Westen (1993); Chung and Fabbri (1999); Gorsevski et al. (2000); Dhakal et al. (2000); Zhou et al. (2003); Saha et al. (2005); Guinau et al. (2007); Komac and Ribičič (2008); Magliulo et al. (2008); Miller and Burnett (2008); Pozzoni et al. (2009); Komac et al. (2010) van Westen (1994); Terlien et al. (1995); van Westen and Terlien (1996); Soeters and Westen (1996); van Asch et al. (1999); Zaitchik et al. (2003); Mazengarb (2004); Schmidt and Dikau (2004); Mayer et al. (2010) Caine (1980); Caine and Mool (1982); Wieczorek and Sarmiento (1983); Brabb (1984); Cannon and Ellen (1985); Govi et al. (1985); Crozier (1986); Carrara (1991); Terlien et al. (1995); Montgomery et al. (1994, 1998 and 2000); Crozier (1999); Lida (1999); Laprade et al. (2000); Dai and Lee (2001); Jakob and Weatherly (2003); Alcantara-Ayala (2004); Coe et al. (2004); Fiorillo and Wilson (2004); Guzzetti et al. (2004); Lan et al. (2004); Zezere et al. (2005); Wen and Aydin (2005); Giannecchini (2006); Jakob et al. (2006); Guzzetti et al. (2007) Gomez and Kavzoglu, 2005; Wang et al., 2005; Pradhan and Lee, 2007, 2009a, 2009b, 2009c; Pradhan et al., 2009; Youssef et al., 2009). Ermini et al. (2005) and Catani et al. (2005) used unique conditions units for the terrain unit definition in ANNs analysis. More critical analyses compare ANN techniques with other methods such as logistic regression, fuzzy weighing and other statistical methods (Ercanoglu and Gokceoglu, 2002; Lu, 2003; Neaupane and Achet, 2004; Miska and Jan, 2005; Yesilnacar and Topal, 2005; Kanungo et al., 2006; Lee, 2007). In the neural network method, Nefeslioglu et al. (2008) showed that ANNs give a more optimistic evaluation of landslide susceptibility than logistic regression analysis. Melchiorre et al. (2006) did further research on the behaviour of a network with respect to errors in the conditioning factors by performing a robustness analysis and Melchiorre et al. (2008) improved the predictive capability and robustness of ANNs by introducing a cluster analysis. Neaupane and Achet (2004) used ANN for monitoring the movement. Moreover, Kanungo et al. (2006) showed that a landslide susceptibility map derived from combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedure is the best amongst the other weighting techniques. Lui et al. (2006) assessed the landslide hazard using ANNs for a specific landslide typology (debris flow), considering among the triggering factors frequency of flooding, covariance of monthly precipitation, and days with rainfall higher than a critical threshold. 4. Approaches to landslide hazard assessment The landslide susceptibility assessment is a particular step in the landslide hazard assessment and is usually based on the comparison of the previously surveyed landslides and the conditional or preparatory causal factors. With this combination a GIS is obtained in a landslide susceptibility map. In susceptibility analyses, triggering causal factors are often not considered. Some research has been done specifically related to the landslide susceptibility assessment (Lee et al., 2003; Sirangelo and Braca, 2004; Guzzetti et al., 2006). Several countries have published national landslide susceptibility maps that are based on their national landslide inventory (Brabb et al., 1999; Guzzetti, 2000; Komac and Ribičič, 2008). One of the proven techniques for landslide susceptibility assessment is the weights of evidence (WofE) modelling. Many landslide susceptibility have been carried out using this method (van Westen, 1993; Fernandez, 2003; van Westen et al., 2003; Lee and Choi, 2004; Suzen and Doyuran, 2004; Neuhauser and Terhorst, 2007; Magliulo et al., 2008). Essentially, the WofE method is a bivariate statistical technique that calculates the spatial probability and odds of landslides given a certain variable. Many investigations have included landslide runout in the analyses for landslide hazard assessment. With research on landslide runout or travel distance started in mid Nineties of the last century (Hungr, 1995; Finlay et al., 1999; Chen and Lee, 2000; Okura et al., 2000; Fannin and Wise, 2001; Wang et al., 2002; Crosta et al., 2003; Hunter and Fell, 2003; Bertolo and Wieczorek, 2005; Hungr et al., 2005; Malet et al., 2005; Crosta et al., 2006; van Asch et al., 2006; Pirulli et al., 2007; van Asch et al., 2007a; van Asch, et al., 2007b) where authors use three types of approaches for runout analysis. These are the empirical approach from previous landslides and geomorphological analysis, the deterministic approach from the geotechnical parameters and the dynamic approach from numerical modelling of runout. Heuristic analysis Statistical analysis Several parameter maps are surveyed to apply bivariate and multivariate analysis Deterministic analysis Apply hydrological and slope instability models to evaluate the safety factor rainfall Use rainfall characteristic to identify the threshold value for landslide initiation Artificial neural network (ANN) Horton (1945); Rumelhart et al. (1986); Ercanoglu and Gokceoglu (2002); Lee et al. (2003a); Lee et al. (2003b); Lu (2003); Arora et al. (2004); Lee et al. (2004); Neaupane and Achet (2004); Catani et al. (2005); Ercanoglu Learning from data with known characteristics to derive (2005); Ermini et al. (2005); Gomez and (2005); Miska and Jan (2005); Wang a set of weighting parameters, Kavzoglu et al. (2005); Yesilnacar and Topal (2005); which are used subsequently Kanungo et al. (2006); Lee and Evangelista to recognize the unseen data (2006); Lui et al. (2006); Melchiorre et al. (2006, 2008); Wang and Sassa (2006); Lee (2007); Pradhan and Lee (2007,2009a, 2009b, 2009c); Nefeslioglu et al. (2008); Pradhan et al. (2009); Youssef et al. (2009) Tab. 2: Review of numerical approaches to landslide hazard assessment with short description of approach and references. Tab. 2: Überprüfung von numerischen Ansätzen zur Gefahrenabschätzung von Rutschungen mit einer kurzen Darstellung des Ansatzes und Referenzen. Seite 55 AGS. 2004. Leone et al. values of elements at risk and their vulnerability. Risk in this context. Chowdhury and Flentje. 1992. 2001. Castellanos Abella and van Westen (2005) and Saldivar-Sail and Einstein (2007). Chowdhury. ASTER and Google Earth. low and very low.000. They include either estimation of hazard or estimation of vulnerability and consequences (Morgan. 2000. The input is a set of maps that are the spatial representation on the criteria. which are grouped. Semi-quantitative approach efficiently uses spatial multi-criteria techniques implemented in GIS that facilitate standardization. 2000. moderate. at this level. the nature of the building/road that they are in. the vulnerability to landslides may depend on runout distance. Koirala and Watkins (1988).000 and 1:100. usually the multi-criteria evaluation is used (see references below). Among the quantitative approaches found in literature there are some basic similarities but also some differences between the approaches. 2000. The classification of the landslide risk assessment is still in progress. With the semi-qualitative landslide risk assessment approach. 2003). and monitoring or warning systems. The aim of landslide hazard and risk assessment studies is to protect the population. This approach were found in literature from Lateltin (1997). The strategies may be grouped into planning control.. their proximity to the slide.Key-note papers Seite 56 Landslide fundamental vulnerability component assessment in the is a and the risk areas are categorized generally in three or five classes as very high. 1996. 1988). etc (Finlay. Conclusion In this paper. instead of qualitative classes (0-1. 1996. usually the lack of financial support to produce risk assessment maps for dangerous areas results in emphasis on remediation measures. Most publications about vulnerability are related to hazard and risk assessment (Mejia-Navarro et al. Nadim et al. and the elements at risk (person). More details about the weighting system are published by Brand (1988). Powell. (2004). In general. The qualitative landslide risk assessment approach is based on the experience of the experts Seite 57 . engineering solution. Mwasi. is seen as a disaster that could happen in the future. 2005. the use of SRTM. Einstein. This method is applicable for spatial analysis using GIS and usually applied at national or regional levels. The theoretical background for the multicriteria evaluation is based on the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) developed by Saaty (1977). 1994. Based on the statistical results. Quantitative risk analysis and consequent assessment uses information about hazard probability. Generally. volume and velocity of sliding. van Westen. which ease the creation of landslide inventory databases. 1996).. semi-qualitative and quantitative (AGS. standardised and weighted in a criteria tree. The AHP has been extensively applied on decision making problems (Saaty and Vargas. Fell. 1996. 2000. 6. Recently some research has been carried out to apply AHP to landslide susceptibility assessment (Barredo et al. weighting and data integration in a single set of tools. which doesn’t end at the stage where results of assessment process are included in the RMC.. Walker 2000. which mainly depend on data availability. high. debris flow or rockfall hazard risk assessment. a basis for any further hazard assessments. The total risk map could be obtained by combining hazard and vulnerability and made directly or specific risk or consequence maps can be created and analyzed in order to achieve some preliminary conclusions. 5. Komac (2006) designed multivariate statistical processing techniques in order to obtain several landslide susceptibility models with data at scale 1:50. Nie et al. 1984. It could be applicable to any scale. weights are assigned under certain criteria. and where they are in the building. different approaches for the evaluation of slope mass processes are reviewed. Ragozin and Tikhvinsky. 1997. 0-10 or 0-100). Blochl and Braun (2005). Chowdhury and Flentje (2003). In any event the obstacles related to the availability of data are smaller each day due to low-cost satellite information. The vulnerability maps are expressed with values between 0 and 1. 1996). Cascini (2004). The main object of these investigations determined the elements of risk which have impact on structures on its surface and estimate the cost. Whereas in countries with high standards. In a way we could define it as a spiral rather than as a circular process since the same position is never reached again. Landslide (or any natural hazard for that matter) assessment process is just one of several steps in the (Landslide) Risk Management Cycle (RMC). 2005). In developing countries. 1988. AGS (2000). Ragozin and Tikhvinsky. evaluation of landslide risk (Leone et al... 2000). Meanwhile the output is one or more composite index maps indicating the completion of the model used. However. Quantitative landslide risk assessment has been used for specific slopes or very small areas using probabilistic methods or percentage of losses expected (Whitman. several further approaches are possible. When implementing the semi-quantitative model. results and measures obtained should or may be included into the landslide risk management process governed by decision makers to mitigate landslide risk of the community or. Landslide risk management At the end of the assessment process when landslide susceptibility and risk assessment have been identified. 2005). 1994. we can see that many researchers use different approaches to evaluate landslides. their nature and their proximity to the slide. The risk assessed can be compared with the acceptance criteria to decide upon the landslide mitigation measures required. Hollenstein. acceptance. Fell et al. RMC is a live system where each measure/provision results in a consequence(s) that influence(s) further development in and steps of this cycle. Probabilistic values (0-1) are obtained at the expense of a certain amount of monetary or human loss. which provide numbers as outcome. Lee and Jones. 2002. (2006). the approach to the topic is focused into prevention and into remediation if disasters occur. The landslide inventory map is probably the most important data set to work on for producing a reliable prediction map of spatial and temporal probability for landslides or other slope mass movements and a necessity for any type of analyses.. 2001. on the road. 2001). Anderson et al. Ko Ko et al. Ragozin. At the moment the classification is based on the level of quantification dividing the landslide risk assessment methods in qualitative. 2009). but more reasonably used at medium scale. the economy and environment against potential damage caused by landslides (Crozier and Glade. Wu and Chen. IADB (2005).. all analyses are based on the assumption that historical landslides and their causal relationships can be used to predict future ones (“past is a key to the future”). elements at risk (buildings and other structures). where 0 means no damage and 1 means total loss. Budetta (2004). 2000. several landslides susceptibility maps were created. California. Numerical simulation of debris flows. P. Analysis and prediction of rockfalls using a mathematical model. Rickenmann and C. 2000. 2006. Series IV. J. O.. C.. edited by: Hungr. CASAGLI. 35. E. M. Bonnard (Editor). Natural Hazards. Recognition. USGS. G. San Francisco Bay Region..M. DORREN. G. CAINE. M.. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology. P.. CASTELLANOS. D. 821–831.E. V.L.. A.H. ALCANTARA-AYALA. P.I. Rotterdam. R.T. COE. Slovenia marko. P. 101–110.. HERVAS. Earth-Sci. 1991. Rock Mechanics and Mining Sci. L. Rev.A. 2003. / ed. 2005. AND LEE. Strom and R.. H. Probabilistic Prediction Models for Landslide Hazard Mapping. C.komac@geo-zs. J. / Forest Ecology and Management 207 (2005) 75–85 by the European Commission (Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources. AND WISE. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 5. CARRARA. A. E. 2. Landslide hazard and risk: Issues.J. AND VARNES.Photogrammetric engineering and remote sensing.. Special Report No. Senneset (Editor). Efficiency of the Protective Function of Mountain Forest against Rockfall.S.M. Eng.. p. 263. Assoc.. Switzerland). T. Earthquake-induced landslides in Central America. COE. Inovative approaches to landslide hazard and risk mapping... Catani.A. R.. R. BRABB.P. Journal Earth Surface Processes and Landform 16 (5). University of Naples “Federico II” piazzale Tecchio. . P..... 103-122. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. Landslide Risk – Systematic approaches to assessment and management in Landslide Risk Assessment. D. S. 2005. University of New South Wales. CROSTA. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5. BENAVIDES.. T. Bull. KIENHOLZ. HAMZA.. MF-360. 3rd International Conference on Debris Flows Hazards Mitigation: Mechanics. AND BEST. Whashington. C–J. Landslide hazard and risk mapping at catchment scale in the Arno River Basin. G. DAI. CATANI. AND NGAI. Env.Mathematical Geology. F. FELL. 44–92.S.si Marko Komac Dimičeva ulica 14 SI – 1000 Ljubljana. Geol. Davos. Utah. R.. AND GOKCEOGLU. 146–160. Rockfall–Forest Interrelation. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience X (2).1986. Anderson M. 1996. Influence of tectonic folding on rockfall susceptibility.. 31 May ... 252. 16–21 June 2002. International Journal of Remote Sensing 25 (3). CARRATELLI. ROCKFOR. 9 – 23. Rainfall induced debris flows in pyroclastic deposits. Geografiska Annaler Series A Physical Geography. Dordrecht. 64(1): 65-87. 2006. D. Frequency-volume relation and prediction of rainfall induced landslides.. FOCARDI. J. PAMPEYAN. C. AND REICHENBACH. R. 1991. COROMINAS. C. BERGER. 993–1001. and Eberhardt.A. London. Hermanns.. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Landslides (Lausanne.. California. LEE. 24 (9). American Fork Canyon. CROZIER. BRABB. ARORA.N.. R.recent developments. LAPRADE. Campania (Southern Italy). Nepal. Slovenia mateja. 49. Landslide in the Kolpu Khola drainage. C. M. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Landslides in Lausanne. 2004. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 2. AND NASHEM. ERCANOGLU. LOPEZ-CARRERAS. Millpress.P. Engineering Geology. 2001.J. Landslide risk assessment. Landslide Risk Assessment. pp. NATO Science Series.L.. F. Landslide types and processes. P. 32..California Geology. vol. p. A.. American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Vol. FINLAY. O. 1075-1090.C. Himalayas. 1983: Multivariate models for landslide hazard evaluation. H. In: C. MERENDA. Depatrment of Conservation.ITC. 31(2): 261-272. AND HUNGR. Fell. PhD thesis.. E. GARZONIO. 2003.. 1059-1074. HARRIS. Chen. University of Salerno. D. K.H. Calibration of numerical models for small debris flows in Yosemite Valley. AND VAN WESTEN. VAN WESTEN. CROSTA. Landslide susceptibility assessment of SE Bartin (West Black Sea region.. consequences and environment. A. BRAUNER. 41–46.... GUPTA.S. Division of Mines and Geology. BLÖCHL. classification and mechanical description of debris flows. 3–26. 2004. AND LEE.. 32.P. J. 65(12). 2003. 979–992. 1980. Earth Surf. 1997. Vol. CRUDEN. L. 66(8).Balkema.. 15. 2005. Engineering Geology 59 (3-4). 2004. 720–730.. Gran Canaria Island.. Imposimato.. 1389–1399. 145–153.. Balkema. Eberhardt.. L. Map showing inventory and regional susceptibility for Holocene Debris Flows and related fast-moving landslides in the conterminous United States. 1998. 515-524.1993. (eds).jemec@geo-zs. R.289. by O. G. Vol. Environmental Geology 41. EINSTEIN. Proces. J. CROZIER. 982–994. FP5). Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Massive Rock Slope Failure: New Models for Hazard Assessment. E.K. A. E. 555–560.. CARRARA. 2004.. L. Computer-based data bank and statistical analysis of slope instability phenomena. and GLADE. A. FERNANDEZ. BERGER. L. HO. G. The effect of rise in mean annual temperature on the stability of rock slopes containing ice-filled discontinuities.. 2008. Eng. AND VAN WESTEN. Chichester. 135-140. G. S.. The Netherlands. M. ANDERSON. p. Bonnard (Editor). COUSSOT. School of Civil Engineering. G. 62. GUZZETTI.. 1999. Environmental Geology. M. Wiley. US Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map. 49– 54. p. DAI. BOMMER. 2005. P. MICHAEL. MAP MF-2329. W. S. 329–343. CHEN. Switzerland. Acta Mechanica 64. 247.from theory to practice. BRABB. R. CARDINALI. AND LEROI. W. 403–426. Flowing. S. K. An artificial neural network approach for landslide hazard zonation in the Bhagirathi (Ganga) Valley. B.. F.. In: Turner A. R. Validation of semi-empirical relationships for the definition of debris-flow behaviour in granular materials. 2005. sliding. 2000. CUCCHIARO.. BARBERA. 2001..F.. Italy. Geomorphology 66 (1–4). C. AND WIECZOREK. Brauner et al. The Netherland. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 12 (1). Landslide risk assessment and management an overview.. H. R.. S. Special lecture: Analysis methods of assessing landslide risk . Y... Germany— research framework and first results of homeowners’ and experts’ surveys. 427-445. A. Crozier M (Eds) Landslide hazard and risk.H.. P. Prediction and Assessment. 2002.. A. 1985. 1985: Rainfall conditions for abundant debris avalanches. 2007. 187–222. Purworejo Regency. R.G. 1999. NW Turkye) by fuzzy approach. December 1985. F. 2002.. AND HUTTER. E. AND FABBRI. 43: 27-29. 157-173.. Publ Rotterdam: A A Balkema. London.Balkema.T.A. BOWLES. In: S. BERTOLO. 2005. Landslides: causes. Fell. J. H. Geol. 1995. and Roddeman.J.. AND BRAUN. K. Seattle. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Landslides. Lausanne. FIORILLO.. Landslide susceptibility in San Mateo County.Y. 2002. (Editors).. In: C. M.C. Landslide hazard mapping and its evaluation using GIS: An investigation of sampling schemes for a grid-cell based quantitative method. D.F.. AND MENDUNI. J. Gadjah Mada. C.. in: Landslides Risk Management. In: Cruden.. M. RIGHINI. middle mountains. Scarascia Mugnozza.. Economic assessment of landslide risks in the Swabian Alb.. 36-75. E. Fell. Seite 59 .. F. 80. BRAND. BUDETTA P. M. S.K. Hazard assessment of rainfall-induced Geomorphology 61. 1994. 2000. 559–572.. 2000. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sci.A. P. Hungr. 389–396. 1996. S. N. International J. 16.C. 1982.. W. CANNON. 137–144. Second Annual Report (CD). CARRARA. 1988. Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. E. v. GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Bull. FELL. R.. 297 – 308. Jogjakarta – Enschede.. C. ITC. A. Indonesia. USA. Enschede. COLGAN. 1-10.A. 62: 23-27. 30 (3).. Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (north of Yenice. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 5. F. Prediction of rainfall triggered landslides: a test of the antecedent water status model. AND KEATON. 40. Editors.. Assessment of rockfall risk along roads. In: Glade T. Croom Helm. AND FRATTINI. AZZONI. F. Rotterda. N. Rockfall analysis —a mathematical model and its test with field data. and Casagli. G. Earth and Environmental Sciences vol. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 30. Proc. 131-145.. 1984. Concepts and Approach. N. Evans. 1977. WILSON. AMADA. 1988.. 2003.. 427-445. AND RODRIGUEZ. CHUNG... Natural Hazards and Earth System Sci. T. Department of Geotechnical Engineering. Transportation Research Board. Trondheim. Development of a system for landslide risk assessment for Cuba. Application to the Contraviesa Area (Granada..H....Photogrammetric engineering and remote sensing. financed 84 M. BONILLA.P. AND ELLEN. PAMINI. Falls Church. R.J. Celano. Spain). CARRARA. MEUNIER.J. M. Norway.R. ERISMANN.500 scale. Section of Applied Geology. 6. CASTELLANOS ABELLA. 2005 Vancouver. 75.. PASQUUI.. CROSTA. CRUDEN D. CAINE..si BOZZOLO. F.D. E. 2001.Z. 253-266. 209-227. F. Literatur / References: AGS. Proc 5th International Symposium on Landslides. Real size experiments and 3D simulation of rockfall on forested and nonforested slopes. 1991. Italy. Master.. FANNIN. Italy.J. CHOWDHURY.AND MOOL. Mountain Research and Development 2 (2). M. 189– 220. GRASSL. 1997. Landf.B. C. O. SAVAGE. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 38.J. PACK..C. R. N. W. M. Central Java. HARP. Taylor and Francis.E. 371 pp.R. 2005. CROVELLI... AND GUPTA.. An empirical–statistical model for debris flow travel distance.A. Engineering Geology 63. Regionalization of rainfall thresholds: an aid to landslide hazard evaluation. U.G. Map at 1: 62. In: Proceedings of the international conference on landslide risk management.. 327–343. 19– 40.. J. synopsis of basic mechanisms. A. AND FLENTJE. Probabilistic assessment of precipitation triggered landslide using historical records of landslide occurence. 981–989. PUTTERS. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. 1986... Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie 21.F. American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 1996. Landslide risk assessment and acceptable risk.Key-note papers Seite 58 Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Mateja Jemec Dimičeva ulica 14 SI – 1000 Ljubljana. I. 7. FIRDAINI.J. 1999. Land capability and landslide hazard assessment for landuse priority in Gintung watershed. 25-50. AND FELL. VII International Symposium on Landslide. M. Role of slope reliability analysis in landslide risk management.. A framework for landslide risk assessment and management. 1986. S. Artificial neural networks applied to landslide susceptibility assessment. 2004. Kluwer Academic Publishers. ERCANOGLU.. The assessment of rockfall hazard at the base of talus slopes. T. BARREDO. Department of Civil Engineering.. Comparing heuristic landslide hazard assessment techniques using GIS in the Tirajana basin. 1–14. The risk assessment of slopes. California. A risk based method for landslide mitigation. E. T. Special lecture: Landslide risk assessment procedure.J. rolling. CRUDEN.committee on landslide risk management. Couture and E. 1-40. Landslide Hazard Assessment Using The Heuristic Models. LACASSE. H. CROZIER. landsliding in Mexico. Editors.L. USA. Falls Church. 267–272. Australian Geomechanics Society sub.. 825– 833. Rotterdam. A. Engineering Geology. D. p. Vol. DAVIES. Spain. Sacramento.. G.. pp. Risk assessment of fast landslide. CASCINI. D. A. R. 1988. Methodology for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping by Means of a GIS.D.. CANUTI.G. AND ANIYA.C. C. Australia. Rotterdam. 2005. R. 1978. A. In: D.L. Couture.A. 620–636. Landslide risk management concept and guidelines. pp. H. 2004. In: K. Ermini.R. EINSTEIN. L. EVANS. Int. Landslide risk assessment in Hong Kong. Shuster R.. ERMINI. DHAKAL. E. F.1996. ZANINETTI.E. A simple definition of a landslide. GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 37.3 June. J. C. London...K. M.A.. A. Turkey) by artificial neural networks. bouncing. 403-324. Australian Geomechanics 35 (1).. The rainfall intensity duration control of shallow landslides and debris flow. Correlation between rainfall and landslides. Landslides 2 (4). Canadian Geotechnical Society I. 2002. CHOWDHURY.K. 709–724. Landslides triggered by the 23 November 2000 rainfall event in the Imperia Province. R. SCHMIDT. DK. AND J.. 2006. MWASI. 2002. 2004. NaDIM. 233–255. China. M. MATSUOKA. J.. J. Natural Hazards 30(3). Atmos. C.. 2003a. J. O. Bulk appraisal of slopes in Hong Kong. Geol. 31. Relationship between rainfall and shallow landslides in the southern Apuan Alps (Italy). ROSSI. L. M. 565–577. July 2004. AND GREENBERG. 2000. M.7.. Vancouver... Rotterdam.. AND ZELANO. AND STARK. S. P. I. AND OAKS. GUZZETTI F. hazard and risk zoning. Hydrometeorological thresholds for landslide initiation and forest operation shutdowns on the north coast of British Columbia. J. Engineering Geology 58(2). AND DIETRICH. 213–226. GRUBER. REMAITRE.. HOLM.. M. MAGUIRE. 687–695. 2006. K.. GLADE. fuzzy and combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedures for landslide susceptibility zonation in Darjeeling Himalayas. M. H. P. Sym. 2005. Computers & Geosciences 28 (9). J. 1975. 05344. 228-238. 28/4. W. Estimating landslide motion mechanism. Swiss Federal Office for Water and Geology (FOWG).D. 2006. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences. O.. 115–131. Rock falls induced by earthquakes: a statistical approach. Travel distance angle for "rapid" landslides in constructed and natural soil slopes. H. A probabilistic model of debris-flow delivery to stream channels.. 311–314. 633– 640. Landslide fatalities and the evaluation of landslide risk in Italy. GUO.. M.L. W. 2000. AND PEDUZZI. S. M.. O. http://www..K. M. Modelling landslides: triggering rainfall thresholds at a range of complexities. K. Landslide risk assessment. A.. Alberta. L. Canada. J. 2006. 1945. N. Dilley M (eds) Natural disaster hotspots.. N.. 2008.S. M. Bull. Balkema. 215–235.. G. A. GESSLER. 293-313. Use of backpropagation neural network for landslide monitoring: a case study in the higher Himalaya. AND WATKINS. M. Sci. REICHENBACH P. Chichester. SHAKESBY.. Ljubljana: Geological survey of Slovenia. FLENTJE. symp. Journal of Geology 83.. AND WON. for land use planning. SITAR. LEE. LUCKMAN. Land use conflicts resolution in a fragile ecosystem using Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) and a GIS-based Decision Support System (DSS).K. The Netherlands.S. DI LISIO.. HUNGR. pp. H. 71(3-4). S. M. GOMEZ. Couture... H. Landslide Risk Management. Geol.. 2007. EBERHARDT.. 311–324. J. KOMAC. 331–354. KIRKBY. 1999. 79–95.. edited by: Senneset. 51–60. H. 2000. 2004. Nat. In: Arnold M.T. 2006.H.H.. K. 1739–1757. Engineering Geology 85. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 32. Boulder.J. The Netherlands. P.. Appl. Geomorphology 66. Thomas Telford.. Proceedings of the 8th int. Quantification of risks from slope hazards.S. John Wiley & Sons. 2003b... 2005. Surface stone movement and scree formation. KJEKSTAD. MELCHIORRE. 2004. Freeman. 27.S. AND BURNETT. 30. J. The relationship between the probability of landslide occurrence and rainfall. AND ACHET. AND PARK. R. Arctic and Alpine Res. AND FELL. K. HOELZLE. Rainfall thresholds for the initiation of landslides in central and southern Europe. Landslide susceptibility map of Slovenia 1:250. London...TECGNICAL COMMITTEE ON RISK ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT. DOMAAS. E. 411-435. GARDNER. Artificial neural network and robustness analysis in landslide susceptibility zonation. AND CHOWDHURY. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Landslides in Lausanne. 2. B. 2010. S. Western Liguria. Geological hazard. E..). KOMAC. ZHANG. Am.. 357–364. 289-302.. cliff during thawing periods. GUINAU. LUZI.W. Sci. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences. A. 1997. M. Ltd. GUZZETTI. 1999. L13504. R.P. British Columbia. 2005. J. O. Eberhardt. 1994. A physically based model for the topografic control on shallow landsliding. M. Canadian Rocky Mountains. 2004. New York. Annu. D. M.383–398. R.H. 137-156. C. pp. 2004. 1997. T. Vol.. Catena 34 (3-4). 2001. Int. 239-267.E. 2000. AND EVANGELISTA. LANGE..O. ARORA.4th International Conference on Integrating GIS and Environmental Modeling (GIS/EM4): Problems. Venezuela. American Geophysical Union. 1997.. JTC-1 JOINT TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON LANDSLIDES AND ENGINEERED SLOPES. O. 811– 824. Vol. Banff.H. Inc.. GLADE.. 299-315... 2006. P. P. 5. R.000. D. A stochastic hydro-geomorphological model for shallow landsliding due to rainstorm. R. (Ed. Geomorphology 10.. GORSEVSKI.. 802 pp. KOMAC.S.. K. UK.. 1988... 63 (2). Artificial neural networks and grey systems for the prediction of slope instability. Shannon & Wilson.M. WON.Flow Hazard.F..). Map 3. 610–623. International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. Š. D. Shaking intensity thresholds for rock falls and slides: Evidence from 1987 Whittier Narrows and Superstition Hills earthquake strongmotion records. 2008. LEE. MILLER. Bull. ARDIZZONE F.P. DETTI..C. R. E. R. Guidelines for landslide susceptibility. DC. C. HORTON. 1995. S.G.. E. A. S. Engineering Geology 74 (3–4). 1999. P.Water resources research. B. 275–370. Landslide Hazard and Risk. H. 229–245. 454 pp. GIANNECCHINI. Indicators of disaster risk and risk management. Chen R.J. 2007.Version 1. S. Geophysical Res. Hobart. G. Rockfall frequency and distribution in the Highwood Pass area. 1361-1376.G.. REICHENBACH P. pp. 615–623.A. 11–27. R. Summary report for WCDR.. Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural networks in Jabonosa River Basin. REID. E. 1970. S. G. AND SCHWAB.J. Internal Report W-7992– 01. 2005. 99–128. Landslide Risk Assessment: prediction of travel distance. Glissements de terrain. Wiley. SAKAI. Engineering Geology. MATSUOKA. R. JOHNSON.000. H. AGLIARDI. H. AND REMONDO. J.. IVERSON... MEJÍA-NAVARRO. LIDA. WOHL. D. Case studies.J. R. Umbria. ZHOU.G. MATTEUCCI. Can. P. Geomorphology and landslide susceptibility assessment using GIS and bivariate statistics: a case study in southern Italy. 2005.E.P. 2003. 2000. MAGLIULO. Abstracts 8. 25.M... Geomorphology. C.. 347– 366.C. S.. Hazards Earth Syst. B.C.. GUZZETTI F. M. X.. Landslides. 2006. E. G. http://www. Rotterdam. Empfehlungen 1997. Taylor & Francis Group. JohnWiley & Sons. 1983. CARDINALI M. Gis-based debris flow source and runout susceptibility assessment from DEM data – a case study in NW Nicaragua.. of America 85 (6). Geogr. Vulnerability assessment of elements exposed to mass movements: working toward a better risk perception. 94:184-205. KO KO.. AND WANG.. A. A landslide susceptibility model using the analytical hierarchy process method and multivariate statistics in perialpine Slovenia. P...A... Phys. L. SARKAR. L. GUZZETTI.. 2004.. Italy. R.. T. Engineering Geology 78 (12)..M. RUSSO. Eng. 85– 138. 2004. HAEBERLI. The Geologic Society of America. 2008. AND FOLTZ. In: Slaymaker. KHAZAI. JAKOB. VII Int. J.. Proc. LEE. ZOU. P. Landslide hazard spatial analysis and prediction using GIS in the Xiaojiang watershed. vulnerability.J. GOVI. Geol. CROSTA. A hydroclimatic threshold for landslide initiation on the North Shore Mountains of Vancouver. H. 76: 109–128.. on Spatial Information for Sustainable Development. VILAJOSANA. Vancouver. A. 1998. D. MONTGOMERY. AND CROZIER. J. T.. J. Deichemann U. 2006. R. AND GUPTA. 1998. Artificial neural networks and cluster analysis in landslide susceptibility zonation. pp. O. Central Italy. 8808-8814. Y. 1988. Geotech.H.M. R. AND SORZANA. M. Seite 61 . CIPOLLA F. Tasmanian Landslide Hazard Series.A.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.. LEE. Bonnard). A. Prospect and Research Needs. D. Evaluation of factors controlling earthquake-induced landslides caused by Chi-Chi earthquake and comparison with the Northridge and Loma Prieta events. Engineering Geology. 263–270. F. California event. 1995.. Neural network modelling for regional hazard assessment of debris flow in Lake Qionghai Watershed. AND CARDINALI M. MOSTYN. AND EVANS. ROBERTSON. HUNTER.. 56 (1945). V. AND KAVZOGLU... 36: 556-562. AZZONI. 6. 2. G. 2002. 820-833. D. R. Natural Hazard 47. WANG. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie N. O. K. on Landslide. travel distance and velocity. MORTARA. 2004.E.K. K. vol.. 2004. F.. 30/4. T. HOLLENSTEIN. LUI.. 2005.. 7: 703-716. e Idrog. Spatial and temporal patterns of Late Holocene rockfall activity on a Norwegian talus slope: lichenometry and simulation-modelling approach.T. Eventi idrologici e frane. 2004. MONTGOMERY. SALVATI P. PERUCCACI.. H. Physical Processes in Geology. K. Washington. Use of artificial neural network for analysis of the susceptibility to landslides at Boun. A model for the runout analysis of rapid flow slides.. Estimating long-term rockfall accretion rates by lichenometry. Landslides 3. S. USA. MALET. Conf. Lett. Kenya. U. Geomorphology. AST´E.E. Rockfall activity from an alpine Geomorphology 28.. Statistical analysis of an earthquake-induced landslide distribution — the 1989 Loma Prieta. 188: 789-814.. Evaluation of current statistical approaches for predictive geomorphological mapping.. Environmental Geology 44. Department of Infrastructure Energy and Resources. Glossary of Risk Assessment Terms. W.. GUZZETTI.. FELL. p 204 NEAUPANE. M. Reginal test of a model for shallow landsliding. 1995. MORGAN.ch/themen/natur/e/index.. BC. Environmental Geology 49.C. Chichester. net/5/301/2005/. ANDERSON. E. (Eds. Inter-American Development Bank (IADB). R. 20(2). Inform.. Environmental Geology 52. p. Mineral Resources Tasmania. Berücksichtigung der Massenbewegungsgefahren bei raumwirksamen Tätigkeiten. WILSON. AND ZANCHI. 943–955... Soc.. LAIGLE. Earth surface processes and landforms 28. N. 2003. Frost wedging and rockfalls on high mountain rock slopes: 11 years of observations in the Swiss Alps.. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. MAZENGARB. Geophyiscal Res.. Engineering Geology 73. HARP. 89–107. Symp. Hobart . 301–307.. C. Env. 557 p. In: Hungr.. R. Geological Survey of Slovenia. Rev. Colombia. 1992. Switzerland. N. P. MCCARROLL.. 2007. SULLIVAN. MISKA. AND DIETRICH. ANN black box. AND RIBIČIČ. 149–165. P. F. Landslides in Research. Washington. 309–328. Global landslide risk case study. F. M.. Seattle landslide study. China. M.. C. Theory and Practice.. W.bwg. MELCHIORRE. ISSMGE TC32.. MARZORATI. demonstrated for the Coast Range of Oregon. O. LU.... GALLI M. Application and verification of fuzzy algebraic operators to landslide susceptibility mapping. H. Ltd. Debris-flow susceptibility map of Slovenia 1:250.. B. 1079–1093. AND LEROI. 1985.Potential Debris. Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: hydro physical approach to quantitative morphology.. Debris-flow mobilization from landslides.. R. M. R. I. Spatial prediction of Landslide hazard using logistic regression and GIS. F. On landslides held in Cardiff on 26–30 June. Triggering conditions and mobility of debris flows associated to complex earth flows. debris flows and mavalanches. Natural Hazards Earth System Science 6. 98. RYU. 2000. C. M. M. 17-28. 11 pp. 685–690.. F. M. F. W. FIG — International Federation of Surveyors. MONTGOMERY.. AND WON. 2008.. Open file report No 1992-15. LEE.-P.. FISKE. F.. 1994. p. 1123–1141. FINLAY. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 22 (7). Meteorol. DE AMICIS.. Manizales.... Colorado. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 40. 2004. J. IADB. in: Landslides. LEE. M.... CHOI. D.. Reconsidering the risk assessment concept: Standardizing the impact description as a building block for vulnerability assessment. p.. AND WEATHERLY. Engineering Geology 58:231-249. Engineering Geology 71.. AND FELL. 2006. 379–400. J. Ljubljana.. KANUNGO. 968–976...P. Proceed. July 16-21. Engineering evaluation of fragmental rockfall hazards.S.. 1181-1186.J. Canada. LI. Y. HUNGR. KUMELJ. Nairobi. D. GALLI M. Engineering Geology 103.. 54. Springer Science. 2005.. pp. Geomorphology 74. Yunnan.R. A comparative study of conventional. HUNGR. 349– 362. S. SEBASTIANI C.D. MIN. Lausanne. RYU. MATTHEWS. VILAPLANA.H. The World Bank. 85–98..J. Landslide hazard assessment in the Collazzone area.T. Geomorphology 94. 1153–1171. 359–375.. Bulletin of the Seismological Soci. KEEFER.admin. RYU. GREENBERG. Geology.... Korea. LAN. Balkema. M. S. MATTEUCCI. COROMINAS. C. Of the Fifth Int. Steepland Geomorphology. Fell.. Rotterdam... Geological Survey of Canada. Landslides qualitative hazard and risk assessment: method and its reliability. 2008. JAKOB. NASHEM. pp. Hydrological Processes. 1996. 2006. T. Permafrost thaw and destabilization of Alpine rock walls in the hot summer of 2003..htm LEE. Determination and application of the weights for landslide susceptibility mapping using artificial network. J. AND JAN. Earthquake-induced landslide-susceptibility mapping using an artificial neural network. KIRKLAND. AND STATHAM. Slide susceptibility mapping using GIS and Weight of evidence model. Eangland. MAQUAIRE.. R. S. Forest clearing and regional sliding.... E. KOIRALA. (Ed. H. LEONE. R. Trondheim. LAPRADE.. A. J. Landslide susceptibility analysis using GIS and artificial neural network.J. LAHUSEN. Vol 12.Key-note papers Seite 60 FINLAY.. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 6. In Landslides. 2003. LATELTIN.. M.. RAFAT. C. R. Planet Sci. AND JONES. STONE: a computer program for the three-dimensional simulation of rockfalls. and risk assessment using GIS: model for Glenwood Springs. 34. AND RIBIČIČ. LEE.. W. Geomorphology 67 (3-4). .2009.. L. 1976. problems in predicting the mobility of slow mowing landslides. B.J. AND CSAPLOVICS. AND TERHORST. B. Volume 35.. PRADHAN. Earth Science Frontier 14 (6)..J... An approach for GIS based statistical landslide susceptibility zonation-with a case study in the Himalayas. 2006. pp. The effects of rockfall volume on runout distance. Conceptual debris flow modeling for risk assessment at the municipal scale. K... Austria. AMBROSI.. GERMANNCHIARI. Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists. International Journal of Physical Sciences 4 (1).K.Mathematical Geology.. M. MITANI. C. Modelling Slope Stability in Honduras: Parameter sensitivity and Scale of Aggregation. BUMA. Engineering Geology. 57-77. 2009a. Landslide: Investigations and Mitigation. 49-52. M. 2002.. G. 2007a. J.. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15. C. KIENHOLZ. CASTELLANOS ABELLA. Discussion “Landslide Risk Management Concepts And Guidelines”.T. Models. AND VAN WESTEN... Engineering Geology 73.. Balkema.. E. G. Lacerda. 1996. GOKCEOGLU. Thomas Telford. Diploma Thesis. SASS. MALET.. pp. AND TRIGO. 3–15.O. Influence of landslide geometry and kinematic deformation to describe the liquefaction of landslides: some theoretical considerations. AND SOETERS. SALDIVAR-SALI. Nature 323.W.. Taylor & Francis Group. D. Shallow and deep landslides induced by rainfall in the Lisbon region (Portugal): assessment of relationships with the North Atlantic Oscillation. A. ASCE Journal of Geotechnical Engineering. 2001. Vol. Engineering Geology 91 (2-4). AND SARMIENTO. VAN WESTEN. AND CZURDA.J. WANG. Antarctic. Seite 63 . on Remote Sensing.-P. 1963. 267–276. 564–573. Schuster (Editors). Engineering Geology 58. 30(1-2). 2007. TERLIEN. Modelling historical climate variability and slope stability. G. Paris. Japan. 1978. pp. G. 2009. V. RAGOZIN. H.. PRADHAN. B. Slope movement types and processes. Regional landslide susceptibility analysis using back-propagation neural network model at Cameron Highland. R. 2007b. Evaluation of rockfall and its control. TRIGO.L. Landslide hazard and risk assessment. 176. R2 RESOURCE CONSULTANTS.. Carrara and F. F. AND VARGAS. 5. MORI. 268 -278.B. 2009c.. 4: 393-399.. Slope stability evaluation using Back Propagation Neural Networks. A. RITCHIE. 1984. AND SASSA.A. Allen and Unwin. T. analysis and control. HUANG.. 1996. ZINGGERLE. 2004. S.. issues and advances in numerical modelling of landslide hazard. In: A. by using frequency ratio. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Soil Science Society of American Journal 67. C. M. XIE. POWELL.C. Catena... 11-33. L. Spatial data for landslide susceptibility. RENGERS.. Application of FLaIR model to Sarno warning system. 1983. PRADHAN.. TANG. In: W. MALET. 2003. AND FRANCIS. 2001. AND AYDIN. G. Spatial probabilistic modeling of slope failure using an integrated GIS Monte Carlo simulation approach. Applied Geomatics 1.. AND SULLIVAN. Engineering Geology 97.C. Engineering Geology. KAWANAMI. Environ. A.A. R. D. (www. Assessing the protective effect of mountain forests against rockfall using a 3D simulation model. W. Germany. H. L. 15... AND XU. 37 (4). LIU.X.. 110(2).K. R.. Powell.H. T. Guzzetti (Editors). Determining landslide susceptibility in Central Taiwan from rainfall and six site factors using the analytical hierarchy process method. MANGENEY. RAGOZIN. Hendek region (Turkey). National Research Council.K. Boulder. Vol. AND BUCHROITHNER. vulnerability and risk assessment.M. LEE.. VAN WESTEN. C. p. Kluwer Academic Publishers. E.. 80 (3-4). 1984. W. NEUHÄUSER. Y. Landslide Hazard Zonation: a rewiev of principles and practise. Transportation Research Board. H. 2007. Washington. Schuster (Editors). Steinschlagsimulation in Gebirgswa¨ldern: Modellierung der relevanten Teilprozesse. C. 190-204. logistic regression.Geological Society of America.H. Proc. 171–191.. SUPSI. L. J. and Alpine Res. California.A. T. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Slope Instability. NIE. P..Key-note papers Seite 62 NEFESLIOGLU. Department of Geography. Manno. ZHOU. AND TERLIEN. Influence of scree accumulation and weathering on the development of steep mountain slopes.V. 2005. 1993. Natural Hazards. G. J..E. 5.... 12. Geomorphology 60 (3-4). WANG.. A..J. DORREN. The geometric signature: Quantifying landslide-terrain types from digital elevation models. STATHAM. AND ASCH. 2000.. 22(10). 1:339-44. H. D. 31(2):235-247..P. 45.. University of Berne. M.F. AND LEE. A prediction model of landslips. S. Geological Society of America. Arctic.J. H.. An assessment on the use of logistic regression and artificial neural networks with different sampling strategies for the preparation of landslide susceptibility maps. Evaluating calculated risk in geotechnical engineering. A. National Research Council. XXI (3): 337-342. 245– 267. O. 113–122. AND WILLIAMS. M. No. A.. AND EINSTEIN. VARNES.H. H.. C. Dordrecht. Rainfall-induced landslide hazard assessment using artificial neural networks. Engineering Geology. Washington.. VAN ASCH.. T. KITAHARA. A landslide risk rating system for Baguio. VARNES. W. A. C..F. Remote Sensing and Geographic Information System for Geological Hazard Mitigation. H. SIRANGELO. hazards and vulnerability assessment : an overview. 143–152. Temporal variability of rockfall in the Bavarian Alps. National University of Singapore. of the 22nd Asian Conf. 1986. D. Transportation Research Board.. M. The effect of earth pressure coefficient on the runout of granular material.H. J. AND IAEG. J. An approach towards deterministic landslide hazard analaysis in GIS.pdf. 1996.. pp. p. B. B.P. 55-46. H.. 1989. 215–230. 1988. 145-188. VAN ASCH. landslides.) Landslides ... 2005. 2000.P. N..K..K. 1. 2008.B. 68: 373–386. Engineering Geology 79. PIRULLI. 106-128. 1995. B. Singapore Institute of Sorveyors and Valuers (SISV) and Asian Association on Remote Sensing (AARS). . Netherlands. VAN WESTEN. P.. Turner and R. NEULAND. Upper Nehalem Watershed Analysis. (Ed. H. Landslides. 1996.. S. 1977. Wales. RUFF. XU. S. AND BUCHROITHNER. China. Sci.K. Forest Ecol... Vol. Vorarlberg. 78: 69–88.J. 12–24. A. Engineering Geology. 251–266.. AND BRACA. 2007. D.A.H. Modern problems and quantitative methods of landslide risk assessment. SUZEN. Singapore. In: A. Elsevier Science B.. ARORA.H.. Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de France.L. Rotterdam.supsi. S. J. Rio de Janeiro..L. 314-324. W.ist. A. Landslide hazard. SCHMIDT. SOETERS.F. SAMMORI. DC: Highway Research Board. VAN ASCH. S. 30(3): 399-419.. ITC-Journal. T. AND EINSTEIN. S. Special Report No. Australian Geomechanics 35 (3). AND LEE. 2002. T. A.J. A case study form manizales (Colombia). National Academy of Sciences. T. R. M. DIAO. (Editors). 2009) PRADHAN. I. Kluwer Academic Publishers.. AND LEE. 289.. J.F... VAN WESTEN. 433-447.Y. Transportation Research Board.G.. 109– 124.L. L. National Academy Press. 533– 536. S. 2006. ZAITCHIK. ISL 04. Hillslope Processes. concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process.W. SARKAR. 660–665. Techniques. methods.Gliessements de Terrain. 2004.J. Balkema. Landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison of logistic regression and neural networks method in a medium scale study.. 2004. National Research Council. AND SEKHAR. VAN ASCH. Geomorphological hazard analysis along the Egyptian red sea coast between Safaga and Quseir.. A. VAN WESTEN.F.C.. O. Landslide risk analysis using artificial neural network model focusing on different training sites.L. Ehrlich. 2005. M.V... Sayao (Editors). AND VAN BEEK. VAN WESTEN. Abstracts with Programs.. 2006. 112-131. ITC. AND VAN BEEK. pp.A. WU. H.T. YOUSSEF. 178 (2). 1999. I. M. Amsterdam. 2005. analysis and zonation. 2002. A comparison of the GIS based landslide susceptibility assessment methods: multivariate versus bivariate.J. POZZONI. 2000. T. VAN BEEK. Australian Geomechanics.L. J.H. B.. A. PRADHAN. Darantiere. A.. PERRET. J. PRADHAN. SAHA. and artificial neural network model. 2009b. Mechanism of a long runout landslide triggered by the August 1998 heavy rainfall in Fukushima Prefecture. Significance of storm intensity-duration for triggering of debris flows near La Honda. I. 63 (1-2).. AND BOGAARD. STOFFEL. Turner and R. 20. KÜHNE. J. L. 1. BRISTEAU. AND AMITRANO. ES.. Natural Hazards Earth Syst. Geomorphology 112. C. M. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 9.13– 28. Earth surface processes and landforms 21. GABER. SAATY. SAATY. No 1.. M. AND TIKHVINSKY. 1986.L. A. Cardiff. 2005... Oregon Department of Forestry (Salem) 1–231. Landslide susceptibility analysis with a heuristic approach in the Eastern Alps. 59–69. Centre for Remote Imaging. J. Vol. Y. WHITMAN. Engineering Geology 88 (1–2). T. H. pp. W. Identification of hazard conditions for mudflow occurrence by hydrological model. H. Recognition. 2009. Hazard. 61 pp. B. AND LEE. Delineation of landslide hazard areas on Penang Island. WIECZOREK. Proc 9th International Symposium on Landslides.H. THÜRING. AND DIKAU. 2005. 302-315.F. pp. L. PIKE. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. Deterministic modelling in GIS based landslide hazard assessment. M. p. Geomorphology 94. In: Abrahams. Special Report 247. Landslide Investigation and Mitigation. 2004. AND SCAVIA.D. YESILNACAR. S. C. Use of geomorphological information in indirect landslide susceptibility assessment. R. 2007. 91 (1). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. 853-868. SALVETTI. L. Geographical Information Systems in Assessing Natural Hazards. T... Management 225. 333 pp.F.. Landslide susceptibility assessment using “weights-ofevidence” applied to a study area at the Jurassic escarpment (SW-Germany).J.D.. AND DOYURAN. Winchester. B. 2008. 129-177. AND WANG. 491–511. R. K.. F. K. Geomorphology 86. Malaysia. In: Engineering geology. R. VAN WESTEN. AND TOPAL. 2005.J. Environmental Geology. Senneset K (Ed.P..A... R. AND CHEN. ZEZERE. In: Schuster R. M.J. 65-88. Response to discussin by G. OKURA. Fontoura and A. 2003..W. 2007. B. A view on some hydrological triggering system in Geomorphology. 102 (3-4).P. 1–15.. ESAKI. The application of remote sensing technique and AHP-fuzzy method in comprehensive analysis and assessment for regional stability of Chongqing City. 2003. UNESCO. SASSA. In: A. 169. WEHRLI. Philippines. M. 1437–1454. T. 25-32. GUPTA. 111113. Utilization of optical remote sensing data and GIS tools for regional landslide hazard analysis by using an artificial neural network model. Sensing and Processing (CRISP). C. Highway Research Record 17... Environmental Earth Sciences. Malaysia. P. G. J. 2009.. Mechanism of a rainfall-induced slide-debris flow: constraints from microstructure of its slip zone. Softw. Springer-Verlag.185. pp. H. WU. 751–766..M. vulnerability and risk analysis.J. AND SONMEZ.J. 39-56. WALKER. 1984. B. C. M. C. G.. RUMELHART. WEN..C. 665-679. 234– 281. Landslides: Evaluation and Stabilization. Engineering Geology.ch/Content/main/uploaded/img/ progetti/dfwalk_big.. I. 85-99.J. T. WIECZOREK. E. Preparing a detailed landslide inventory map for hazard evaluation and reduction. 3. Modell.. Landslides. Use of geospatial data for the development of fuzzy algebraic operators to landslide hazard mapping: a case study in Malaysia..M. 8th International symposium on landslides. J.E. S. A.. R. R. F. WANG. VAN BEEK. Geo-infromation tools for landslide risk assessment: an overwiev of development.). HINTON. A.J. Krizek R. C..L.. 331–344..J. Tagungsband der Jahrestagung von CIPRA Österreich.und Bodenschutzrecht der Alpenkonvention. wenngleich das allgemeine Problem des Nebeneinanders von mehreren gebietsbezogenen Festlegungen besteht. III 2002/235. rock fall. standards such as those for priority areas are only provided for in drafts such as the proposal for a Directive establishing a framework for the protection of soil or are mentioned in the Communication on the Community approach to prevent natural disasters. Introduction A glance at the legal framework on assessment and mapping of geological hazards is difficult. 4 BGBl. in particular by land movement (mass slides.1.). p. Auf nationaler Ebene bestehen in der Regel Rechtsvorschriften im Zusammenhang mit präventiven Planungen bei Naturgefahren. p. Naturally.2 This will be the attempt in the following sections.1). Salzburg (2010). Commission in 2002 about a Strategy for Soil Protection8 aims at the further development of BMLFUW (ed. see RUDOLFMIKLAU (fn. 97 et seq. Likewise. Das vorgefundene Material reicht jedenfalls nicht aus. which are often only partly related to this topic and follow different legal approaches. ohne allerdings materielle Vorgaben zu treffen. The “Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development Protocol“7 establishes the obligation to determine the areas subject to natural hazards. Soil protection law The communication from the European are the only source of international law.. Also. areas damaged by erosion and land movement shall be rehabilitated in as far as this is necessary for the protection of human beings and material goods (art. in particular with regard to the protection against natural hazards (art. where building of structures and installations should be avoided as much as possible (art. 1. 2.). European law 3. and to register those areas and to designate danger zones when necessary (art. avalanches and landslides. 1 Seite 65 . 112.1) and imposes the duty of the Contracting Parties to give priority to the protective function of mountain forests (art. avalanches and floods”. Therefore. III 2002/232. Die Alpenkonvention: Handbuch für ihre Umsetzung (2007). NaturgefahrenManagement in Österreich (2009). although the general problem on the coexistence of multiple area-related definitions persists. whenever No coherent legal system on the necessary. At a European level. 10. 21. landslides). mudslides. International law 2. 3. 1). in: CIPRA Österreich (ed. The spatial planning policies also take into account the protection of the environment.Key-note papers Seite 64 ROLAND NORER 1. Alpine Convention The Alpine Convention3 and its protocols In international law. Certain protocols to the Alpine Convention provide for the obligation to map geological hazards.1.2. 33 et seq. a legal fragmentation can be detected at a national level.1). p. but they fail to adopt substantive standards for it. 3. 1995/477. 9.2. 5 For the “Natural hazards profile“ of landslips. At a national level. But farther-reaching. 6 BGBl. 21 et seq. III 2002/233. not enough to derivate consistent standards and provisions for the assessment and mapping. 7 BGBl. additional substantive elaborations arising out of these duties are not revealed before the respective national implementation measures. Das Natur. Bestimmte Protokolle zur Alpenkonvention sehen Kartierungspflichten für geologische Risiken vor. p.f). Als zentrale Vorschriften gelten die flächenhaften Gefahrendarstellungen im Forstrecht. um einheitliche Standards und Vorgaben für Analyse und Kartierung ableiten zu können. 1 Both provisions were classified as binding and directly applicable. European and National Levels Rechtlicher Rahmen für Analyse und Kartierung geologischer Gefahren auf internationaler. Zusammenfassung: Rechtliche Vorgaben betreffend Analyse und Kartierung geologischer Gefahren sind sowohl auf internationaler als auch europäischer Ebene selten. 11.Oktober 2009. the essay will not exceed a more or less abundant outline of the issue. 2. Implementation analysis by SCHMID. the “Mountain Forests Protocol” aims to preserve and. only certain provisions established in the protocols to the Alpine Convention refer to the obligation to map geological hazards. The extensive exposition of hazards in forestry law remains a central issue. Anwendungsmöglichkeiten und Beispiele.e). to develop or increase mountain forests as a near-natural habitat (art. 6. hydrogeological and hydrological risks. The “Soil Conservation Protocol”4 provides for the obligation to draw up maps of Alpine areas “which are endangered by geological. 2 For an overview regarding norms of prevention. Im Europarecht finden sich solche Regeln lediglich in Entwürfen wie bei den prioritären Gebieten im Vorschlag einer EU-Bodenrahmenrichtlinie oder sie werden wie im Gemeinschaftskonzept zur Verhütung von Naturkatastrophen erst in Aussicht gestellt. addition. however. Die Alpenkonvention und ihre rechtliche Umsetzung in Österreich – Stand 2009. 3 BGBl. the art is to filter something like a legal essence out of diverse dispersed norms. europäischer und nationaler Ebene Summary: Legal standards for the assessment and mapping of geological hazards are rather scarce at the international and European level.2). Findings management of natural disasters can be found at either the international or European level. there are legal provisions in connection with preventive planning on natural disasters. see RUDOLF-MIKLAU.5 In 6 Legal Framework for Assessment and Mapping of Geological Hazards on the International.-22. The sources and materials encountered to this end are. as addressed by the Sixth Environment Action Programme. the Commission tries Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection (fn.1 in conjunction with Annex INVEKOS-CC-V 2010. BGBl.6). 23. for a Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters. However. However. Cross Compliance. COM(2006) 231 final. Section 1. Section 3. OJ 2007 L 314/9. Cf. Section 146. 10 Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection (fn. LIFE+. based on the already existing instruments. 17 Like the Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (“Wasserrahmenrichtlinie“). 14 European Parliament legislative resolution of 14 November 2007 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the protection of soil and amending Directive 2004/35/EC. after an attenuated version failed to obtain the majority in the EU Environment Council. the European Commission followed suit with a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection 13 12 and with a Proposal for a Directive establishing a framework for the protection of soil . land cover. 20 Council Regulation (EC) No. the European Parliament. Handbuch des Agrarrechts (2005). In particular. 73/2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers. The addendum landslides “brought about by the down-slope. the European Economic ad Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. such as those regarding soil erosion. 8). the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection. 41 and 44 Regulation (EC) 1698/2005.g. Bodenschutzrecht. Disaster law The Communication of the European Commission of February 200924 was another attempt to establish measures. 6.2. moderately rapid to rapid movement of masses of soil and rock material” fell victim to the changes made by the European Parliament.17 However.8. a programme of measures shall be adopted within five years of the implementation of the Directive (art. § 5. Section 3. the EU Directive establishing a Framework for the Protection of Soil turned out to be fiercely disputed.3. A list of common elements for the identification of areas at risk of landslides can be found in the appendix.6. ESDP European Spatial Development Perspective. 21 20 3.3. BMLFUWLE. climate and seismic risk.4.8/0028IV/3/2009. Spatial planning law Regarding the quantitative aspects of soil to collect and unify information about hazard/ risks by developing Community guidelines for hazard and risk mapping. P6_TA(2007)0509.19 In contrast. 17 et seq. 11 Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection (fn. 26 Council Decision 2007/779/EC of 8 November 2007. topography. art.2. damage to buildings and infrastructures. the European Parliament. Section 2. the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection.2009. Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union (1999).3. Three key elements were mentioned for the Community approach: creating the conditions for the development of knowledge based disaster prevention policies at all levels of government. including 10 In particular. soil can essentially be considered as a non-renewable resource. bedrock. OJ 2000 L 327/1. does not currently exist. 3.1. “Floods and mass movements of soil cause erosion. farming systems and forestry).8/0054-IV/3/2007 idF BMLFUW-LE. these should focus on disasters with potential cross-border impact. 4 et seq.1) by establishing an inventory of existing Community instruments capable of supporting disaster prevention activities.23 3. a regulation on geological mass movements similar to the EU Directive on the assessment and management of flood risks27. 491. the Civil Protection Financial Instrument. 11 announced content. Hence. 3.1. occurrence and density of landslides. in detail NORER. 24 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament. OJ 2009 L 30/16. COM(2006) 232 final. 18 Art. Agricultural law The situation is rather similar in the area of European agricultural law. OJ 2005 L 277/1. contemplates the designation of landslide risk areas and the establishment of Especially the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development.2. COM(2009) 82 final. such as afforestation (cf. 6 for priority areas (first draft: risk areas) with regard to landslides. Bodenschutzrecht im Kontext der europäischen Bodenschutzstrategie (2009). the subsection “Developing guidelines on hazard/risk mapping” (3. however. 12 Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection (fn.).02. 9 Communication from the Commission to the Council. 8). which has been put on hold.14 Also. the Research Framework Programme. a separate communication on the topic of “Planning and Environment – the Territorial Dimension” has been announced for a some time now. or the imminent threat thereof. 15 Annex I Section 5: soil typological unit (soil type).16 Since 2007. 25 includes in its Axis 2 some links with supporting 15 Communication from the Commission to the Council. large-scale disasters. Also.3. Environmental law In the remaining European environmental laws. linking the actors and policies throughout the In 2006. These are intimately related to soil and land management. Here. land use (including land management. exceptional events. the Proposal for a Directive establishing a Framework for the Protection of Soil. a more efficient targeting of Community funding25 is dealt with (3. in which there is an obligation to maintain all agricultural land in good agricultural and environmental condition. 16 disaster management cycle and making existing instruments perform better for disaster prevention. in: Norer (ed. does not refer to a special relevance for the prevention of landslides. 22 Seite 67 . building upon existing Community initiatives.2. Findings Some relevant regulations can be found at the European level. Furthermore. and disasters for which the cost of recovery measures appears to be disproportionate when compared to that of preventive measures. 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). with its flood hazard maps and flood risk maps. 21 Cf.. the Council. 19 Art. as well as by developing a catalogue of prevention measures (e. 23 European Commission (ed. p. COM(2002) 179 final. 6 in conjunction with Annex III Regulation (EC) 73/2009. For Austrian implementation see Sonderrichtlinie zur Umsetzung der forstlichen und wasserbaulichen Maßnahmen im Rahmen des Österreichischen Programms für die Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums 2007 – 2013 „Wald & Wasser“. 38. pollution with sediments and loss of soil resources with major impacts for human activities and human lives. there are no further provisions dealing with the topic of this essay. 9).5. certain provisions about erosion can be found. p. the future of this proposal remains uncertain. at present the only object of an integrated and sustainable management at the EU level is the flood prevention programme in transnational river areas included in the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP). A Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters. As soil formation is an extremely slow process.9 It proceeds to mention eight main threats to soil in the EU . 8 Mechanism25 deals with assistance intervention in the event of major emergencies. Recital 32. a a Council Civil Decision Protection establishing Community protection. 27 Directive 2007/60/EC on the assessment and management of flood risks. Different standards are included in the general provisions on direct payments (cross compliance)18. 50. This communication should deal with rational land-use planning. By contrast.). the regulation on support for rural development measures.. is in force and affects the topic dealt with in this essay in a rather marginal way.3) is of great interest. measures integrating preventive action in reforestation/afforestation projects). 3. properties. REISCHAUER. only one of them.1. 8). Council Regulation (EC) No.Key-note papers Seite 66 political commitment to soil protection in order to achieve a more comprehensive and systematic protection. the ICT Policy Support Programme. the latter of which provides in its art. OJ 2007 L 288/27. and loss of agricultural land”. However. The 22 “erosion” and “floods and landslides”. 13 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Framework for the Protection of Soil and amending Directive 2004/35/EC. 8). II 2009/492. O. see § 5 Burgenland Soil Protection Act (Burgenländisches Bodenschutzgesetz). BGBl.b). in: Fuchs/Khakzadeh/Weber (ed. in conjunction with § 7. LGBl. p. Anschrift des Verfassers / Author’s address: Univ.1. Section 4 of the Water Law Act 1959. 42 For Austria see in detail RUDOLF-MIKLAU (fn. including brown areas of reference. the catchment area of mountain torrents and avalanches. BGBl. 37 et seq. 123 et seq. 67 . Recht im Naturgefahrenmanagement (2006). Kritische Analyse des „Grünen Rechts“ in Österreich (1991).Key-note papers Seite 68 action programmes. p. 1976/436.3. 84 et seq. 2006/27. BGBl. Unlikely enough. From the perspective of avalanche protection see in detail KHAKZADEH. Raumplanungsrechtliche Regelungen als Teil des Naturgefahrenmanagements. However. p. landslide or other gravitated natural hazards”. 22). 32 Such as in § 27. Roland Norer University of Lucerne School of Law Hofstraße 9 P. 38 F. p. Naturgefahren und öffentliches Recht.g. forests with a direct protective function against the above-mentioned hazards could be signalised by means of an administrative act (Bannwälder). although geological risks are at times also included .und zivilrechtliche Aspekte von Steinschlaggefährdung und –schutz.a Tyrol Spatial Planning Act (Tiroler Raumordnungsgesetz).4. 31 Such as in § 6. Admittedly. p. Österreichisches Raum.). Forestry Development Plan (Waldentwicklungsplan) based on § 9 Austrian Forestry Act 1975. are established within the national forestal spatial planning. rockfall. Cf.-Prof. 34 32 grassland can be mainly found in spatial planning law.und Risikokarten). Soil protection law The rules on soil protection can be divided in two categories with different aims: on the one hand. National law 4.g. 43 For Austria see HATTENBERGER (fn. Agrarumweltrecht. here geological hazard mapping (no legal basis).5 Styria Building Act (Steiermärkisches Baugesetz). 40).5. p.i. expressly mentions the necessary protection against “rock fall. hazard and risks mapping (Gefahren. 477. It can even 28 4. § 27 Upper Austria Soil Protection Act 1991 (Oberösterreichisches Bodenschutzgesetz). p. the creation of uniform technical standards by all those involved as a further step towards self-regulation should be brought to mind. 1959/215 (Wv). LGBl. Water Construction Development Act (Wasserbautenförderungsgesetz). Here. Cf. p. The suitability as a building site for areas with a higher risk of mass movements is not given. LGBl. Conclusion 41 A convincing and coherent overall view cannot be offered. This fact. Recht im Naturgefahrenmanagement (2006). such as rock fall and landslips.und Forstwirtschaft.g.). JÄGER. 58 et seq. unveröffentlicht). norms related to the assessment and mapping of geological hazards. 1985/148 (Wv). 37 In Austria e. Spatial planning law As a general rule. REISCHAUER (fn. p. there is a risk of „rockfall. LGBl. but also marginally in spatial planning law.31 Thus. in: Fuchs/Khakzadeh/Weber (ed.und Fachplanungsrecht (2006). 57 and list 61 et seq. the existing instruments partially conduct the assessment of mass movements. Raumwirkungen des Forstrechts. 52 of the Austrian Spatial Planning Conference (ÖROK) about preventive handling with natural hazards in Spatial Planning (2005) also puts an emphasis in floods. by implementing higher-ranking guidelines or autonomously.1.. 29 In Austria e. 4. Studie im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Land. for Austria altogether KANONIER.g. p. 1987/66. 35 Cf. in: Hauer/Nußbaumer (ed.a Regulation on the mapping of risk areas. rules on areas with a higher risk of mass movements in connection with the designation of building sites 37 include the layout of forests with a protective function 29 or the extensive hazard description or special use in structured in risk levels. 35 4. 41 WEBER/OBERMEIER. a Community approach on the prevention of natural disasters sets out guidelines for the unification of hazard mapping in large-scale disasters. 37). remain fragmentated between the various regulations (“Querschnittsmaterien”).g.g. 4. 1990/87. 40 For Austria see e. p. 4. HATTENBERGER.). Rechtsfragen des Lawinenschutzes (2004). no relevant changes coming from the international and European level are to be expected in the near future. Building law Legal provisions regarding the assessment and A similar situation applies to building law.. From the perspective of avalanche protection see in detail KHAKZADEH (fn. 28 In Austria e. Recht im Naturgefahrenmanagement (2006).1. 1). speaking of „Kompetenzlawine“.2b Austrian Forestry Act 1975. Furthermore. p. LGBl. 5. p. 1997/63.2. 29. would not allow the development of uniform standards and provisions for assessment and mapping of geological hazards. 33 In Austria e. as well as references to rock fall and landslip areas. 1). 73 et seq. in: Fuchs/Khakzadeh/Weber (ed.6. qualitative soil damage such as contaminating activities and structural damages and on the other hand.43 39 In Austria e. suggest for Austria f. BGBl. 40). Seite 69 . at the national level more legal provisions exist in connection with preventive planning42 for natural hazards.). The political feasibility seems little realistic.und Lawinenverbauung“ towards other natural hazards. Relevant provisions exist.a Austrian Forestry Act 1975. quantitative soil loss.1. 181 et seq. Dr.30 The protective effect of the forest especially implies “the protection against natural peril and contaminating environmental influences as well as the conservation of the soil against torrents and drift. HATTENBERGER (fn.i. at a first glance the respective national systems seem to constitute the determining factor. Findings In the light of the arid gain at the international and European legal level. boulders accumulation and landslides”. Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft (2008.i. STÖTTER/FUCHS. Forestry law Many times. HOLZER/REISCHAUER. 39 In Austria e. Box 7464 CH-6000 Luzern 7 Switzerland The second category 36 could also be of interest for mass movements. mudflow and landslides” in the requirements for granting and allocation of federal funds to pursuit the objectives in the Act (§ 1. § 37. according to which certain areas are excluded as building sites when f.g. however. § 7 Salzburg Soil Protection Act (Salzburger Bodenschutzgesetz). Whereas the available legal set of tools remains within the same course of action.. although the general problem of the coexistence of different area-related definitions still remains. 1995/59. according to which a plot area is only suitable for building if the risks posed by „flood debris accumulation. such as soil degradation and erosion. Water law Such regulations are limited to measures for flood prevention33.g. LGBl. Further contents in this regard remain missing. 2001/80. the Recommendation Nr. § 5. such as the law of natural disaster management at all40. Umgang mit Naturgefahren – Status quo und und zukünftige Anforderungen.1. landslides” are not to be expected. Verwaltungs. 21 et seq. § 6 Styria Agricultural Soil Protection Act (Steiermärkisches landwirtschaftliches Bodenschutzgesetz). 30 In Austria e. an extension of the competence „Wildbach.2. 129 et seq. 36 In Austria e. which posed other hazards than mountain torrents and avalanches. 34 mapping of geological hazards are tenuously sown at the international and European level. the mapping of risk areas is based on § 11 Austrian Forestry Act 1975. RUDOLF-MIKLAU (fn. 47. primarily in forestry law with its extensive hazard descriptions.g.38 4. 1975/440. the pertinent national provisions only provide for land-use measures for soil in erosion areas. wird eine relationale Datenbank erstellt. The type of attribute determines which relations can be saved in the database and what kind of information can be queried using them. Da die harmonisierten Begrifflichkeiten und Definitionen für alle beteiligten Länder und auch für eine breitere Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht werden soll. This glossary aims at an international harmonization by providing the user with a selection of official terms used by the geological agencies in a specific country and by setting relations to similar terms employed in other countries. it is easy to reconstruct the history of an entry at a later point in time. Zusammenfassung: Ausgangslage und Motivation für dieses Projekt ist die schon „traditionelle“ Problematik der unterschiedlichen Verwendung und Definition der Begrifflichkeiten in der Fachliteratur zum Themenbereich Massenbewegungsprozesse.Key-note papers Seite 70 KARL MAYER. This eases the following conceptional work a lot and minimizes time-consuming adjustments and changes to the model later on. wobei die erste Projektphase vom technischen Bereich bestimmt wird. combination for one language and one country. Seite 71 . a search by synonyms.g. resulting in a unique It is particularly relevant for this project.) is to be defined. a relational database management system will be used as a back-end. as the usage of a term varies greatly within a language depending on the region where it is used. e. Requirements for the relational database Before the actual database is deigned. In order to tackle that complexity and ambiguity. Dies hat zur Folge. die speziell im deutschsprachigen Raum. Although the user friendliness mostly depends on the graphical user interface and is hard to control through the database design. It is important to determine what possible queries will be offered to the user (e. numbers. a multilingual glossary shall be created.g. The unique language to which a term is assigned is a fundamental attribute in a multilingual glossary. Editing and adding glossary terms after the initial import should also be possible and requires saving metadata for each entry. keys etc. Das gesamte Projekt gliedert sich grundsätzlich in einen technischen und einen inhaltlichen Teil. in welchem im Sinne der internationalen Harmonisierung in Absprache mit den einzelnen Projektpartnerländern die von den jeweiligen geologischen Ämtern verwendeten administrativen Begriffe eingestellt und in Beziehung gesetzt werden. The first step is to design and implement the technical infrastructure required to store and query the terms. Switzerland). time and date of the creation or the last edit of a term. there are still aspects that need to be considered in conception. found not only in the German-speaking geology. soll ein mehrsprachiges Glossar erstellt werden. Because of the panEuropean character of the glossary. as it is the case for German (Germany. dass die Arbeitsweisen der Experten in den verschiedenen geologischen Ämtern in den Projektpartnerländern nicht einheitlich sind und es daher immer wieder zu Missverständnissen und Schwierigkeiten bei der Abstimmung gemeinsamer Projekte kommt.g. Every attribute corresponds at least to one column in the main glossary table.) and to adapt the database design accordingly. First a list of attributes needed for a single glossary term as well as a type for those attributes (e. Austria. The resulting harmonized terms and definitions should be made available to all partners and to the general public on the internet through the Bavarian Environment Agency homepage. it is essential to assess the exact requirements for the glossary. text. Aufgrund dieser Komplexität und der Unklarheit. Easy and intuitive queries are essential for the usability of the glossary. aber auch europaweit. BERNHARD LOCHNER Internationally Harmonized Terminology for Geological Risk: Glossary (Overview) Internationale Harmonisierung der Fachterminologie für geologische Risiken: Glossar (Überblick) Summary: Purpose and motivation for this project are the difficulties traditionally encountered when using or defining mass movements terms in scientific papers. For this purpose. 1. but generally throughout Europe. it is necessary to specify the languages more precisely by linking them to a specific country. Using that information. besonders im Hinblick auf die Klassifikation der Massenbewegungen existiert. in welcher die Inhalte logisch verknüpft werden und welche zu Projektende in die LfU-Homepage integriert wird. etc. case and special character insensitive searches. This results in different methods and concepts being used by geological agencies and finally leads to misunderstandings and problems in cooperative international projects. 2: Overview of the database model components Abb.FK1 PK. 3: Main tables Abb.e. PK. be expandable if future needs for extensions or additional functions arise.FK1 PK.FK1 idelement lang title description (Note: the values used above are examples and do not necessarily match any official values) 1.FK2 idtopic lang topicterm tkeyLanguageLng PK. which corresponds to a minimum volume of 106 cubic meters. In this new glossary. A direct translation is still required in order to provide the user with the exact translation of a definition in his language. Der Primärschlüssel der Tabelle mit dem Textinhalt ('tdtaTermLng') ist somit über ID und Sprache definiert.FK1 idlanguage PK lang languagesort Fig. FK1 PK idterm lang term description Fig. to some meters. The glossary terms are stored in the latter. the database should. FK4 FK2 FK1 FK5 FK3 PK tdtaElement idelement tdtaEleGlossarTerm PK. extent.e. glossary terms) in an entity-relationship model (ERM). a direct translation of each term into exactly one term of another language. if the technical meaning is taken into account. “tkey-” is used for key tables (key attributes can only take a value from a predefined set of keys) and “trel-” for relation tables. The first “section” is the core of the database. 4: Behelfstabellen Seite 73 . also characterized by volume values above 106 cubic Fig. The relation to “rock fall” (i. For the purpose of clarity. but that translation usually doesn't consider the effective volume transported. “Steinschlag“. would have the same meaning as “rock avalanche”. 1: Beispiel eines mehrsprachigen Glossars. However. 1: Example of a multilingual glossary where each term has exactly one translation in each other language. with its element tables tdtaElement and tdtaEleGlossarTerm. The relations between “cliff falls“. “block falls“. the database was divided into four “sections” or “areas” which correspond to a set of interrelated tables. FK2 PK.FK1. 1. Following example should help clarifying The English term “rock fall” is usually Metadata • Workflow • History Fig. The primary key of the language table ('tdtaTermLng') is defined by its ID and language Abb. Those language tables hold the text values of the different glossary terms. The prefix “tdta-” stands for tables in which actual data is being stored. its name is prefixed differently.FK2 idelement lang title summary metacreated metalastedit metatranslator PK. in dem jeder Begriff genau eine Übersetzung für jede weitere Sprache hat. the relations between the different terms should be defined solely by their technical meaning. Depending on the function or content of a particular table. whereas the main element table holds additional information related to the system and not to the glossary itself (mostly through the usage of foreign keys).Key-note papers Seite 72 tdtaTerm PK idterm idworkflowstatus metacreator metaowner idreadaccess idwriteaccess deleted metamasterlang metalastedit tdtaTermLng PK. 3: Haupttabellen tkeyCountry PK idcountry tdtaEleGlossarTerm PK. Unique IDs are prefixed with “id-” and meta-attributes with “meta-”. “definition”: translated into “Felssturz” or “Bergsturz” in German. similar meaning) would be a looser one.FK2 idcountry lang langterm idlanguage the concept of “meaning” vs. “Bergsturz”.FK1 PK. Glossary • Terms • Relations • Translation tables glossaries is a single translation layer. 2: Übersicht über die Komponenten des Datenbankmodells FK3 FK4 FK2 User Management • Users & groups • Permissions tkeyTopic PK idtopic topicsort tkeyTopicLng PK. The following diagram shows the relations between those “sections”. “Blockschlag“ could be defined in a similar manner.FK1. 4: Auxiliary tables Abb. The nomenclature used throughout the database follows a simple naming convention. For most of the tables the multilingual concept required by the direct translation provides a second table with an identical name and the suffix “-Lng”.FK2 idcountry lang countryterm tkeyLanguage PK idlanguage lang languagesort countrysort Auxiliary • Key tables • Relation tables tkeyLangLng PK. This corresponds to a 1: n relation between the entities (i.FK1 idelement term reference idtopic idlang idcountry searchterm searchsynonyms tkeyLang PK idlang langsort tdtaEleGlossarTermLng PK. Such a direct translation supposes an equivalence of the terms’ definition and meaning.FK1 idelement term reference idtopic idlang idcountry searchterm searchsynonyms elementtype idworkflowstatus metaowner metacreator idreadaccess idwriteaccess deleted metamasterlang FK3 FK4 FK2 Finally.2 Database model This chapter describes in detail the different “sections” of the database.1 Relations The classical approach followed by most tdtaEleGlossarTermLng tdtaElementLng PK. “boulder falls“ and “Felssturz“. resulting in two possible relations: same meaning or similar meaning. can be handled to some extent by the database itself. a multilingual glossary can help to improve the collaboration between the experts. 5: Metadata tables Fig. user and group management defines the group(s) a user belongs to and which read/write rights a group or a specific user owns (through the tdtaElement table) 1. This table is used as an interface to import data records in the database.und Gruppenverwaltung tkeyelementActionLng PK. 6: Benutzer. Finally. 5: Metadata tables Seite 75 . which can be displayed as a list to an authorized user.FK1 idlanguage PK lang languagesort FK1 trelUserGroup PK. Metadata is partly stored in the tdtaElement table using foreign keys. 2. Also. progress concerning the comparability of the methods dealing with geological hazards in the several countries is to be achieved. author or owner of an element are defined. where. Other errors.FK1 idpermissionlevel PK lang permissionlevelterm tkeyWorkflowStatusLng PK. Contents of the glossary In view of a different use of landslide-terms in the European countries. tdtaUser PK iduser username password email organisation fullname inactive superadmin lastlogin loginip maingroup PK FK2 FK1 tdtaHistory idhistory idelement lang iduser logdatetime info idelementaction FK1 tkeyElementAction PK idelementaction FK1 elementactionsort idhistory Fig. They also contain the relation table used to specify relations between terms based on a relation code (“similar” or “same”). for example. The person responsible for filling out this table must ensure that the relations between the terms are set correctly. such as duplicate IDs.Key-note papers Seite 74 For each term. Those keys point to external metadata tables such as tkeyWorkflowstatus or tdtaUser. countries and topics used in the main table.FK1 idgroup FK4 FK2 FK1 FK5 FK3 FK3 FK4 FK2 Fig. information about the status.FK2 lang workflowstatusterm tdtaUser iduser username password email organisation fullname inactive superadmin lastlogin loginip maingroup description tdtaElement PK idelement elementtype idworkflowstatus metaowner metacreator idreadaccess idwriteaccess deleted metamasterlang tdtaEleGlossarTerm PK.FK2 iduser PK.FK1 idelement term reference idtopic idlang idcountry searchterm seyrchsynonyms tkeyLanguageLng PK.FK1 idelementaction PK lang FK2 elementactionterm idlanguage element. tdtaHistory works similarly to a log by saving all actions performed on a specific tkeyLanguage PK idlanguage lang languagesort PK FK4 FK2 FK1 FK5 FK3 PK tdtaElement idelement elementtype idworkflowstatus metaowner metacreator idreadaccess idwriteaccess deleted metamasterlang PK PK tkeyPermissionLevel idpermissionlevel permissionlevelsort tkeyPermissionLevelLng tdtaGroup idgroup groupname PK. The integration of the database into the homepage from the Bavarian Environment Agency (LfU) and a graphical user interface to manually add or edit single terms is planned in the final stage of the project.FK1 idworkflowstatus PK. 6: User and group management Abb.3 Data capture and import The primary data capture is done via an Excel table with a predefined format. following fields are available: • 'term': the actual text value (direct translation using the -Lng table) • ‘reference’: source of information and date • 'idlang' and 'idcountry': foreign keys pointing to a unique combination of language/country • 'idtopic': foreign key specifying the topic of this term • 'searchterm' and 'searchsynonyms': used for insensitive searches • 'picture': paths to pictures depicting a term tkeyWorkflowStatus PK idworkflowstatus workflowstatussort The auxiliary tables are mainly key tables defining the different languages. B.z. For example. The “basic list” is structured into the • Accumulation (Ablagerungen .B.z.z. Therefore. Mögliche Auslöser können sein: Niederschläge. die oftmals dafür sorgt.z. 7: Extract of the “Basic-Terms-Table” in German Abb. Steinschlag) • Subrosion (Subrosionsprozess . Dieser löst eine quasi sofortige Reaktion aus.z.B. the other language lists were developed. Rotationsrutschung) • Slides translational (Rutschprozess – Translationsrutschung . it is necessary to create a “basic list” in which all the desired terms and definitions are included. Blockstrom) • Flow process very rapid (Fließprozess – sehr schnell .z. 7: Auszug aus der Deutschen Begriffstabelle Seite 77 . Bergzerreissung) • Path of movement (Bewegungsbahnen z. Schneeschmelze.000. Schuttkegel) following topics: • General geomorphology (Allgemeine Geomorphologie . aktive Maßnahmen) • Slides combined (Rutschprozess – Kombinierte Rutschung . Rutschung mit kombinierter Gleitfläche) • Slides rotational (Rutschprozess – Rotationsrutschung .B. Erdbeben.z. Doline) term lang country definition As mentioned above. Bergsturz) • Falls (Sturzprozess – Blockschlag . considering “danger. Austria (three different lists) • Italian – Italy • French – France • Slovenian – Slovenia • Spanish – Spain (Castilian and Catalan) • English – United Kingdom 2. the different terms lists will be integrated in the official homepage of the Bavarian Environment Agency in a final step. More information on the approach of this “Harmonization” is available in chapter 3. LfU Bayern Allgemeine Geomorphologie 2066 aktive Maßnahmen de DE LfU Bayern Maßnahmen 2070 Aktuelle Hangbewegung Anbruch de DE LfU Bayern Rutschungsdynamik Anbruchformen 2029 de DE LfU Bayern 2027 Auslöser de DE LfU Bayern Allgemeines 2092 Bachschwinde (Ponor) de DE LfU Bayern Subrosionsprozess/Allgemein 2079 Bergsturz de DE LfU Bayern Sturzprozess Bergsturz Fig. Translationsrutschung) • Landslide dynamics (Rutschungsdynamik z.000m³. beispielsweise Aufforstungen oder Entwässerungen.B. dieser Kategorie zuzuordnen. This classification is very useful for simplifying the comparability between the languages.B. Der Auslöser/Anlass für das Versagen eines Hanges liegt in externen Faktoren. the glossary consists of the following six languages: • German – Germany. Felssturz) id • Falls (Sturzprozess – Steinschlag .z.B.Key-note papers Seite 76 In general.z.B.Tauwechsel. Frost.U ein Hinweis auf Hangbewegungen sein kann Schutzmaßnahme.z.B.B. In einem fluviatil geprägten Relief stellt sie eine Anomalie dar.z.2.z.B. Based on this. Hangbewegung mit großem Volumen und hoher Dynamik. the terms are collected in a predefined reference topic same_ rel similar_ rel 2016 Abflusslose Senke de DE Senke ohne natürlich möglichen oberirdischen Wasserabfluss. Volumen > 1. Hangbewegung die zum Zeitpunkt der Aufnahme aktiv oder bezüglich ihres Alters für die Untersuchungen relevant war.B. In order to facilitate this process.z.z. Hangbereich aus dem eine Hangbewegung ihren Ausgang nimmt. Primärereignis) • Fracture forms (Anbruchformen . die ihrerseits wieder Auslöser für die nächste Reaktion sein kann (Kausalitätskette). Solifluktion) • Flow process rapid (Fließprozess – schnell . Blockschlag) • Falls (Sturzprozess – Felssturz .B. Switzerland. Neben den klassischen.z.B.B. dass die Massen am Gegenhang weit aufbranden.B. the glossary contains all the languages spoken in the Alpine region plus English and Spanish for two additional European countries dealing with geological hazards. the glossary implies terms and definitions to landslides and corresponding maps. Sturzbahn) • Flow process slow (Fließprozess – langsam . Die Auslöser reduzieren zum Beispiel die Festigkeit der im Hang anstehenden Gesteine. Grat) • General (Allgemeines . all the terms are structured in different topics. Murgang) • Risk (Gefahr-Gefährdung-Risiko . Restrisiko) • Maps (Karten . die u. Öffnungen an der Erdoberfläche über die Oberflächenwasser in den Untergrund eindringt. Gefahrenkarte) • Classification – processes (Klassifikation – Prozesse . um die Gefahr zu verringern oder um den Ablauf eines Ereignisses oder dessen Eintretenswahrscheinlichkeit wesentlich zu verändern. Therefore a table with 92 terms and definitions for geological hazards (in German) was drafted. This topical limitation helps the translator to get the several experts on the right track. Rutschungkopf) • Falls (Sturzprozess – Bergsturz .z. die dem Naturereignis aktiv entgegenwirkt.B. hazard and risk” caused by several kinds of geological hazards. Therefore.1 Basic list for Germany For the development of such a glossary.B.B. it’s much easier to get the English term for “Stauchwulst” if the English expert knows that you are searching for an accumulation term.z.B.z. Sturzprozess) • Measures (Maßnahmen .z. punktuellen technischen Schutzmaßnahmen wie zum Beispiel Stützmauer oder Felsanker sind auch flächendeckende Maßnahmen im Einzugsgebiet. Due to the “alpine – character” of the project.B. Menschlicher Eingriff. aktuelle Hangbewegung) • Landslide features (Rutschungsmerkmale z.B. In the literature.org). 2010 2007 2008 2009 2006 2005 2004 id 2001 German term Stauchwulst definition Wulst aus Gesteinsmaterial.org) will be brought into focus. Herkunft der Blöcke in der Regel von großen Fels. Sie tritt vor allem an der Stirn einer Rutsch. schedules. LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation (fall) bloc???? Fig. das durch unruhige Morphologie (weiche Formen) gekennzeichnet ist. procedures. a. Murwall LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation 2003 Blocklandschaft LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation Bloc Landscape???? Area in which blocs are shared spacious. Unter Murkegel sind kegelförmige Ablagerungen v. 2002 2. This ID is used to establish the relations between the different languages and also to integrate these in the relational database.adaptalp. 8: Auszug aus der vorgeschlagenen Begriffsliste für England Seite 79 . methods. deren Böschungswinkel meist mehr als 8-10° beträgt Sie sind oft noch durch die typischen dammartigen Wülste entlang des Randes eines ehemaligen Murstromes gekennzeichnet. According to the business dictionary. harmonise and improve different methods of hazard zone planning applied in the Alpine area. in dem weiträumig Blöcke und Gesteinsschollen verteilt sind. Accumulation caused by a slide process. infolge eines Sturzprozesses. English reference LfU Bayern topic Ablagerungen topic accumulation term toe???? definition accumulation at the toe/foot of the main body.Key-note papers Seite 78 Excel table with a unique ID for each term. Striving for “Harmonization” of regional terms and methods seems to be a guiding principle not only in WP 5 of the AdaptAlp project but in multiple European cooperation projects. a lot of definitions are used for the term harmonization.com). Bloc are comming from rock collapses. Schuttkegel entstehen v. Accumulation caused by a fall process. The comparison of methods for mapping geological and water risks in the individual countries” (www. Fig. -fächer LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation Coned accumulation espacially at channels with a naturel slope of 8-10°. 8: Extract of the “suggested-terms list” for England Abb. or systems to make them uniform or mutually compatible” (www.od. specifications. durch Steinschlag.adaptalp.2 “Harmonisation” of terms and methods “…A glossary will facilitate transdisciplinary and translingual cooperation as well as support the harmonization of the various methods…” (www.a. größere Geschiebeblöcke fehlen. block falls or sags. Schuttkegel LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation coned debris/ detritus???? "coned debris/detritus" are caused by rock falls. LfU Bayern LfU Bayern Ablagerungen Ablagerungen accumulation accumulation sliding bloc/clod/ massif???? LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation A coplex of rocks which is sliding as one bloc/clod/ massif. Ablagerung infolge eines Rutschprozesses Teilweise im Verband befindlicher Gesteinskomplex. der als ganze Scholle abrutscht. -fächer LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation Coned accumulation espacially at channels with a naturel slope less than 10° and with no big blocs. harmonization is an “adjustment of differences and inconsistencies among different measurements. The adjustment of differences and the achievement of compatibility also play a major role in work package 5: “AdaptAlp will evaluate. Ablagerung infolge eines Sturzprozesses. Einzelblock >1m³. They accumulate at the rock face.businessdictionary. Buckelfläche Sturzmasse Rutschmasse Rutschscholle Sturzblock LfU Bayern Ablagerungen accumulation undulating area???? Area which is characterized by undulating morphologie. Murkegel. Sie lagern sich an Steilwände und dort bevorzugt im Bereich von Steinschlagrinnen an Gelände.oder Kriechmasse auf Murablagerung am seitlichen Rand des Murkanales Gelände. accumulation at flank of the main body. Schwemmkegel. an Gerinnen zu verstehen. Concerning the development of the 2011 multilingual glossary for geological hazards. Bergstürzen. One bloc (<1m³) of an fall process. the “Harmonization” is implemented by the following approach. Schwemmkegel weisen im Gegensatz zu Murkegeln meist Böschungswinkel von weniger als 10° auf. This definition implies some important points which are mentioned as main goals in many projects supported by the EU. aber auch von Talzuschüben. 6 shows an extract of this Excel table with the basic terms from Germany. 2. Therefore existing online glossaries are compared and “bestpractice” examples are pulled out as inspiration. found not only in German-speaking geology. 2. 9: Screenshot of the online “Inter Active Terminology for Europe” from the EU (Source: http://iate. Fig. 9: Screenshot de online „Inter Active Terminology for Europe” der EU (Quelle: http://iate. theoretical and practical approaches could be shown. the main output of the project will be an online glossary which is linked to the homepage of the Bavarian Environment Agnecy (LfU).1 Basic rules In order to tackle the complexity and ambiguity. 3. This glossary aims at international harmonization by providing the user with a selection of official terms used by the geological agency in a specific country and by setting relations to similar terms employed in other countries.2. in the run-up to the visits. Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Karl Mayer Bavarian Environment Agency (LfU) (Office Munich) Lazarettstraße 67 80636 Munich – GERMANY Bernhard Lochner alpS – Centre for Natural Hazard and Risk Management Grabenweg 3 6020 Innsbruck . which are officially used by the regional responsible agencies.2. the multiple functions offered by external tables and the stronger data integrity fully compensate for a higher level of complexity. each “Harmonization” is carried out with the help of native speakers who also be well versed in the thematic of geological hazards. in these talks “term after term” is discussed with the respective person responsible. The term “Harmonisation” is playing a central role in the work for the glossary where the contents are concerned. As mentioned in the introduction of this article.eu) Seite 81 . Unlike many other glossaries.europa. which undoubtedly would have the linguistic ability but not the specialist background. These lists also contain short descriptions of the desired expressions and they are sent to the responsible persons for orientation and preparation. The connection to the LfU – Homepage ensures accessibility for all interested persons. To achieve this complexity. 7 shows an extract of the “suggested terms list” for England. 8 shows the “Inter Active Terminology for Europe” glossary from the European Union which approximately fulfils the desired criteria for the geological hazard glossary. a multilingual glossary shall be created. therefore also pictures and illustrations are used within the talks. Building on the German “basic list”.2. which are more like dictionaries working with direct translations. Conclusion As mentioned in the introduction. this article presents no final results because the project runs until February 2011. Only terms. A picture paints a thousand words.3 Data preparation and presentation Concerning the data preparation. Nevertheless.europa. The topics in this glossary are not defined by a translation agency. With regard to linguistic problems. this glossary consists of terms and definitions which are used by the official agencies from the involved countries. every involved country or region gets the chance to determine the terms and definitions they use and that procedure improves the overall result. are registered in the glossary and the relations between the different expressions are also defined by several experts. Due to this approach. Although the structure of the model may seem complex. at this stage of the project no final results can be shown.2 Data acquisition Basically the data acquisition is made during short visits in the involved countries. the main issues are already described in the technical description above. The terms are related in the following three forms: • Same meaning (the term has the same meaning in both languages) • Similar meaning (the term has a similar meaning in both languages) • Not existing (no term with the same or similar meaning exists) To facilitate the harmonization process. namely the improvement of the cooperation by the European countries in dealing with geological hazards. The multilingual concept provides the user with a direct translation of a term in a foreign language and sets relations to other terms based on its technical meaning.AUSTRIA Fig.Key-note papers Seite 80 2. but generally throughout Europe. Fig. The database model presented in this article fulfils all requirements stated by a multilingual glossary focusing on mass movements and other geological hazards. several national literature lists with suggested terms are worked out with the native speakers. The layout of this web page should be clear and simple for everyone to use. So the big difference from many other word lists is the way of getting the topics. Regarding to the data presentation. The central point to fully exploit the possibilities of the database structure is the correct setting of the relations between the different terms (over the ID). provisional results. not only the structure of the relational database but also the contents should satisfy the guidelines. This is an important contribution to one of the main goals of the whole project.eu) Abb. Furthermore. 1: Karte der Massenbewegungen in Österreich (Quelle: Geol. others have collected a lot of data Fig. Also. Zusammenfassung: Der „österreichische“ Weg zur Erfassung von historischen bzw. RICHARD BÄK. B.).ac. inventories of the federal states) via the hazard zone planning leading to the development of process related susceptibility maps. photos.-A.at) Abb.geologie. forecasting such mass movements are being followed. the Department of Engineering Geology of the Geological Survey of Austria developed a complex data management system called GEORIOS. inventory maps) about gravitational mass movements and other hazardous processes. the extent and the quality of the expertise.geologie. photos etc. Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Rapid Mass Movements (Rock Fall and Landslide) in Austria Standards und Methoden der Gefährdungsanalyse für schnelle Massenbewegungen (Steinschläge und Rutschungen) in Österreich Summary: This presents the Austrian approach for the documentation and prediction of landslides and rock falls from various inventories (GEORIOS .ac. 1: Inventory of mass movements in Austria (source Geol. Ereigniskataster der Länder) über die Gefahrenzonenplanung bis zur Erstellung von Prozessdispositionskarten wird dargestellt. documents. which is the basis for the digital storage and display of data and overlay of different data types. As there are no legal instructions in Austria as to how to deal with the evaluation of mass movements. 2009) involved in the assessment of rapid gravitational mass movements such MICHAEL MÖLK.g. den Umfang und die Qualität der erreichten Aussagen. The different legal obligations of the respective organizations leads to different results regarding the type.Geological Survey. The following provides a short summary about the efforts in the federal states.at) Seite 83 . These organizations deal with those hazards using different approaches (method and target).und Lawinenkataster.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 82 Introduction In Austria there are several public organizations ([12] HÜBL et al. Mass-movement inventories in Austria Since 1978 the Geological Survey of Austria has been gathering and displaying information (e. And then there are states that can rely on a lot of digitally available data and are working on generating landslide susceptibility maps. Dabei sind unterschiedliche gesetzliche Verpflichtungen und Zielsetzungen für die damit befassten Organisationen maßgeblich für die Art.: www.: www. the federal states all follow a different course of action.-A. In some of the federal states. almost no data is available. Additionally the data management system consists of a relational data base. THOMAS SAUSGRUBER. zur Vorhersage von zukünftigen Steinschlagprozessen und Rutschungen von den verschiedenen Ereigniskatastern (GEORIOS – Geologische Bundesanstalt. Inventories of such events are maintained by the Austrian Torrent and Avalanche Control (WLV) and the Geological Survey of Austria (GBA) apart from independent assessments done by the national railway and road administrations. B. which manages additional thousands of meta-information (documents. Wildbach. the status of available historical data is very different in the individual states. approaches to documenting and/or but it is not digitally available. Torrent and Avalanche Control. ARBEN KOCIU as rock falls and landslides. Due to the increasing amount of data. It consists of a Geographical Information System (GIS). different On the level of the federal administrations. On the other hand. is presented in 5 classes (very low. When. the local department of the Austrian Service for Torrent and Avalanche Control (WLV) creates “hazard maps” within the “hazard zoning plan”. blue – earth flow. categorized according to the quality of the data.). • The event inventory (“Ereigniskataster”) records only those processes for which an event date is known (5W–questions)..only the course of actions concerning floods. green – earth fall) Abb. pentagon – great events). & SCHMIDT F. avalanches and debris flows are regulated by law (ordinance of hazard zone mapping. • The thematic inventory map contains only information related to a type of process.die-wildbach. the priority. “Karte der Phänomene”): These kinds of maps can have different scales (1:50. In Carinthia. 2: Ereignisdatenbank von Kärnten mit 5W-Fragen und Qualitätskriterien „MAXO“ The Austrian Torrent and Avalanche Control (WLV) also maintains an inventory covering torrential floods. [15] KLINGSEISEN et al. high. Three (respectively 4) hazard zones were classified ([“high Hazard”].at) in German and English.000 and bigger) and can be of varying quality with information about process areas as phenomena of mass movements that have already happened. red – rock fall.und Lawinenkataster”. There are already in the 22. 2004) . Seite 85 .000 ([36] SCHWEIGL & HERVAS 2009). In Lower Austria up until now the susceptibility maps have been created using a heuristic approach based on geological expertise. Burgenland and Carinthia. Lower Austria. was evaluated on the basis of the intensity and the probability of an event. landslide susceptibility maps were generated for the major settled areas in Upper Austria (OÖ). mitigation measures) and the source of information (archives. different approaches are chosen to develop susceptibility maps (different scales. For each type of mass movement. they can be called “hazard maps” by definition. [18] KOLMER. risk map) were produced in the course of a university dissertation ([34] RUFF. 2010): Main focus of Burgenland is concentrated on shallow landslides with an annual rate of movement of 1-2cm. 2006). For the prediction of landslide susceptibility based on morphological and geological factors.. as well as a bibliographical database is also included in the GEORIOS system. X-uncertain. working with a 25x25m raster. Three to ten classes of susceptibility are delineated at a scale ranging from 1:50. avalanches. The inventory map is included in the susceptibility map. meaning spatial susceptibility. rock falls. geometric and geographical data. Nevertheless it has to be • The inventory map/event map (“Ereigniskarte”) contains only information about processes for which an event date is known (5W–questions: What. historical data and interpretation of DEM and aerial photos. Why). processes) derived from existing data sets and maps ([30] POSCH-TRÖTZMÜLLER G. low. For modelling. 2: Event inventory of Carinthia with 5W-questions and quality remarks MAXO (M-sure. bivariate statistics (for landslides) and cost analysis (for rock fall) were used. landslides and rock falls – the so called “Wildbach.ac. medium. The susceptibility.000 to 1:25. the web application includes only events such as slides. O-unknown) Abb. or more complex mass movements which have been published already in the media or the internet and are freely available for everyone ([16]KOCIU et al 2007). For example.die-wildbach. In Upper Austria. which is a susceptibility class. The priority was classified in 3 stages (high – medium – low. it is independent of a scale and can contain processes without information on location. the method called “Weights of Evidence” was chosen ([15] KLINGSEISEN et al. 2006).. However. 4: WLV-Inventory of mass movements in Austria (source: www. very high). 2005). etc. An engineering geological database. A-estimate.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 84 The database includes detailed information about the mass movements (geology. 2005). “no hazard”.at) Abb.the federal states all follow a different course of action. studies or tests carried out. “hazard cannot be excluded”. the Geological Survey of Austria has created not just one “inventory map”.geologie. in Vorarlberg risk maps (susceptibility map. Fig. The symbols are correlated to process type and magnitude (triangle – small events.[33] RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. mass The Fig. Where. As these maps include the intensity and the frequency of mass movements. as is explained in the following ([17] KOCIU et al 2010): Level of information: • Process index map. Who. “hazard”. In cooperation with the Geological Survey of Carinthia. a digital landslide inventory was created with historical events of the last 50 years ([1] BÄK et al 2005). 4: Ereignisdatenbank der WLV (Quelle: www. and also information about who carried out the field work and added the data into the database.at) movements stored compilation of a part of the mass movements in Austria is publicly accessible via the internet (www. map of phenomena (“Prozesshinweiskarte”.. 3: Event map of Carinthia (brown – landslides. Standards of susceptibility/hazard assessment in Austria Because of the lack of a regulatory framework or technical standard concerning landslides and rock falls in Austria . To offer assistance for the municipalities in land-use planning. hydrology. 3: Ereigniskarte von Kärnten Fig.000 database. but a “level of information”. vulnerability map. 000 using neural network analysis ([35] SCHWARZ et al. Any susceptibility class is not a ranking of the degree of slope stability. a thorough mapping of the phenomena involved and an accurate interpretation of the failure with the subsequent processes.. avalanches.000 ([1] BÄK et al. such as torrential processes. how often and with which intensities those events took place. neural network analysis) have already been generated. These inventories can form an important basis for the elaboration of hazard maps and related hazard zones. flachgründige Rutschungen im Bereich Gasen-Haslau ([35]Schwarz et al 2009). Dpt. The WLV is legally obliged to do an inventory of all events regarding natural hazards. among others: “the assessment and evaluation of geogenically induced natural hazards". official and legal documents Several standards issued by the IAEG (Internat. 5: Dispositionskarte für spontane.. 436/1976) for potentially endangered zones caused by natural hazards (except flooding by rivers and earthquakes. the assessment of the type of process. which certifies documentalists for those processes. Rock fall hazard assessment The state of the art regarding the assessment and evaluation of hazard for rock fall processes can ([8] Forstgesetz 1975 and [2] BGBl. equipment and modes of operation with proven functionality which represent the status of progress based on relevant scientific expertise. Inst. [38] TILCH et al. land-use and lithologicalgeotechnical characteristics of bedrock and unconsolidated sediments.000). Standards. 5: Susceptibility map for spontaneous shallow landslide at Gasen – Haslau ([35] Schwarz et al 2009).). f. These inventories (WLV. [21] MELZNER et al. areas” by the WLV. Using the digital geological map of Carinthia (1:50. [40] TILCH et al. DEM (10m x10m raster). For the assessment and evaluation of rock fall processes and the design of protection measures an Austrian Standard is currently under development ([28] ONR 24810: Technischer Steinschlagschutz).. the accuracy of predictions regarding the susceptibility for rapid mass-movements based on maps like the ones mentioned above is limited.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 86 taken into account that the method of generating these maps included neither field work nor remote sensing techniques. The key feature for susceptibility/hazard responsibility of different authorities mapping is a good documentation of historic events. At the Geological Survey of Austria (GBA). magnitude. guidelines. The elaboration of hazard zone maps issuing building permits to consult an expert to evaluate the hazard for the planned construction site explicitly. 2009). Alpine Naturgefahren. but a description of the relative propensity/probability of a landslide of a given type and of a given source area to occur. susceptibility maps in different scales and with different methods (heuristic approach. the inventory map of mass movements (landslides and rock falls). [39] TILCH et al. which are done by other authorities) for all communities is the task of the Austrian Torrent and Avalanche Control (WLV). 2010. otherwise the community can be excluded from public funding for the financing of mitigation measures in the future. The method of assessment is based solely on geological expertise. Furthermore. The state of the art according to the “Wasserrechtsgesetz WRG 1959 §12a(1)” is defined in Austria as the following: The use of modern technological methods. 2005). requirements by the law. are not mandatory and therefore can be illustrated as “brown hazard indication Fig. [41] TILCH et al 2009). geological surveys of provinces like Carinthia) are established to guarantee a complete documentation of processes and events that can eventually endanger infrastructure and/or people. f. location. 2010. Legal situation. which give the authorities good evidence to optimize land-use planning and avoid areas that tend to be exposed to natural hazards. Due to the imprecision of input data used. 2010. Bautechnik und Naturgefahren. The legal implication of these indication areas lies in the obligation of the authorities Seite 87 .. run-out. 2009. The GBA defines its very own tasks. Of course these maps still lack information about intensity and recurrence period or probability of occurrence.. Association of Engineering Geology –UNESCO Working Party of World Landslide Inventory [42] to [47]) exist for the documentation and classification of landslides. GBA. State of the art in the practice The code of practice is to be brought up to the state of the art due to the absence of binding standards. the Geological Survey of Austria generated a susceptibility map for spontaneous landslide (soil slips and earth flows) at a scale of 1:50. The delineation of potential emmissionzones of rapid mass movements.und Lawinenkataster – WLK” ([8] Forstgesetz 1975). allows for a better priority-rating and design of mitigation measures. 2010. when.. Abb. rock-falls and landslides in the so called “Wildbach. such as rock falls and landslides. for the documentation of landslide and rock fall events (avalanches and torrential processes are covered as well) there is a short course of the Universität für Bodenkultur Wien. process-related susceptibility maps for Carinthia were generated in a collaboration of the Geological Survey of Austria (GBA) and the Geological Survey of Carinthia at a scale of 1:200. For already developed areas.. ([17] KOCIU et al. frequency etc. For a small study area in Styria. The data collected in the inventories allow for better information and further evaluation of where. relevant failure mechanisms. Abb. where the upper part of the slope shows a rotational failure which is constrained by a plane of weakness at the base (e. especially after extraordinary water input resulting from precipitation and/or snow melt leading to an excess of pore water pressure. identification (by field work and/ or according to e. Relatively often one can find these slides in the soil cover of the ground. have no relevance in Austria. 7: Beispiel für die Veränderung der Sicherheit eines Einhanges über die Zeit. [24] MÖLK 2008): Rough estimation of run out e. energy and bouncing-height distributions for slopescale problems For the design of mitigation measures. translational and compound slides. filling …). sliding The combination of a rotational and a translational sliding mechanism is called a compound slide. These may develop in horizontally stratified soils and rocks. Translational slides take place in rock on forgiven more or less planar features like bedding planes. which one can find for example in Scandinavia or in Canada. Very rapid to rapid flow slides. for a detailed description see the cited literature. [23] MELZNER et al 2010. g. joints etc. a claystone layer). Slides include rotational.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 88 be described by the following workflow. Fig. The failure results when the shear resistance on the plane is exceeded. Concerning [37] THERZAGHI (1950) the stability of slopes is stated by the factor of safety. such as a gley horizon in the range of groundwater fluctuations. probabilistic distribution of joint-bordered rock bodies • Scree slopes: block-size distribution (statistics) • Analysis of rock fall processes ([22] MELZNER et al 2010. The triggering of the occurrence of a mass movement is the last step of destabilization over a longer period of time. Gasen and Haslau 2005. by shadow angle (regional scale) 2D or 3D modelling (probabilistic): provides run out length. g. which turns into a debris flow down slope. Rapid landslides with reference to [6] CRUDEN & VARNES (1996) feature velocities of some metres per minute to several meters per second. The mass movement often starts as a rotational slide. g. In Austria. dip/direction. the main processes exhibit different slides and debris slides. which is expressed by the ratio between driving surface is formed by a weak clay layer. a probabilistic approach is going to be defined as a standard procedure in Austria ([28] ONR 24810) following the concept of partial factors of safety ([26] EUROCODES) for actions/resistances and varying accepted probabilities of failure depending on the casualty and reliability-classes of [27] Eurocode 0. 6: Delineation of potential conflict areas at regional extent using an empirical model ([21] Melzner et al 2010). called where sheet the slides. studies etc. nach [46] WL/WPLI (1994) Seite 89 . [12] JABOYEDOFF 1999) and • Evaluation of detachment areas description of discontinuities (type. The methods to be applied are just roughly described. Vorarlberg). Rotational slides own a circular sliding surface. it is important to distinguish between preparatory factors and the triggers ([46] WL/WPLI 1994). Fig. These failures occur in porous soils. geology. 6: Abgrenzung potenzieller Wirkungsbereiche mittel einfachen empirischen Modellansätzen ([21] Melzner et al 2010). which results from shear failure in relatively homogenous rock or soil of low strength. being more coarse at regional scale and detailed at slope-scale. literature. A process that frequently can be observed in Austria are debris slides (e. A landslide may exhibit a translational sheet slide of some square meters involving the ground surface or a deep seated mass movement of several cubic kilometres. land use. 7: An Example of changes of the factor of safety with time after [46] WL/WPLI (1994) Abb. Depending on the objective of the assessment. When assessing landslide hazards. g. the tools to be applied may vary in respect to the scale of the result. Landslide hazard assessment General Landslides present complex natural phenomena for both the variability of processes and the dimensions. properties of rock mass. Standard procedure for the assessment of rock fall hazards (best practice): Preparation • Definition of the boundaries of the project area in compliance with the stakeholder • Acquisition of basic data (topografic maps. opening.) • Collection of historic event information (written and oral) Field work: • Collection of properties of the forest (if relevant). triggering. A main advantage of Lidar data in comparison to conventional photos is the information on shaded areas and of areas covered with wood. turned out to be very useful.g. Geologische Stelle Liebeneggstr. • type of process • velocity of the process • geotechnical involved • potential role of human activities (triggers?). [29] Poisel et al. properties of materials State of the art in landslide assessment For several years. The accuracy of these models will depend with highly on a thorough events. to provide the modeldevelopers with calibration data. The multitude of parameters influencing the development of the erosion processes in question will keep the stakes high and will not allow for providing the authorities with the accurate models they ask for within a considerable time. the factor of safety drops under one. many practitioners and scientists are focusing on that topic. airborne and satellite-based multispectral and radar images) provide information on unstable.ac. Aerial photos. Due to the fact that the authorities are strongly asking for such tools. remote sensing systems (e.baek@ktn. If the driving forces are greater than the resisting forces the slope fails. This first analysis is completed by mapping in the field. which show the spatial distribution of different hazard classes. Models showing the disposition of a given environment to tend to mass-movements and also forecasting the location. [32] ROSE & HUNGR 2007) Future development The development of forecast-models for the prognosis of the location and/or time of rapid gravitational mass movements to take place or even the meteorological settings which will trigger such events is at an early stage. This means that the expertise of experts applied at defined locations with all the necessary field work and assessment of natural parameters. Landslide inventories (databases of WLV.g.moelk@die-wildbach. Collected surface data in combination with subsurface data gained from trenches and boreholes or seismic refraction.. the factor of safety of the slope decreases to the point where it is close to failure (marginally stable).kociu@geologie. 2009).. GBA. a monitoring allows the prediction of failure time under certain circumstances (e. For some years authorities (LReg Kärnten.at This emphasizes the necessity of a consistent documentation of events. erosion processes etc.at Richard Bäk Abt. Geotechnical data are also required to assess the factor of safety and the probability of failure by means of analytical calculations or numerical modelling (e. Furthermore. This serves as a check for the taken assumptions and an evaluation of the mechanical model. and all the necessary models are developed. hydrogeology.e. The data are commonly presented in landslide hazard maps. WLV Oberösterreich und Vorarlberg) are going to make comprehensive hazard maps giving a basis on decision-making for land use and development.gv.at Thomas Sausgruber Forsttechnischer Dienst für Wildbach und Lawinenverbauung Geologische Stelle Liebeneggstr. 11 6020 Innsbruck michael.at Arben Kociu Geologische Bundesanstalt Fachabteilung Ingenieurgeologie Neulinggasse 38 1030 Wien arben.. have been used since decades to detect these slopes by characteristic geomorphological phenomena in combination with available geological maps ([4] BUNZA 1996. geotechnical parameters etc. well-documented necessarily calibration future. 5 ([46] WL/WPLI 1994) shows the development of a stable slope to one that fails. slowly creeping slopes. morphological and meteorological conditions only. high resolution Lidar data have been available for most regions in Austria bearing landslide activity. 2006). i. At this point the slope is susceptible to many triggers. meaning that the resisting forces exceed the driving forces. it is highly likely that they will work in certain regions with similar or corresponding geological. which may fail and transfer into a rapid moving masses ([31] PRAGER et al. Stable slopes feature a factor of safety over one. They are a powerful tool to recognize geomorphological structures of landslides ([49] ZANGERL et al. 15 Umwelt Geologie+Bodenschutz Flatschacher Straße 70 9020 Klagenfurt richard.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 90 forces and resisting forces. susceptibility/hazard maps in Austria were often made on demand. State of the practice in landslide assessment Conventional methods are based on observations of potentially unstable slopes. 11 6020 Innsbruck thomas. Since the slope is exposed to weathering. 2008). Until recently. several federal states) in combination with GIS applications are used to get rapid information to areas prone to landslides. both stereographic and orthophotos. Additional information on the process can be provided by a monitoring system. Additionally chronicles.sausgruber@die-wildbach. groundpenetrating radar and electrical resistivity profiles allow for the drawing of an underground-model and deduce the type of failure mechanism which is most likely to occur. which occasionally exist at the town halls. [9] FUKUZONO 1985. fed in apt models will not become obsolete in the near and very probably not even in the far Seite 91 . such as geology. [19] KRÄHENBÜHL 2006. Given the necessary detailed parameters. [14] KIENHOLZ 1995).g. Fig. influencing or allowing for the processes in question are at hand. Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Michael Mölk Forsttechnischer Dienst für Wildbach und Lawinenverbauung. time and run-out of such processes will be a precious tool for the experts although a replacement of a thorough evaluation of the conditions on site is not to be expected anytime. When assessing landslide hazard the following information is needed regarding the ground conditions: • geology and structures • hydrogeology. Additionally. N. (2009): Landslide sucseptibility mapping by means of artificial Neuronal Networks performed for the region Gasen-Haslau (eastern Styria. Angew. ArcNews 28 (3): 16. 19-24th April 2009. Ass. 41.Working Party on Landslide Inventory (International Geotechnical Societies of UNESCO) (1991): A Suggested Method for a Landslide Summary. & SCHÖNLAUB H. 2004 [26] ÖNORM EN 1990: Eurocode: Grundlagen der Tragwerksplanung [27] ÖNORM EN 1997-1: Eurocode 7: Entwurf.3/0185-IV/5/2007 vom 12.. S.. No.Working Party on Landslide Inventory (International Geotechnical Societies of UNESCO) (1993): A Suggested Method for describing the Activity of a Landslide. 2004 [6] CRUDEN. A. (1995): Erfassung und Modellierung von Hangbewegungen als Beitrag zur Erstellung von Gefahren-Hinweiskarten.. RUDOLFMIKLAU. 18.Jahresbericht 2009.. & R. Final Report. Innsbruck.. (2008): Methodischer Leitfaden zur prozessorientierten Bearbeitung von Massenbewegungen. Geologische Stelle. American Rock Mechanics Association.. Graz.-A. BÄK (2010B): Regionale Ausweisung potentieller Ablöse. S. AND STOFFEL.. BÄK (2010A): Comparing empirical models. Gmünd 2005 [2] BGBl. Universität für Bodenkultur Wien. 12.ac.pdf) [36] SCHWEIGL. Ch. Paris 1993 [46] WP/WLI . M.Leopold Stocker – Verlag. 52. A. geologie.. N. Luxembourg. Eng. 308-320. (2009): Geological controls on slope deformations in the Köfels rockslide area (Tyrol. (http://www. EBERHART.. N. 145-150. KALCHER. J. Eng. M. Science. – Bull. 83-107. Austria).. – Bull. Ch. Intern. KRISSL. European Geosciences Union (EGU). [33] RUDOLF-MIKLAU F. Univ. Ch.. B.eine Fallstudie im Bereich Niederösterreichs –. N. and field workshop on landslides. 43.ac.. 61 pp.-15. TILCH.15 Umwelt. M. (2009): Landslide Mapping in Austria.geologie. Innsbruck. E. . PHILIPPOSSIAN Frank & ROUILLER Jean-Daniel (1999): Detection of Rock Instabilities: Matterock Methodology. (http://bfw. Geology.. – Bull. 16-23. (2008): Regionalstudie Wipptal Südost: Erfassung und Darstellung von Naturgefahrenpotentialen im Regionalen Maßstab nach EtAlp Standards. § 11 [9] FUKOZONO T.. 5. Berkey Volume 1950. Vortrag im Rahmen des Landesgeologentages 2009. JONNSON.Vortrag Innsbrucker Hofgespräche 26. (http://www.pdf) [21] MELZNER.ac. (1988): General Report: Morphological and geotechnical parameters of landslides in the relation to geology and hydrogeology. Heft 1+2.M. Paris 1990 [43] WP/WLI . R.. [37] TERZAGHI. Vienna. Pölten 2009. A.pdf) [24] MÖLK.Alp. Jänner 2010 [4] BUNZA..geologie. p. 47. LOTTER. Vienna. A. Geo. Intern. 2007. (1950): Mechanism of landslides. [49] ZANGERL C. (2009): Geogenes Baugrundrisiko Öberösterreich. KOCIU (2009): Simple applicable methods for assessing natural hazards caused by landslides and erosion processs in torrent catchments. der sich auf die Stunde genau ankündigte. No. T. Paris 1994 [47] WP/WLI . F. (2010C): Rock fall susceptibility assessment using structural geological indicators for detaching processes such as sliding or toppling. 2006. 42-49 (2006) [30] POSCH-TRÖZMÜLLER. Vol. Juli 1976 über die Gefahrenzonenpläne [3] BMLFUW (2010): Richtlinie für die Gefahrenzonenplanung-LE. 44. J. – Bull. L.at/pdf/Poster/poster_2010_egu_melzner_etal. H. (2004): The occurrence and classification of massive rock slope failure. Intern. JANDA. – In preparation. (2006): Mapping Landslide Hazards in Austria: GIS Aids Regional Planning in NonAlpine Regions. (2010): Räumliche und skalenabhängige Variabilität der Datenqualität und deren Einfluss auf mittels heuristischer Methode erstellte Dispositionskarten für Massenbewegungen im Lockergestein . (1985): A new method for predicting the failure time of a slope. TILCH. 1988. Geological Society of America. Mitt. MOELK. H. ZANGERL. E. 4th Int. General Assembly. M. [25] MÖLK M..B.10.gv.49. KOCIU. No.C. Teil 1: Allgemeine Regeln [28] ONR 24810: Technischer Steinschlagschutz: Begriffe und Definitionen. Chancen. Karlsruhe. Berechnung und Bemessung in der Geotechnik. Ch.pdf) [41] TILCH. 2006.at) [22] MELZNER.at/Verwaltung/Abteilungen/Abt. N. 02-07 Mai 2010. and Schuster R. Tirol. General Assembly. N. I. & A. [16] KOCIU A. HABERLER A. Paris 1991 [45] WP/WLI . Int.3. 2008.ac. Niederthai. 19-24th April 2009. (http://www. Münchner Forum für Massenbewegungen. PRAGER. [35] SCHWARZ. Geol. 2004 [34] RUFF. S.at/pdf/Poster/poster_2010_geoforum_tilch. 2D and 3D process based models for delineating maximum rockfall runout distances. geologischgeotechnische Grundlagen.ac.und Forstwirtschaft vom 30. (2005): GIS-gestützte Risikonanalyse für Rutschungen und Felsstürze in den Ostalpen (Vorarlberg.geologie. Bemessung und konstruktive Ausgestaltung. S 215-220.. (1996): Assessment of landslide hazards by means of geological and hydrological risk mapping [5] BUWAL: Symbolbaukasten zur Kartierung der Phänomene. – Sea to Sky Geotechnique.. Intern. Paris 1990 [44] WP/WLI .-A. application and enforcement of hazard zone maps for torrent and avalanches control in Austria..1 Hazard Mapping . Eng. Vienna. M. München [15] KLINGSEISEN. Bull. LETOUZE-ZEZULA & LIPIARSKI (2005): Ereigniskataster und Karte der Phänomene als Werkzeug zur Darstellung geogener Naturgefahren (Massenbewegungen). Washington D..05. Th. Instandhaltung und Wartung.. Band 147. 02-07 Mai 2010. (2010): GEORIOS . 2004.. Geology. European Geosciences Union (EGU).und Wirkungsbereichen von Sturzprozessen im Oberen Mölltal/Kärnten. J. Conference Proceedings. R. 25-32.. PRAGER C. 120 S. MELZNER S. R..1996. LIENER. S. (http://www. (2007): Massenbewegungen in Österreich. LOTTER. & BÄK. Eng. L.. & A. Tirol.Working Party on Landslide Inventory (International Geotechnical Societies of UNESCO) (1990): Suggested Method for Reporting a Landslide .: National Academic Press. KRUMMENACHER.): Landslides: Investigation and mitigation. Rotterdam: Balkema. Ass. KOCIU (2009): Development of an efficient methodology for mapping and assessing potential rock fall source areas and runout zones. Report. Niederthai.ac. TILCH N. Geol. & TOTSCHNIK. Niederthai. Austria) – 6th European Congress on regional Geoscientific Cartography and Information Systems. K.N. A. of Rock Mech. [20] MELZNER.. SKOLAUT. Austria.ac. & R. Jour.. N. Forstliche Schriftenreihe. DORREN. (2006): Der Felssturz. 50. JRC Scientific and Technical Report EUR 23785 EN. TSCHACH. Geology. Geologische Bundesanstalt. and Min. Eng. Bundesamt f. J. Poster Präsentation beim Geoforum Umhausen 2008. (http://www. Wasser u. [13] JABOYEDOFF Michel. Felsbau 22. p. [7] DORREN. RACHOY. Geoforum Umhausen 14. 1-51. Literature Survey regarding methods of hazard mapping and evaluation of danger by landslides and rock fall. (2006): Assessment of the Risks Caused by the Landslide Lärchberg ? Galgenwald. MÖLK. BRÜCKL E. 2010 (www. ANGERER.. Conf. Wien... KITTL.. Georisikokarte Vorarlberg.pdf) [23] MELZNER. BRANDNER. (http://www.. Österreich). Geology. geologie. 36-45. 0863.K.. (1996): Landslide Types and Processes. NAGLER. Eng. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen 158 (2007) 6: S 128-141 [8] Forstgesetz 1975. geologie. Joint japa-Swiss [14] KIENHOLZ. (2010): Erstellung von Dispositionskarten für Massenbewegungen – Herausforderungen. internal derformation and kinematics of rock slides. POSCHER G. Tagg. KOCIU. Arb. ISBN 978-92-79-11776-3. [10] HUNGR. S. 2005.ktn.10.. A. European Geosciences Union (EGU). Ch.. and HUNGR O.. Ass. Methoden. EDER S. G.. General Assembly. Geology. St.. und NEUNER G. In: Bonnard (ed. N. No. Intern. B. (2010): Adapt Alp WP 5.. B. B.. S. (2007): Forecasting potential rock slope failure in open pit mines using the inverse-velocity method. Poster Präsentation beim Geoforum Umhausen 2010. Ass. L. Paris 1995 [48] WYLLIE D. J. Diss. EVANS. No. C. Geologie 6. 49-63. European Geosciences Union (EGU). [39] TILCH. [40] TILCH.geologie.Geological Hazards. S.. General Assembly. FELLIN W. [11] HUTCHSINSON. Intern.L.-A. 3-35. No. (2008) Seite 93 .. MELZNER. (2006): Risk management of rock fall hazards. TENTSCHERT E. No. Tokyo.Working Party on Landslide Inventory (International Geotechnical Societies of UNESCO) (1994): A Suggested Method for Reporting Landslide Causes.3. & SCHMIDT F... S. (eds. [12] HÜBL. O.at/050/ pdf/IHG_26_05_2010_Tilch_Schwarz. Special report 247. Geol. M. 3. [18] KOLMER. (2008): Influence of geologcial structures on failure initiation. G. (2009): Datenmanagementsystem GEORIOS (Geogene Risiken Österreich). – JB der Geol. Pölten 2009.at/pdf/Poster/poster_2009_euregio.Working Party on Landslide Inventory (International Geotechnical Societies of UNESCO) (1995): A Suggested Method for the Rate of Movement of a Landslide. Vancouver 2006. Vortrag im Rahmen des Landesgeologentages 2009. M. & KOCIU. R. 436/1976: Verordnung des Bundesministers für Land. BAILLIFARD Francois.. 2009. St. 41. MOSER. In: Turner A.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 92 Literatur / References: [1] BÄK. VARNES D. SCHNETZER. 41. L. Felsbau 24. H. LÄNGER.at/pdf/Poster/poster_2010_egu_melzner_2d_3d. HERVAS.. S. – Wien 2007 [17] KOCIU. Vol 1. foreseen publication: 2011 [29] POISEL. TILCH. LANG. DORREN. (2004): Generelle Legende für Geomorphologische Kartierungen des Forsttechnischen Dienst für Wildbach und Lawinenverbauung.at/pdf/Poster/poster_2009_egu_melzner.at/pdf/Poster/poster_2009_egu_tilch_etal. LEOPOLD. – Bull. KOÇIU. H.pdf) [42] WP/WLI . KOCIU. Ph. A. Ch. M. AJES 102/2 (2009). Ass. MARRO Christian. Wien. (2009): Alpine Naturkatastrophen – Lawinen-Muren-Felsstürze-Hochwässer. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Geology.Working Party on Landslide Inventory (International Geotechnical Societies of UNESCO) (1990): Suggested Nomenclature for Landslides . et al.pdf). Nr. – Bull. Wien 2010. 1985.D. KRAUTBLATTER.2010.ac. GOLDSCHMIDT. M. Ass. [50] ZANGERL C... S. Limitierungen. [19] KRÄHENBÜHL R.G. M. Proc. M. Bd. Thema Geologie und Bodenschutz) [31] PRAGER... PÖLLINGER. (Poster download on GBA homepage www. 83-124 [38] TILCH..): Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Landslides. 11(1). (2004): Implementation. SCHWARZ L. 4-19 [32] ROSE. C. PICHLER. D. (2007): State of the Art in Rock-Fall and Forest Interactions. 5 m) and the volumes involved. Das gilt für geologische Massenbewegungen. A map of landslide phenomena and an associated technical report provide signs and indications of slope instability as observed in the field. gelben. The legal and technical background conditions for the protection against landslides have undergone considerable changes since the 80’s. causing the destruction of the village of FalliHölli in the year 1994. The hazard assessment is then integrated into land use planning and in the risk management (3. The cantons are now required to establish inventories and maps denoting areas of hazards. mass movements. and to take them into account in the land use planning. Im Sinne des integralen Risikomanagements werden für alle Gefahrenprozesse vergleichbare Methoden angewendet und anschließend in der Planung umgesetzt. This is based on the observation and interpretation of landforms. the identification of protection objectives. Guidelines are published by the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN/BAFU). Field interpretation of these phenomena allows areas vulnerable to landslides to be mapped. Rock avalanches with huge volumes (v > 1million m3) and high speed (> 40 m/s) can also happen although these are rare. The hazard maps are dealing with five degrees: high (red). a landslide was reactivated with historically unprecedented rates of displacement up to 6 m/ day. Consequently. the size of their elements (Østone < 0. In a second Seite 95 . floods. 2-10 cm/year: slow. Geological Hazard Assessment in Switzerland Geologische Gefahrenbeurteilung in der Schweiz Summary: Geological hazard assessments are based on Swiss laws dealing with natural hazards. The Federal Flood Protection Law and the Federal Forest Law came into force in 1991. low (yellow). > 10 cm/year: active).000 m3) and high speed features (1-10 m/s). step). Hochwasser und Lawinen. residual (yellow-white).5 m. floods. hazard assessment. Differential movements must also be taken into account since they can generate buildings to topple or cracks to open. For the improvement of the inventories and the hazard maps. Zusammenfassung: Geologische Gefahren werden in der Schweiz gemäß den eidgenössischen Gesetzen über den Wald und den Wasserbau erhoben und beurteilt. These depth and velocity parameters are not always sufficient to estimate the potential danger of a landslide. Following the promulgation of these new regulations. These hazards include earthquakes. BERNARD LOUP case. 2-10 m: intermediate. The flooding of 1987 promoted the federal authorities to review criteria governing natural step the hazard of landslides is assessed according to the methods used in the Swiss strategy against all natural hazards (e. on structural and geomechanical properties of slope instabilities. snow avalanches). purposeful planning of preventive measures and the limitation of the residual risk are of central importance. Thirty million m3 of fallen debris cut off the valley for two weeks. More than 6% of Switzerland is affected by hazards due to slope instability. Rock falls are characterized by their speed (< 40 m/s). floods. Due to heavy rainfall. In another HUGO RAETZO. According to the integrated risk management. Their purpose is to protect the environment.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 94 Introduction Switzerland is a country exposed to many natural hazards. Dazu hat das zuständige Bundesamt (heute das Bundesamt für Umwelt BAFU) entsprechende Empfehlungen und Richtlinien veröffentlicht. the federal government provides subsides to the cantonal authorities (50%). avalanches). snow avalanches. debris flows and very shallow landslides are frequent in Switzerland. These are moderate volume (< 20. Für diese Prozesse werden Gefahrenkarten erstellt. mittlere und geringe Gefahr sowie Restgefährdung und keine Gefährdung. During this phase inventories and maps of phenomena are established. snow avalanches and forest fires. rock falls and debris flows. gelb-weiß gestreiften und weißen Zonen auf den Gefahrenkarten. In a first step the landslides are identified and classified. >10 m: deep) and the long term mean velocity of the movements (< 2 cm/year: substabilised. greater emphasis has been placed on preventive measures. human lives and property from the damage caused by water. These areas occur mainly in the Prealps and in the Alps. These phenomena are very dangerous and annually cause important traffic disruptions and fatalities. forest fires. the methods are applied for all natural hazards (landslides. Øblock > 0.g. die immer fünf Gefahrenstufen ausscheiden: Hohe. blauen. First step: Hazard identification Landslides can be classified according to the estimated depth of the sliding plane (< 2m: shallow. Daraus entstehen die roten. no hazard (white). The Randa rock avalanches of 1991 are a good example of the potential of such hazards. medium (blue). hazard protection. The map represents phenomena related to dangerous processes and delineates the vulnerable areas. even outside buildings (except in the case of stone and block avalanches. A chart of the degrees of danger has been developed in order to guarantee a homogeneous and uniform means of assessment of the different kinds of natural hazards across Switzerland (floods. The different phenomena are represented by different colours and symbols. landslides…) – for example. mean and low intensity. floods and snow avalanches. The yellow-white hatched zone is mainly an alerting domain.000 for the Master Plan. calculations of factors of safety) may be used to determine the extent of areas endangered by rock falls. They indicate the level of danger to people and to animals. These are represented by the colours red. Hazard maps. including special sheets for each phenomenon (landslides. express three degrees of danger. Second step: Hazard assessment of landslides Hazard is defined as the occurrence of a potentially damaging natural phenomena within a specific period of time in a given area. Criteria for the intensity assessment: There is generally no applicable measure to define the intensity of slope movements.1 for fall processes. people are considered safer inside the buildings than outside. this legend may contain a large number of symbols. Each canton is currently compiling the data for its own register. according to possible damage to property. The 300 kJ limit corresponds to the impact energy to which can be resisted by a reinforced concrete wall. • Damage to buildings should be expected. in which severe damage can be reduced by means of appropriate protective measures (area with restrictive regulations).Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 96 and on historical traces. Applied criteria usually refer to the zone affected by the process. Inventories: Recommendations for allow an overview of the different natural disasters and potential associated damage in Switzerland. However. • Slight damage to buildings is possible. Fig. 1). Mass movements often correspond to gradual (landslides) or unique (falls. The blue zone is mainly a regulation domain. It is sometimes difficult to make an assessment of the return period of a massive rock avalanche. Consequently. RED: high hazard An additional distinction is made between potential. In this case. Some recommendations for the uniform classification. as long as the construction type has been adapted to the present conditions. Medium intensity: People and animals are at risk of injury outside buildings. represented by corresponding colours: red. and the probability (frequency or return period). Numerical models (analysis of block trajectories. The intensity parameter is divided into three degrees: High intensity: People and animals are at risk of injury inside buildings. snow avalanches). In the case of mass movement. Two major parameters are used to classify the danger: the intensity. The yellow zone is mainly an alerting domain (area where people are notified at possible hazard). indicative values can be used to define classes of high. The 30 kJ limit the definition of a uniform Register for slope instability events has been developed. These databases (StorMe) are transferred to the FOEN to • People are at risk of injury both inside and outside buildings. which can harm or kill people and animals). but are at low risk inside buildings. The various hazard zones are delineated according to the landslide phenomena maps. the register of slope instability events and additional documents. heavy damage to buildings or even destruction of buildings is possible. debris flows) events. but with a higher probability of occurrence. Some federal recommendations have been proposed in the 90’s for the management of landslides and floods. the significant criterion is the impact energy in the exposed zone (translation and rotation energy). inferred or proved events. the definition of features on a natural hazard map is based on a uniform legend for landslides. snow avalanches. Risk is considerably lower inside buildings. or to predict when a dormant landslide may reactivate. blue and yellow. 1:5. Since 1984 similar recommendations have already existed for snow avalanches. YELLOW: low hazard • People are at slow risk of injury. Hazard assessment implies the determination of the magnitude or intensity of an event over time. YELLOW-WHITE HATCHING: residual danger Low probability of high intensity event occurrence can be designated by yellow-white hatching. highlighting a residual danger. BLUE: moderate hazard • People are at risk of injury outside buildings. blue and yellow (Fig. According to the scale of mapping (e. Low intensity: People and animals are slightly threatened. lighter damage to buildings should be expected. as well as to property. • A rapid destruction of buildings is possible. according to currently available information. The red zone mainly designates a prohibition domain (area where development is prohibited). according to the federal “recommendations“ (guidelines). For rock falls.g. Three degrees of danger have been defined. or buildings can no longer house people. superficial damage to buildings should be expected. 1:50. A description of the magnitude of potential damage caused by an event is based on the identification of threshold values for degrees of danger.000 for the Local Plan). people are mainly at risk outside buildings. Seite 97 . floods. or: • Events occurring with a lower intensity. representation and documentation of natural processes have been established by the Swiss federal administration. but not a rapid destruction. as long as the structure is properly constructed. WHITE: no danger or negligible danger. The estimated degrees of danger have implications for land use. Extensive knowledge of past and current events in a catchment area is essential if zones of future instability are to be identified. or to the threatened zone. or to present quantitative data on the stability of a potentially unstable area. mass movements are usually non-recurrent processes. The results of probability calculations to determine if mass movements occur remain very uncertain. if attributed to the same reference period: p = 1 – (1 – 1/T)n For example. For rock avalanches. The 100-year limit corresponds to a value applied in the design of flood protection structures. Hazards with a very low probability of occurrence are usually classified as residual dangers under the standard classification. The probability of mass movement occurrence should mainly be established for a given duration of land use. In principle.1 m/day for shallow landslides.1 m/day). 1: Matrix for the assessment of hazards Abb. rather than the frequency of dangers. and T is the return period. T v > 0. D.5 m and 2 m. Thus. if horizontal displacements greater than one meter per event may occur. Most landslides: A low intensity movement has an annual mean speed of lower than 2 cm per year.g. neither does it exclude the intensity scale for high magnitude events. displacement > 1 m per event correlated with recurrent meteorological conditions. corresponds to the maximum energy that oakwood stiff barriers can resist (e. the probability of potential damage during a certain period of time. e: thickness of the unstable layer. except for events involving stone and block avalanches and earth flows. the intensity depends on the thickness of the potentially unstable layer. intensity criteria can be directly converted to danger classes. and of 10% (or about 1 in 10) for a 300year return period. n represents the given time period (for example 30 or 50 years). The class limits are set at 30 and 300 years and are equivalent to those class as derived from the long term velocity. 1: Matrix für die Gefahrenbeurteilung medium PROBABILITY low very low Seite 99 . The boundaries defining the three intensity classes are set at 0. it is recommended not to artificially delineate zones affected by low to medium intensities. h: height of the earthflow deposit. only has a relative meaning. The calculation of the probability of occurrence clearly shows that even for a rather high return period (300 years). Other criteria as velocity changes or accelerations (dv). the residual danger remains not significant. The return period. T High intensity E > 300 kJ E > 300 kJ v>10 cm/year dv. A medium intensity has a speed ranging from one to 10 cm per year. D: differential movements. the high intensity class (E > 300 kJ) is always reached in the impact zone. It may also be assigned if reactivated phenomena have been observed or. D. differential movements (D) and thickness of the landslide (T) can lead to increase resp. considering a time period of 30 years. the probability scale does not exclude very rare events.5 m 0. The probability of occurrence and the return period can be mathematically linked. therefore. an event with a 30-year return period has a 64% probability of occurrence (or about 2 in 3). which can be YELLOW high Fig. the high intensity class can also be assigned to very rapid shallow landslides (speed > 0. to reduce the intensity For earth flows and debris flows. In the area affected by landsliding field. v: long term mean velocity. Probability: Probability of landslides is defined according to three classes. Therefore. or the degree of safety of a specific area should be taken into account. The high intensity class is assigned to velocities higher than 10 cm per year and to shear zones or zones with clear differential movements (D). T Medium intensity 30 < E < 300 kJ v : 2-10 cm/y dv. T: thickness of the landslide. In the Earth flows and debris flows potential real e < 0. rail sleeper). The target zones affected by block avalanches of low to medium intensity can only be roughly delineated. E: kinetic energy. Finally. Unlike floods and snow avalanches. dv: variation of velocity (accelerations). of 26% (or about 1 in 4) for a 100-year return period.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 98 Phenomena Rock fall Rock avalanche Landslide Low intensity E < 30 kJ v ≤ 2 cm/y dv.5 m < e < 2 m h<1m e>2m h>1m Whereby p is the probability of occurrence. high RED YELLOW / WHITE INTENSITY medium BLUE low established for snow avalanches and floods. D. 2009. 2002. and is based on studies.: Landslide types and processes. • To define necessary requirements and mandates to be used in subsequent planning stages. VARNES.: Hazard assessment of mass movements – codes of practice in Switzerland. Mitteilungen BUWAL Nr. In agricultural zones.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 100 domain of dangers related to mass movements. WALD UND LANDSCHAFT. RAETZO et al. & LOUP. et al. 6 of the Federal Law for Land use Planning. Bern 1995. The constraints on Local Planning already allow and ensure appropriate management of natural hazards with respect to land use. 1984. In: A. Berücksichtigung der Massenbewegungsgefahren bei raumwirksamen Tätigkeiten. 1996. 6. • To formulate principles that can be applied by the cantons to the issue of protection against natural hazard. • Granting of subsidies for building and development (road and rail networks. 41 S. B. • To refine the survey of basic documents concerning natural hazards. or to establish legal frameworks leading to the same ends. development and natural hazards. (1997). They must minimise risks to the safety of people and animals. • It provides legal constraints to the authorities in charge of land use planning. It consists of a map and a technical report. The federal recommendations are on attempt to mitigate natural disasters by restricting development on unstable areas. International Association of Engineering Geology IAEG Bulletin. according to existing natural hazard.. • It identifies the goals of planning and specifies the necessary stages. Applying this concept rising efforts for geological investigations are planned when the assessment on the second or third level takes place. buildings affected by different degrees of danger are constrained by the same conditions as those in built-up areas. According to Art. H. The cantonal Master Plan is a basic document for land use planning. The degree of hazard is defined in a hazard matrix based on intensity and probability criteria (Raetzo & Loup 2009). Washington: National Academy Press. 3000 Bern. The integration of hazard maps into land use planning (including construction conditions. special report 247. RAETZO. The objective of these constraints is to delineate danger zones by highlighting restrictions. Technische Richtlinie als Vollzugshilfe. as well as for slope stabilisation and protection measures. Federal Office for the Environment FOEN Bundesamt für Umwelt BAFU 3003 Bern Schweiz Literatur / References: BUNDESAMT FÜR RAUMPLANUNG. as well as minimising as possible damage to property. Entwurf 9. H. Third step: Land use planning and risk management The hazard map is a basic document used in land use planning. Empfehlungen. residences). the cantons must identify all areas that are threatened by natural hazards. Sept. Detailed analyses and engineering calculations are foreseen for the planning of countermeasures (level 3).. Hazard maps are also considered in planning protective measures as well as the installation of warning systems and emergency plans. UND VARNES D. scales and the risk in order to respect economic criteria: low efforts are done for the Swiss indicative map (level 1). The UNESCO Press. Schuster (eds): Landslide investigation and mitigation: 36-75. building licences) and the development of protective measures to minimise damage to property are main objectives.: Empfehlungen Symbolbaukasten zur Kartierung der Phänomene Ausgabe 1995. Seite 101 . Natural hazards should be taken into account particularly in the following situations: • Elaboration and improvement of cantonal Master Plan and Communal Local Plans for land use. and IAEG Commission on Landslides and other MassMovements: Landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice.J. specific construction codes are required to reach the desired protection level. Since it is difficult or impossible to change land use. Keith Turner & Robert L. KRUMMENACHER. When the hazard map is compared with existing land use conflicts may occur. EDMZ. The Master Plan allows for deciding the following: • It shows how to coordinate activities associated with different land uses. • Planning. the limit for a residual danger has been set for an event with a 300-year return period. B. The degrees of danger are initially assigned according to their consequences for construction activity. The objectives of the Master Plan with respect to natural hazards are: • To early detect conflicts between land use. Paris. The hazard map indicates which areas are unsuitable for use. Reihe Vollzug Umwelt VU7502-D. Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Hugo Raetzo Federal Office for the Environment FOEN Bundesamt für Umwelt BAFU 3003 Bern Schweiz Bernard Loup Conclusions In Switzerland legal and technical references are published to clarify which responsibilities the authorities have and how the assessment has to be done in order to apply the concept of integral risk management. The resulting hazard map is mainly used for planning (land use). infrastructural coordination and accident prevention.M. In general the methods used are related to the product. Transportation Research Board. D. KIENHOLZ. BUNDESAMT FÜR WASSERWIRTSCHAFT & BUNDESAMT FÜR UMWELT. CRUDEN D. • Granting of concessions and planning for construction and infrastructural installations. construction. important efforts are done when a hazard map is established or reviewed (level 2).. transformation of buildings and infrastructures. BAFU: Schutz vor Massenbewegungen. At the same time danger zones can be delineated on the local plan with areas suitable for construction as well as additional protection zones. while the design of protection measures needs more detailed investigations.J. It tries to verify the geological instability of the whole territory as regards the land use planning through a process of upgrading and feedback with the local urban management plans. etc. 2) Landslide studies that have direct consequences to land planning laws. hazard and risk mapping in Italy and Piemonte. etc. it is not so unusual to find inventory maps used as hazard maps or damage maps called risk maps. morphological.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 102 Introduction When facing a natural hazard. Schlüsselwörter: Rutschung. The national Law n. The same law designated the Autorità di Bacino (Basin Authorities) whose main goal is to draw up the Basin Plan. etc. Es gibt keine Gesetze oder Verordnungen darüber. It is essential to properly distinguish the three aspects of landslides studies: • DANGER. b) risk evaluation and assessment. At the beginning of ‘70s. activities and authorities involved. the last plan adopted in 2001 is called PAI (Piano per l’Assetto Idrogeologico or Hydrogeological System Plan of River Po Basin). Hazard & Risk Kartierung von Rutschungen im Piemont (Italien): Gefahren & Risiken Summary: This paper briefly describes the legal framework of landslide danger. Therefore. Typical cases are the studies carried out by universities about relevant landslides. The aim is. all the municipalities are classified according different risk levels. Gefahr. danger. monitoring. GIS methods allow for performing analyses over wide areas that are useful to be included in basin plans or master plans. Piemont. Funktionen. • HAZARD.D.000 scale): Landslide Mapping in Piemonte (Italy): Danger. numerical. STEFANO CAMPUS c) risk prevention (protective works. hazard assessment and vulnerability analysis. About Po basin. a tool for planning actions and rules for conservation and protection of the territory. hazard. Moreover. do not exist. 3267/1923 (Establishment of areas subject to hydro-geological constrains) were the first public regulations on land use planning. Italien Seite 103 . for example). As a general remark. d) crisis and post-crisis management. Laws or rules that indicate how a landslide analysis (danger. intensity and forecasting of evolution (scenarios) are needed. 183/1989 introduced land use planning at a basin scale: the government sets the standards and general aims without fixing a methodology to analyze and evaluate the dangers. So. Threat characterization (typology. These differences are theoretically well known by all technicians but often there are some problems when they have to be applied in a legal framework. for example. risk. and risks related to natural phenomena. it has to be observed that public legislation defines general principles and lines of conduct. risk management can be divided in several stages: a) danger characterization. 445/1908 (Transfer and consolidation of unstable towns) and Royal Decree R. Spatial and temporal probability. Italy Zusammenfassung: Diese Abhandlung beschreibt kurz den gesetzlichen Rahmen der Kartografie von Rutschungsgefahren und -risiken in Italien und im Piemont. • RISK. e) feedback from experience. dass die öffentliche Gesetzgebung allgemeine Prinzipien und Richtlinien. methods for hazard and qualitative or matrix calculus for risk. morphology even quantitative. we have to distinguish two situations: 1) Landslides studies that have no influence from legal point of view.). while the regional administrations apply restrictions on land use through different regional laws. functions. Piemonte. mainly from a qualitative point of view. n. Risiko. at local scale or higher. risk) has to be done. Legal framework in Italy and Piemonte High Level Legislation (national level) The national Law n. Aktivitäten und betreffende Befugnisse festlegt. National or local laws can require standard ways to present the results (common graphical signs on the maps. deterministic. We need vulnerability and damage analysis. approach. Any method to assess landslide hazard and risk can be used. Gefährdung. Interaction between a threat having particular hazard and human activities. They include statistical. inventory…). die Regionalverwaltungen hingegen erlegen auf der unterschiedlichen landesgesetzlichen Basis Einschränkungen hinsichtlich der Bodennutzung auf. hazard. wie eine Rutschungsanalyse (Gefahren und Risiken) auszuführen ist. land use management was transferred to the regions. Landslide inventory can be made by means of historical. Als eine allgemeine Bemerkung ist festzustellen. Keywords: Landslide. For landslides it has two atlases (1:25. land use regulation. to understand the mechanical features of instability or to study different ways of evolution of the phenomenon (scenarios) in order to assess residual risk. hazards. Fig. n. It is an inventory. avalanches) at the municipal level. national and projects. hazard and risk analyses that have not any legal consequences. Landslide hazard is function of ratio between area of landslides within municipal boundaries and whole area of municipality. Some geological functions are for executed by Arpa Piemonte (Agency two Environmental Protection) having development of these areas is indicated in the city development plan. 267/1998 regards the development of “extraordinary plans” to manage the situations of higher risk (R. 12/1999) introduced the concept of hazard and risk zoning. Abb. Problems to human safety. a deep analysis of the areas has to be done to justify new land use destination. Therefore. n. vulnerability and expected damage. • Fq-Area with Quiescent Landslides (“high hazard”). Low Level Legislation (Local Urban Development Plan) The classification of areas made by the Po Basin Authority is a binding act. If the municipality wants to change PAI classification. alluvial fans. government to give answers for development regulation (to reduce or eliminate landslides losses). 56/1977) includes the danger/hazard zoning in order to identify landslide prone areas on the basis Seite 105 . 1: Beispiel des „Atlas of Landslides“ (Bergsturz-Atlas).R. which is the main legal instrument of land use management at a local scale. etc… It is important to clarify that Regione Piemonte does not have an official regional Geological Survey. n. 2) Atlas of Landslides. the government enforced legislative measures at the national level. 56/1977. 1): • Fa-Area with Active Landslides (“very high hazard”). It has 4 qualitative classes: • R1-moderate risk. Within many regional. Interreg PROVIALP Project Fall or national Project of Geological Cartography for shallow and planar landslides hazard maps in the southern hilly part of Piemonte region called Langhe (fig.E. In a state of emergency (as established by the Regional Law n. n. New buildings are allowed according to city development plan. Consequently. research and applied projects.M. classifying the whole territory in different classes where land uses are precisely regulated and defined. urged the “geological” departments: one dedicated to Geological Informative System. Every municipality is valued on the basis of the hazard. divides areas in more detailed classes having (almost) same meaning of PAI classification. which caused heavy damages and victims in municipalities of Sarno and Quindici (Campania). 38/1978. where preventive measures have to be taken. classified as a very high-risky area. veröffentlicht von Po River Basin Authority (Ausarbeitung von ARPA Piemonte).-Aree a Rischio Molto Elevato). including the procedure to define landslide risk areas. with national funding. 267/1998. 7/LAP/1996 and Nota Tecnica Esplicativa. • R4-very high risk.R. where safety problems or functional damages are possible. 1: Example of Atlas of Landslides published by Po River Basin Authority (elaboration by Arpa Piemonte).R. new land-use planning must be realised (upgrade/ revision of the local management plan). the IMIRILAND Project within Fifth Framework Programme. n. Some enlargements are allowed. Social damages and few economic losses are possible. The municipality must adopt a new town development plan taking into account that classification. 45/1989 which regulates land use modification and transformation in areas subject to environmental protection. Regione Piemonte Regional Law for Urban Development L. design and apply proper measures to risk mitigation. these actions have been applied in some significant cases such as in Ceppo Morelli (Valle Anzasca in northern part of Piemonte). floods. 2). The catastrophic event of May 1998. According to the national Law n. Arpa Piemonte carried European out many experiences in fields of assessing methodology for landslides hazard assessment: for instance. Few damages to buildings and infrastructures without loss of functionality. • R3-high risk. The last integrations to this law (Circolare del Presidente della Giunta Regionale. Only measures of protection and reduction of vulnerability. In Piedmont. which regulate and organise interventions related to severe instability phenomena).Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 104 1) Atlas of Hydro-geological Risks (landslides. Deaths and severe injuries are possible. the other one deals with geological aspects of municipality urban plans. a specific article of the regional law 56/1977 (art. In Piemonte. • Fs-Area with Stabilized Landslides The (“medium-moderate hazard”). the local management plan of geological and morphological features and historical analysis. in which polygons and points are divided in 3 classes (fig. Local and regional authorities are obliged to define. we produce landslide danger. 9/bis) allows inhibiting or suspending development in the involved areas. No new buildings or infrastructures are allowed. Many damages and economic losses. • R2-medium risk. (required by the Regional Law L. Another important aspect of the Law n. as well as the Regional Law L. where building is forbidden. geotechnical geo-database. In Piemonte. Abb. sponsored by national authorities and made locally by the regions. 2006). Qualitative approach seems to be preferred. • There is often some confusion among danger. Progetto n. ARPA PIEMONTE. Bonnard. Balkema Publisher. One of the available tools produced by Arpa Piemonte is the regional part of Italian Landslides Inventory (IFFI).piemonte. 3: Arpa Piemonte Web-GIS Information Service of the IFFI Project. it has to be observed that public legislation defines general principles and lines of conduct. Apat. Bovo editors). (2006).http://webgis. (2008).campus@regione. (in Italian). F. activities and authorities involved. Roma. Barbero & S. • There is some lack of trust in quantitative methods. 211 Dego. An inventory map can be used as hazard map (i.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 106 existing landslides (fig. (C. while the regional administrations apply restrictions on land use through different regional laws. referring to return periods of critical rainfall (Arpa Piemonte.000 landslides were recognized by interpreting aerial photos and field surveys and the Informative System of Landslides is constantly updated with inclusion of new landslides or corrections and deepening of Fig. Interreg IIIa 2000-2006 Alpi Latine Alcotra. Seite 107 . Identification and mitigation of large landslides risks in Europe. The traffic light colors indicate increasing hazard (from green to red). Forlati. do not exist. hazard. over 35. In any event. Die Ampelfarben veranschaulichen die zunehmende Gefahr (von grün zu rot) mit Bezug auf Wiederkehrdauern kritischen Niederschlags (ARPA Piemonte. Balkema Publisher. (2007).it V. Evaluation and prevention of natural risks. ARPA PIEMONTE. 2006). Anschrift des Verfassers / Author’s address: Stefano Campus Arpa Piemonte Dipartimento Tematico Geologia e Dissesto via Pio VII 9. The IMIRILAND project. susceptibility map). risk) has to be done. oberflächennaher Hänge im Maßstab von 1:50. 2: Auszug aus dem Gefahrenzonenplan rutschgefährdeter. functions. Web-GIS Informationsdienst des IFFI-Projekts. Geographic Information System on-line . F. 2: Extract from the shallow landslides hazard map of 1:50. Final remarks • Laws or rules that indicate how a landslide analysis (danger. Nicolò editors). (S.e. without any prevision of scenarios.arpa. As a general remark for Italy. shared.piemonte. 3: ARPA Piemonte.A. Currently. resources. detailed and most complete knowledge of the landslide occurrence on the whole territory. in Piemonte landslides inventory coming from IFFI Project is not a legal basis but it is one of the tools available that can be consulted. It is a national program of landslide inventory. So complete coverage of basic information is available (lithology. Note illustrative della Carta della Pericolosità per Instabilità dei Versanti alla scala 1:50.000 scale sheet Dego in Piemonte. (2010). Forlati & C. etc…). Forlati & G. (2004).000 Dego im Piemont. 10135 TORINO (ITALY) stefano.000 Foglio n. ARPA PIEMONTE. Campus. The technicians who make the maps have to think firstly: • Who will be the end users? • What will be the use of maps? • Is the scale of work suitable for this? • Are the complexity of methods (time. (S. F. Final Report (in Italian). hazard and risk. needed input data…) and results appropriate and understandable for decision makers? Literatur / References: ARPA PIEMONTE. Campus. Every region decided Fig. S. It is the first try of an inventory based on common graphical legend and glossary. 165 PROVIALPProtezione della Viabilità Alpina. Scavia editors). IFFI represents a very important tool for the planners who finally have the first homogeneous. but only few rigorous applications of hazard & risk assessment. 3).it by itself if the results of IFFI Project (danger maps) do or do not have or a legal value. landslides inventory. Abb. The next logical step would be to incorporate this knowledge and approach into legislation. legislation. While. Gefahrenhinweiskarte. Slowenien MARKO KOMAC. 2002). dieses Know-how und diese Ansätze in die Gesetzgebung zu integrieren. 2) debris-flows. 2002). Schlüsselwörter: Massenbewegungen. und das dazwischen liegende Risiko (nach Alexander. The majority of SMM events cannot be prevented. Slovenia is exposed to different slope mass movements (SMM) above the average of the rest of Europe. Slovenia is highly exposed to slope mass-movement processes. die zum Schutz vor schnellen Massenbewegungen in Slowenien erstellt wurden und die eine fachlich fundierte Grundlage für die entsprechenden Präventivmaßnahmen bilden. and the risk in between (after Alexander. SMM that represent substantial problems can be generally divided into three groups. MATEJA JEMEC but they can be mitigated or avoided. adequate legislation measures supported by corresponding expert argumentation. Slovenia Fig 1: Relation between hazards on one side and elements at risk on the other. it’s biggest deficiency lays in the area of prevention measures. in the case of frequent events it Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Rapid Mass Movements in Slovenia Standards und Methoden der Gefährdungsanalyse für schnelle Massenbewegungen in Slowenien Summary: Slovenia is situated on the complex Adria – Dinaridic – Pannonian structural junction and its general geological structure is well known. While Slovenian legislation (and based on that also measures) mainly focuses on the remediation phase and mitigation of consequences of SMM events that have already occurred. in the case of rare SMM events. Der Zweck dieses Artikels ist die Präsentation von Gefahrenhinweiskarten über Hangmassenbewegungen auf nationaler und regionaler Ebene. Der nächste logische Schritt wäre. As in other areas of the Alpine region. Seite 109 . applying 1. Aufgrund seiner außerordentlich heterogenen geologischen Lage ist Slowenien Hangmassenbewegungen (SMM = slope mass movement) sehr stark ausgesetzt. and 3) rock falls. As a consequence of an extraordinarily heterogeneous geological setting. es mangelt jedoch an vorbeugenden Maßnahmen. 1) landslides. Introduction Slovenian territory occupies the Eastern flank of the Alpine chain. Abb. Die slowenische Gesetzgebung (und darauf beruhend auch die entsprechenden Maßnahmen) sind vorwiegend auf die Schadenbehebungsphase und die Begrenzung der Auswirkungen bereits aufgetretener SMM-Vorkommnisse ausgerichtet. The purpose of this paper is to represent slope mass movement susceptibility maps on a national and a local level that have been developed for protection from rapid mass movements in Slovenia and which form an expert foundation for the prevention measures. Keywords: mass movement processes. Although Slovenian legislation (and hence also measures) mainly focuses on the remediation phase and mitigation of consequences of SMM events that have already occurred. the current approach of exclusively post-event measures is conditionally sustainable. und seine allgemeine geologische Struktur ist bestens bekannt. 1: Beziehung zwischen Gefahren und gefährdeten Elementen. its biggest deficiency lays in the area of prevention measures. susceptibility map.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 108 Zusammenfassung: Slowenien liegt in einem komplexen Raum Adria – Dinaren – Pannonisches Becken. Gesetzgebung. The Act governs the protection against natural and other disasters and includes the protection of people. 67/03. According to the article 11. no. no. state budget funds may be used to ease the effects of natural disasters. The presented approaches are similar to a certain level. Slovenia's Development Strategy Slovenia's Development Strategy sets out the vision and objectives of Slovenia and five development priorities with action plans. no. Damage assessment is made in accordance with the Regulation on the methodology for damage assessment (Official Gazette of RS. which is designed to achieve sustainable development. its use and conservation. and protection against threats. no. no. 122/04) Regulation of spatial order in Slovenia provides the rules for managing the field of landslide problematic. 3 – rock falls) hazard assessment. the emphasis is on protecting human lives and property. emergency protective measures and permanent measures adopted in the process for remediation. they also differ according to the scale of the assessment. 2/06) The National Environmental Action Programme (NEAP) is the basic strategic document in the field of environmental protection. 21/02. The National Programme is oriented towards the prevention and its basic aim is to reduce the number of accidents and to prevent or minimise its consequences. no. Methodology Due to specifics of different slope mass movement processes. public document guiding development in the field of landslide problematics. and recovery. providing of basic conditions for life. One of the basic approaches to solve the problem is to establish potentially hazardous areas due to natural phenomena and the inclusion of this information in spatial plans. economic and environmental factors of spatial development. Resolution of the National Environmental Act (Official Gazette of RS. It provides for the creation of spatial planning. rescue and help. the emphasis is on creating a national database of active landslides (and other SMM) and intentions of government to include hazards doe to landslides into spatial planning. The spatial strategy takes into account social. Spatial Development Strategy of Slovenia (Official Gazette of RS. quality of life. property and land in dangerous exposed areas. National program of protection against natural and other disasters (Official Gazette of RS. Act on measures to eliminate the consequences of certain large-scale landslides in 2000 and 2001 (Official Gazette RS. In the frame of preventive actions. namely: climate change. It provides a framework for spatial development throughout the country and sets guidelines for development in European space. Slovenia lags behind other Alpine countries or regions. no. It covers several major landslides in Slovenia. 64/94) Water Act (Official Gazette RS. They are mainly divided into prevention. NEAP was prepared under the Environmental Protection Act and complies with the European Community Environment Programme. the National Programme of Protection against Natural and Other Disasters for the period 2002 – 2007. that is among other the issues dealt with this act also refers to protection against landslides. The main goal of the protection against natural and other disasters system is to reduce the number of disasters. 2 – debris-flows. Legislation in the field of slope mass movement domain In the area of systematic prevention measures regarding SMM. 4/09) Protection against the harmful effects of water included in the fifth development priority. The Law on the Remediation of consequences of natural disasters (Official Gazette of RS. no. 67/02. Threatened area is defined by Government. preparedness. which threats a property or infrastructure. 98/05) Act defines the format and the method of financing and form of allocating state aid for the implementation of remedial measures. a single approach would be hampered in its results / prognosis. In order to protect against the harmful effects of water. 44/02) On the basis of the Resolution. 3. aimed at improving the overall environment and quality of life and protection of natural resources. in which is mentioned how to plan according to the limitations which are caused by natural disasters and water protection. upon which the slope mass movement occurrence heavily depends. animals. no. The objectives and measures are defined in the four areas. The following chapter presents an overview of approaches to slope mass movements (1 – landslides. which addresses the key environmental objectives and priorities that require leadership from the community. One of the important articles is Article 67. with some restriction and at some level of damage. cultural heritage and environment against any hazard or accidents (risk) that can threaten their safety. Law on protection against natural and other disasters (Official Gazette of RS. property. The only reasonable approach would hence be minimising interaction between SMM events and elements at risk. which is responsible for protecting the population. The chapter on protection against natural disasters is Seite 111 . it is not yet an integral part of spatial plans. land in the threatened area is categorized into classes based on the risk. 114/05) The Act defines a landslide as a natural disaster. Legislative acts deal mostly with remediation issues instead with the prevention measures. The protection strategy against landslides (within legislation the term landslide also other types of slope mass movements are included) varies substantially and is tailored according to different terrain conditions. nature and biodiversity. after which the landslide is considered a landslide. 2. 76/04) The Spatial Development Strategy of Slovenia is a Regulation of the spatial order of Slovenia (Official Gazette of RS. Information on geology. regional and state budget. Graphically this interaction would be presented as a cross-section between the natural hazard on one side and vulnerability of elements at risk on other side (Fig 1). to prevent the spread of landslide and stabilization of landslides on the specific area of influence. In the planning and implementation of emergency protective measures. 79/04). and to forestall or reduce the number of victims and other consequences of disaster. and waste and industrial pollution. 92/03. The basic tasks of the system are: prevention.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 110 becomes unsustainable and brings a huge burden to the local. Among triggering factors. distance to surface waters. the best factors’ weight combination was selected. water and air. random but representative 65% were selected and used for the univariate statistical analyses (χ2) to analyse the landslide occurrence in relation to the spatio-temporal precondition factors (lithology. slope inclination. Furthermore. Regarding the landslide occurrence. Results have shown that daily rainfall intensity. which significantly influences the triggering of landslides.000 (Komac & Ribičič. the intensity of maximal daily and average annual rainfall for the 30 years period was analysed. a Landslide susceptibility map of Slovenia at scale 1 : 250. curvature. For this model an error interval was also calculated. flow length.25). energy potential of streams). This clearly indicates the spatial and temporal dependence of landslide occurrence upon the intensive rainfall. A linear model- weighted sum approach was selected on the basis of easily acquired spatio-temporal factors to simplify the approach and to make the approach easily transferable to other regions. slope aspect.000 (Komac & Ribičič. most probably above 130 mm. 2006. 2009). critical slopes for the landslide occurrence.000 was completed. To avoid over-fitting of the prediction model. slope inclination (0. 2). The final result of this approach was presented in a form of a warning map (Fig. occurrences using GIS several information layers were used such as geology (lithology and distance from structural elements). It also gives a general overview of susceptible areas in Slovenia and gives guidance for more detailed Seite 113 . 2008). intensive rainfall (48-hour rainfall intensity). 2: Gefahrenhinweiskarte für Rutschungen in Slowenien im Maßstab von 1:250. derivates of digital elevation model (slope. For the area of Slovenia (20.000 was produced. Altogether more than 6. which enables the end users to implement results also in a form of databases or a digital format. Based on the extensive landslide database that was compiled and standardised at the national level. Fig.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 112 final results (but not the only ones) of approaches presented in the following text were presented in a form of warning maps that are still the main product used by end users. 3).05). and slope aspect (0. and peak ground acceleration). Based on the calculations of 672 linear models with different weight combinations for used spatio-temporal factors and based on results of their success to predict debris-flow susceptible areas. The debris-flow susceptibility model for Slovenia at scale 1:250.. critical rainfall and peak ground acceleration quantities were defined.25). of which roughly half are on known locations.000 km2). 2006). Of 3. The landslide susceptibility model for Slovenia at scale 1:250. and analyses of landslide spatial occurrence. ranging from small to high landslide susceptibility. Debris-flows are processes of transportation of material composed of soil. 2008). hydraulic network (distance to surface waters. distance to structural elements. distance to structural elements (0.1). the threshold above which significant number of landslides occurs is 1000 mm. Beside landslide susceptibility assessment.257 landslides with known locations. A debris-flow susceptibility model at scale 1:250. Five groups of lithological units were defined. other terrain properties and land cover types that are more susceptible to landsliding were also defined.3).000 represent a basis for spatial prediction of the debris-flow triggering and transport areas. According to Skaberne (2001) the terminology of slope mass movements in Slovenia are as follows: landslides are processes of translational or rotational movement of rock or soil as a consequence of gravity at discontinuity plane(s). ranges from 100 to 150 mm. average annual rainfall intensity. of the average annual rainfall. an average of weights from the first hundred models was chosen as an ideal combination of factor weights. The analyses were conducted using GIS in raster format with a 25 × 25 m pixel size. which were used for the debris-flow susceptibility models’ evaluation. The rest of the landslide population (35 %) was used for the model validation. All the analyses were conducted in GIS.05). The results showed that relevant precondition spatio-temporal factors for landslide occurrence are (with their weight in linear model): lithology (0. a rainfall influence on landslide occurrence was analysed since rainfall plays an important role in the landslide triggering processes. and locations of sixteen known debris flows.000 was developed at the Geological Survey of Slovenia in 2006 (Komac & Ribičič. and land cover type) and in relation to the triggering factors (maximum 24-h rainfall. distance to geological boundaries. Abb. a debrisflow susceptibility model at scale 1:250. slope curvature (0. energy potential related to elevation).000 was also developed at Geological Survey of Slovenia in 2009 (Komac et al. Rock falls are processes of falling or tumbling of a part of rock or soil along a steep slope. Despite the vague influence. Analyses of landslide occurrences in the area of Slovenia have shown that areas where intensive rainstorms occur (maximal daily rainfall for a 100-year period). and where the geo-logical settings are favourable an abundance of landslide can be expected. 2006. These results were later used as a basis for the development of the weighted linear susceptibility model where several models with various factor weights variations based on previous research were developed. To calculate the susceptibility to debrisflow. 2: Landslide susceptibility warning map of Slovenia at scale 1:250. The final result of this approach was presented in a form of a warning map (Fig. if any at all.600 landslides were included in the national database. slope curvature. land cover type (0. 816 models were developed: 3. Komac. The results showed that approximately 4% of Slovenia’s area is extremely high susceptible and approximately 11% of Slovenia’s area of susceptibility to debris-flows is high.000 Fig.und Felssturz im Maßstab einer Wanderkarte (1:25. 4: Schematische Darstellung der Erstellung von Gefahrenhinweiskarten über Erdrutsch. Regarding landslides. 2005). Berg. 2009). • (4) Mapping of problematic areas at scale 1:5.000) (Bavec et al. • (3) Development of detailed geohazard map at scale 1:25. For analytical purposes.674 for rock-fall susceptibility. 2) probabilistic model of geohazard induced by mass movement processes. The geohazard map at the scale 1:25. As the last phase. In the frame of a research project. 2002).000 (Komac et al.000 for the purpose of the highest detail planning (3) Development of detailed geohazard map at scale 1:25. Fig. 2005). slope mass movement geohazard estimation – The Bovec municipality case study an approach to assess the landslide and rock-fall susceptibility at the municipal scale (1:25. As expected.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 114 (4) Mapping of problematic areas at scale 1:5000 or 1:10. All presented approaches are based on a probability statistical model that is a part of a conceptual development model of general or detailed slope mass susceptibility maps represented in Fig 5. 2005). Elaboration of the final product comprises four consecutive phases. 4: • (1) Synthesis of archive geological data in the overview geohazard map at scale 1:25.000 or 1:10.. The susceptibility model development was based on the upgrading of the expert geohazard map at scale 1:25. 10. In both cases.. 3: Debris-flow susceptibility warning map of Slovenia at scale 1:250.000 as the final product is aimed to be directly applicable in spatial planning of local communities (municipalities). 4: Schematic diagram of the process of production of landslide and rock-fall susceptibility at the municipal scale (1:25. Methodology was developed for estimation of geohazard induced by mass movement processes.000 for the purpose of the highest detail planning. 2005. 3: Muren-Gefahrenhinweiskarte Sloweniens im Maßstab von 1:250.000. Abb. Abb. The requirements that were followed to achieve this aim were: expert correctness.000 with a probabilistic model development that included relevant influence factors.000) (Bavec et al.. The production of a susceptibility map that should represent (officially not included among the documentation yet) one of basic layers in the spatial planning process shown in the Fig. • (2) Development of statistical geohazard at scale 1:25.000 (Komac et al. field reconnaissance of most hazardous areas is foreseen..000 as a combination of synthesis of phases (1) and (2) (1) Synthesis of archive geological data into the overview geohazard map at scale 1:25.000 (2) Development of statistical geohazard at scale 1:25.000 (Komac. research areas and further spatial and numerical analyses. 3) compilation of phases 1 and 2 into the final map at scale 1:25.000 as a combination of synthesis geological map (1) and statistical geological model (2) and delineating the most problematic areas. and easy to read product. geology/lithology and slope angle showed to be the most important influencing factors. and in the case of rock-falls an additional important factor was synchronism of strata bedding and slope aspect. 2009). additional important factors were land use and synchronism of strata bedding and slope aspect.000) (Bavec et al.000 (Budkovič.142 for landslide susceptibility and 7. The methodology is focused towards the direct use of the final product in the process of spatial planning at the municipal level and is divided into four phases as shown in Fig. Seite 115 . reasonable time of elaboration. of which the first three are done in the office: 1) synthesis of archive data. 4. 2005). these areas are related to mountainous terrain in the NW and N of Slovenia. taking the Bovec municipality as the case study area. 5: Konzeptionelles Modell für die Entwicklung von allgemeinen oder detaillierten Gefahrenhinweiskarten über Hangbewegungen. value maps were developed only for some test areas. KOMAC. M. Abb. Oxford University Press.a case study of Bovec municipality. The Bovec municipality case study. BAVEC. to what extent quality geological data will be used for the assessment.. (RV . which ranged from 0 – 1 to assure the equality of the input data. AND RIBIČIČ.000. 2. 2 – Low. M.Min) NVR = . M. Where NVR represents new and normalised value.si Mateja Jemec Dimiceva ulica 14 1000 Ljubljana SI-Slovenia Mateja. and RV the old (nominal) value.. Prispevek k slovenskemu izrazoslovju za pobočna premikanja... 340 pp.E. Bad results Testing of different models developed on the weighted sum of influence factors Fig 5: Conceptual model of development of general or detailed slope mass susceptibility maps. hence separate analyses had to be performed and a different model development had to be developed. 454–458. Geo-hazard map of the municipality of Bovec. BUDKOVIČ. within each factor original values were normalised with the eq. D. T. 2001. SKABERNE. For the purpose of the development of the best and at the same time the most logical susceptibility model. Where wj x fij H= eq. Š.. 2006. 303-310. 48/2. 14–15. M. 3 – Medium (or Moderate). Max . M. Debris-flow susceptibility model of Slovenia at scale 1: 250.Min eq. New York. D. Geologija. 2002. 2005. 87-104. 52/1. 49/2. 2). 2005. 2002. 141-145. KUMELJ. and how the lack of detailed geological data would be tackled. In Slovenia. wj represents the factor weight. In the case of the latter. 1. 5 – Very High. Marko Komac Dimiceva ulica 14 1000 Ljubljana SI-Slovenia Marko. KOMAC. M. T. j=l H represents standardised relative n ∑ phenomenon susceptibility (0 – 1). Geologija. Probabilistic model of slope mass movement susceptibility .Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 116 Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Univariate analysis (x2) of SMM occurrence by classes within each of the influence factor Influence factors classes ranging based upon their influence on the SMM occurrence Values normalisation within each influence factor (0-1) Literatur / References: ALEXANDER. BUDKOVIČ. 48/2. slope mass movement susceptibility maps have been developed on national and on local level. Min and Max represent the minimum and maximum original value within the factor. Estimation of geohazard induced by mass movement processes. Thus several questions remain open and these are: when will the geohazard layer be included as a compulsory part of the spatial planning document.. 2009.komac@geo-zs. 16. KOMAC. M. 1 or discreet variable value. Slovenia. 1 – Insignificant (or Very Low). Landslide susceptibility map of Slovenia at scale 1:250. Ujma. Conclusion Slope mass movement processes are specific in their nature. 4 – High.si Field testing Selection of optimal and most logical susceptibility model Development of phenomenon susceptibility map For all influence factors included in the weighted sum model calculation. and fij represents a continuous Seite 117 res od Go s ult . 4. Principles of emergency planning and management.000. Geologija. 311-340. a weighted sum approach (Voogd.jemec@geo-zs. 1983) was used (eq.. AND KOMAC. Geologija. Ujma. RIBIČIČ. which has an actual application. 295-309.. original values were transformed into the same scale.. respectfully. In other words. Final slope mass movements susceptibility values (the range is between 0 and 1) were classified into 6 susceptibility classes: 0 – Negligible (or None). Sie basiert sowohl auf Modellrechnungen als auch auf empirischen Untersuchungen und wird mit dem GEORISK-Ereigniskataster (BIS-BY) auf Plausibilität geprüft. • Main data of the topic mass movements and 1. Daraus lassen sich mit geringem Aufwand mögliche Konfliktstellen zwischen Gefahr und Nutzung ableiten. karstification.de).bis. etc. which would be relevant for land use planning. water and traffic management offices. rock falls.bis. An important component for developing hazard maps is the construction and evaluation of landslide inventories (e. Dieser kann nur durch empirische oder numerische Simulationen und Modellierungen abgegrenzt werden. large scale flooding as well as ground subsidence and uplift affecting building ground. can only be defined by empirical or numerical simulations and models. forest management as well as private users. • Commonly shared technical data of the subject mass movements and subrosion / karst with information about the date of origin. the so called process area. such as mass movements. will be easier to deduce possible conflicts between hazards and land use. Rutschungen) sind als GEORISK-Daten über das Bodeninformationssystem Bayern (BIS-BY) im Internet oder Intranet abrufbar (www. The hazard map shows large areas where a special type of danger can be assumed. These recommendations of minimum requirements are directed at the employees of the SGD. Concerning the spatial extent of the process areas. It is based on model calculations and empirical analysis and can be verified by the Georisk-cadastre (BIS-BY). The recorded data in the inventories should have a minimal nationwide standard and are divided into: subrosion / karst with information about the spatial positioning. etc.B. Die Gefahrenhinweiskarten können einerseits in Flächennutzungspläne mit einfließen und dienen anderseits zur Prioritätensetzung beim Erarbeiten weitergehender Maßnahmen. Seite 119 . Steinschlag.und Forstverwaltung sowie private Planer die Hauptnutzer. Die Gefahrenhinweiskarte gibt eine Übersicht über die Gefährdungssituation. • Specific technical data of the subject mass movement and subrosion / karst • Data concerning subsidence and uplift Computerized modelling increasingly allows the identification of hazard areas that have been verified using the landslide inventory or through evaluation of the results of field work. geogenic natural hazards.bayern. possible inaccuracies may impair an exact expression of the danger. Geotechnical modelling is used increasingly for rock falls. about the land use and about damage.bayern. avalanches and shallow landslides.g. assessed and spatially represented using a common minimal standard in the future. Zusammenfassung: Informationen über geogene Gefährdungen (z. Dieses Informationssystem wird bereits von vielen Fachstellen genutzt. This area. Felsstürze. Neben den Landkreisen sowie vielen Kommunen sind die Behörden der Wasserwirtschaft. Therefore. ANDREAS VON POSCHINGER Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Geological Dangers (Mass Movements) in Bavaria Standards und Methoden zur Verminderung von geologischen Gefährdungen durch Massenbewegungen in Bayern Summary: Information about geological hazards in the Bavarian Alps (e. This information system is already used by a number of departments such as district administrations. der Straßen. about determination of coordinates. shall be recorded. Die Gefahrenhinweiskarte hält für große Gebiete flächendeckend fest. landslides) is available in the Internet or intranet section Georisk of the Bodeninformationssystem Bayern (BIS-BY) (www. wo mit welchen Gefahren gerechnet werden muss. By now the BIS-BY only shows the sites of origin of geological hazards and not the whole endangered area.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 118 KARL MAYER. For this purpose. Hazard maps can be included in the land development plan or can be used to assign priorities while taking measures. Bezüglich der räumlichen Abgrenzung kann sie Ungenauigkeiten enthalten und die Gefährdung nicht in jedem Fall genau wiedergeben.de). the “Geohazards” team of engineering geologists of the different German federal governmental departments of geology (SGD) are giving recommendations on how to create a hazard map. The current emphasis in Germany is on hydrological modelling of flood events that are used for water management issues in flood prevention. A hazard map gives an overview of the situation. Im BIS-BY ist bisher allerdings nur das Herkunftsgebiet von Gefährdungen dargestellt. landslide or sinkhole inventories). Introduction In Germany.g. nicht der planungsrelevante Gefährdungsbereich. a GIS-based inventory of Bavaria including numerous geological data.2 Modelling rock fall of single blocks (methods use in Bavaria) For the detection of potential starting zones of rock falls. 2. For single blocks.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 120 If necessary.000.500 landslide events have been detected and evaluated within the project area. The datasets are used in different resolutions (1 m. The Bavarian Alps are the most important tourist region of Bavaria and. they have a unique ecological value that has to be specially protected. the Bavarian Alps cover about 6. This map shows verified as well as potential rock fall escarpments i. a physical trajectory model from Zinggeler + GEOTEST is used (MAYER 2010). aerial photo analysis and archive data for the main settlement areas. 4. A hazard map gives a first overview of areas affected by landslides (potentially endangered area) and can be a basis for the detection of conflicts of interests. In May 2008. it is essential to determine areas endangered by geological hazards. for example.e. These maps can be used to estimate the extension of deep-seated landslides.0.3 m. natural hazards are a common phenomenon. Since it is more and more difficult to ensure this protection by structural activities. Landslides.3 % of Bavaria. With approximately 4450 km². Within this project. 10 m) depending on the modelling approach. 27°) as well as the geometric slope angle (e. In the second stage. Within the project EGAR (catchment areas in alpine regions). 3. In areas where construction already has been established or where construction of new infrastructure or buildings is unavoidable. but which are not confirmed.g. only medium to long term. The vertical resolution is better +/. large-scale numeric modelling of rock fall hazards are possible using high resolution terrain models and specialised software. rock falls and earth falls. Every event is described concerning its process type and dimension. 4. the geological. despite the possibilities of the zoom function of a GIS. With an increase in heavy rainfall events an increase in landslide events must be expected. Generally the scale of a hazard map ranges from 1:10. however. the entire process area. It will be finished during December 2011. rock falls and mudflows occur in the course of mountain degradation that reflects the natural slope instability of mountain areas. Definition of a hazard map The federal geological surveys of Germany agreed on definitions for the terminology used for mapping of geological hazards (Personenkreis “Geogefahren” 2008) based on BUWAL (2005). protective measures need to be involved in the planning process and also allow sustainable and cost effective strategies. 30°). Material and methods 3.1 Basis maps Essential data basis for modelling the hazard map is a high resolution digital elevation model (DEM) derived from airborne laser scanning.g. especially in the densely populated areas in the Bavarian Alps. Furthermore. Landslides are mostly triggered by extreme rainfall that will. Both the shadow angle (e. the Bavarian Environmental Agency launched the project hazard map for the Bavarian Alps. estimated empiric angle methods or physical deterministic models can be used. shallow landslides and rock fall areas for the whole of the Bavarian Alps. 3.1 Minimum requirements in Germany In many states of Germany. The aim of the project is to create a hazard map for deep seated landslides. in addition to the tools described above. the shadow angle and the geometric slope angle is applied. That means areas prone to rock falls due to the inclination. potential starting zones Seite 121 .bayern. Fall processes 4. a “black and white map” is created showing verified / potential rock fall areas derived from the landslide inventories and / or remote sensing (DEM). a hazard map also gives a qualitative statement about the probability of a landslide event. The potential process areas of the expected landslides vary depending on the design event. not depicted. historical data of landslides have been evaluated and digitised. is depicted.g. The most effective and sustainable method to prevent losses arising from hazardous events is to avoid land use in the endangered areas.2 Basis data for landslide modelling Information about geological hazards such as landslides. Modelling parameters for rock fall and shallow landslide simulations can be deduced and trivialised from comprehensive data. 32°) can be used as the estimated angle (Mayer & Poschinger 2005). become more relevant in Alpine regions in particular (Umweltbundesamt 2008). In Bavaria this method is used for huge rock masses.de). two empirical approaches can be applied. topographical and morphological situation and the existence of forest. 5 m. field studies will be needed for exact clarification and assessment of given situations. Origin and accumulation zones of landslides have been digitised and stored as well as significant photos. Within these maps landslides are classified into four levels of activity to give an indirect statement about the level of danger.bis. To determine rock fall escarpments. therefore. the age and potential future trend of the landslide as well as annotations about the source and the degree of information.000. the hazard map is produced for a scale of 1:25. of particular importance. The entire process area is. www. Also integrated in the BIS-BY are maps of active areas that have been mapped by field work. i. is available in the section Georisk of the Bodeninformationssystem Bayern (BIS-BY. the run-out zone. according to climate scientists. In a first step. Above all. To define these areas. slopes with an inclination > 45° (in Alpine areas). By defining a most probable design event and integrating it in the landslide modelling process. the risk potential of alpine torrents has been estimated analysing the discharge and catchment potential. In the first stage.000 to 1:50. except for very few areas where currently no laser scanning data is available. In Alpine regions. By now (October 2010). With all of this the BIS-BY is the most important source of information. An angle of deflection from the vertical slope can be used as a lateral boundary of the process area (e.e. results of two other projects have been used: Within the project HANG (historical analysis of alpine hazards). about 4. which is the predefined global angle (Fig. The other global angle is the geometrical slope angle that spans between the horizontal line and top of detachment zone (α in Fig. According to Evans & Hungr (1993) a shadow angle of 27° has been assumed. 2: 3D Sturztrajektorien mit (rot) und ohne (orange) Berücksichtigung der Schutzfunktion des Waldbestandes. The block mass of a geological unit is an input parameter for the simulation. 2005). There are a number of important attributes of every starting point necessary for the modelling process: the vertical view angle. Global angles can easily be modelled with implemented functionalities of standard GIS programs.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 122 stored in the BIS-BY are extracted. According to Meißl (1998) or Hegg & Kienholz (1995) the process model can be divided into two parts: the trajectory model calculating the paths of the blocks as vectors and the friction model calculating the energy along these paths as well as the run-out length. Seite 123 .3 Modelling rock fall masses (Bavarian approach) The trajectory model for rock fall (chapter 4. it plays an essential role in the calculation of the run. The first and more important one is the shadow angle (β in Fig. an even more empiric approach must be applied: it has to be assumed that every slope steeper than 45° is a potential detachment zone (Wadge et al. The loss of energy during tread mat 4. a mean block size and geometry that represents the most probable event has been determined for every geological unit. The calculation is a succession of these processes with intermediate contacts to underground and tree trunks. the forest has not been included in the second scenario. the viewshed function of Spatial Analyst in ArcGIS has been employed. As a result. This function identifies all cells on a surface (DEM) that can be seen from selected observation points (Fig. 3: Global angle models: shadow angle (β) and geometrical slope angle (α) (Meißl 1998. Meißl 1998) show that a global angle method is an appropriate approach to determine the maximum run-out zone of rock fall. as well as the aspect that can be calculated out of the DEM. Within the first scenario. the starting zones already determined within the disposition model have been intersected with the geological map. Within the project. Numerous papers (Lied 1977. Fig. Abb. To assess the design events. This design event has been assigned to one of four volume classes. If the quotient is below 0. 1). an empirical process model with a worst case approach is used. modified). A minimum geometrical slope angle of 30° is presumed (Meißl 1998). 4). bouncing and rolling (Fig. A proper decision for one global angle model can be reached by the quotient of shadow angle tangent and geometrical slope tangent. 3). Abb. 1999. For the runout zone of larger rock fall volumes. Beside the topographical information derived from the DEM. 1993). Abb. Wieczorek et al. by field work. The simulation of the block movement is carried out according to physical principles of mechanics and is separated into falling. 2: 3D Trajectories with (red) and without (orange) the protecting function of forest. In this project. 2005). Otherwise the geometrical slope angle is better suited to describe the maximum run-out zone (Mayer & von Poschinger 2005). 3). according to the geology. the shadow angle has to be used. These starting zones are detected by field work.88. the vector based simulation model of Zinggeler & GEOTEST (Krummenacher et al. The application of the different global angles depends on slope morphology. For each of these classes the mean block mass has been calculated. Two different global angles have been applied. 1: Schematische Darstellung der prinzipiellen Prozesse der Steinschlagmodellierung (Krummenacher et al. It is defined as angle between the horizontal line and the connecting line from the block with maximum run out and the top of the talus. 3). To simulate a worst-case scenario. 2005) is used. These parameters have to be deduced and trivialised from the basis data of the area to be investigated. The simulation has been run for two different scenarios. the horizontal view angle that is defined with 30°. is controlled by deformability and surface roughness. That means that. 1: Basic processes during rock fall simulation (Krummenacher et al. Fig. the forest with the protecting function of the trees has been considered. The affected geological units have been checked Fig. Furthermore it is very important to define a design event for rock fall. Evans & Hungr 1993. verändert nach Meißl (1998). 3: Pauschalgefällemodelle: Schattenwinkel (β) und Geometrisches Gefälle (α). damping and friction characteristics of the slope surface and the vegetation have to be known.2) calculates the reach of single blocks. Onofri & Canadian 1979. As the block dimension is the only variable parameter within the simulation. form and dimension of typical blocks have to be determined.out zone. In areas where no information is available. Like the rock fall simulation. To start the modelling process. Under extreme conditions. Previous experiences and analysis have Seite 125 .e. 4: Die Viewshed-Funktion ermittelt alle Bereiche. Selby 1993). Near-surface landslides of a small volume (shallow slides) are either separately determined using above procedure or are displayed simultaneously alongside the deepseated slides. The higher the number of instabilities the higher is the probability of slope failure. In the second stage. These areas can be found by using empirical methods due to the geological and morphological circumstances and the land usage. landslide inventories. the physical computer model SLIDISP is used. To detect these areas. by long lasting rainfall. Experience shows that they can range from about 5 m up to more than 100 m in depth. hillshades and field work in a first step. 4: The viewshed function identifies all raster locations to be seen from appointed starting points with defined global angle. only important rock fall areas with evidence of activity have been processed. the terrain has been evaluated concerning an increased susceptibility for deep-seated landslides is not available for a regional scale.1 Minimum requirements in Germany In the first stage. General approach The procedure and depiction of flow processes like deep-seated landslides (Talzuschub) is similar to the method used for slide processes. the present runout length has been determined by databases. it is assumed that the run-out length will proceed even further in case of a reactivation. The natural range in the variation of a Monte-Carlo-Simulation. 6. alternatively / additionally: Visualisation of semi-automatically derived areas (cross-over between DEM / geological entity). areas showing evidence of previous deep-seated landslides. Slide processes 5. In the German Alpine area. In the case of small-scaled scars in smooth slopes. a margin of 20 – 30 m has been added to the detachment areas to assess the potential process area. die von festgelegten Startpunkten mit einem definierten Vertikalund Horizontalwinkel gesehen werden. To estimate this process as disposition model in Bavaria. e. the root strength will be landslide areas are determined in addition to the verified landslide areas. That means areas prone to landslides due to the geological and morphological situation and the land use (were landslides have not yet taken place). Since a numeric modelling of deep seated more related to water-related hazards and for this reason not explained here in detail. terrace or depression in the greater surroundings of the landslide. Abb. the model SLIDEPOT (GEOTEST) is applied. the deterministic numerical model SLIDISP (Liener 2000 and GEOTEST AG) is used. both the detachment and run-out zone upward and downward.1. Due to long-lasting field work. have been evaluated. That means affected by definite indications of active and inactive landslides and landslides that have already occurred (reactivation or enlargement of the landslide area is possible).2 Modelling deep seated landslides (methods used in Bavaria) Deep-seated landslides are mostly result of the activation of predefined failure zones. The process occurring in the run-out zone of shallow landslides is also mostly a flow process. The areas can be found using mapping (registers) or remote sensing (DEM) methods. Beyond those areas it is assumed that all important rock fall areas are known. first the global angle approach has to be chosen (shadow angle or geometrical angle). two different approaches have been applied. The locality of the origin of danger (areas showing a higher probability for the development of a deep seated landslide) has been identified within the previously cited disposition model. To find the run-out zones and to simulate the process.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 124 To identify of hazard areas. depending on the predisposition of the slope. the modelling of shallow landslides is carried out in two steps. should be visually displayed. information about known landslides. the process area can reach the next ridge. the viewshed modelling with ArcGIS can be executed. Permanent activity or more or less recurrent reactivation likely produces enlargement of the landslide area identified in the disposition model. potential demonstrated that deep-seated landslides mostly occur in areas already affected by landslides in the past. derived from the DEM from which the thickness of soil will be deduced and the geology which allows to determine friction angle and cohesion as geotechnical parameters. 6. The deep-seated landslides are handled in the same way as the slide processes. e. After digitizing the starting points and determination of necessary attributes. To identify areas endangered by deep seated landslides. For every different input parameters will be considered using raster cell.2 Modelling shallow landslides (methods used in Bavaria) Shallow landslides are usually triggered by heavy rainfall. 5. i. On the one hand. extracted from the databases listed in chapter 3. taking into account the local geology and morphology.2 has to be evaluated. Fig. To determine the potential run out of an active or reactivable landslide. On the other hand. Since the occurrence of forest affects the stability in an enormous way. debris flows are landslides. all registered objects and the associated near-surface processes. The danger area has to be dimensioned according to geomorphologic conditions. there is an excellent overview of the situation within the densely populated areas in the Bavarian Alps. Flow processes rarely occur in low mountain ranges. 5. 5.g. Flow processes 6. The starting zones are calculated in the disposition model and the run-out zones are calculated in the process model. If there are indications for active movements in the landslide toe. For this reason they can be used as design events. Fundamental basic data are the slope angle. The factor of safety F will be calculated for every raster cell to describe the ratio of retentive and impulsive forces (Fig. For the disposition model. the number of instable cases will be determined. The Infinite-Slope-Analysis is applied to calculate the slope stability for every raster cell. using an additional signature The distinction between shallow and deep-seated slides is optional when visualising the hazard map. the determination of the potential process area has to be worked out with empirical methods. with either ongoing activity or a clear probability of reactivation. This assumes an above average precipitation for a certain area.g. g. However. 6). 6). In addition. 7. the raster-based model SLIDEPOT is used (GEOTEST AG). the spread of the inner and outer salt slopes as well as intact salt domes should be entered into the hazard map. 6: Berechnung der Auslaufbereiche: Für die Rasterzelle in der Mitte mit der Zellexposition 210°–230° wurden drei Rasterzellen im Sektor von 20° ermittelt.g. rare and extreme events have to be accounted as an unavoidable residual and remaining risk. the 20° sector identifies 3 cells that are either starting zones or already show accumulation (orange cells). If the information is available in individual states. mining Seite 127 . 8.g. 5: Principle for the calculation of the factor of safety F for every raster cell (Selby 1993). There is no differentiation between fossil and current subrosion features. 5: Grundlagen zur Berechnung des Sicherheitsgrades F einer Rasterzelle (Selby 1993). From a geological view. the hypothetical starting volume and the rest volume will be reduced by a degradation factor. The hazard maps for rock fall of single blocks and rock fall masses and deep-seated landslides are based on field work for the most part. a maximum of 8 expansion steps have been calculated while the degradation factor has been reduced in the forest. 6: Calculation of accumulation: for the central cell with exposition of 210° –230°. as well as using influencing factors. Every step of expansion will analyse the neighbourhood up to a defined distance (4 cells. The second stage includes the visualisation of the dispersion of karstifiable sediments. The result of the second stage determines the differentiation of hazard areas. die sowohl Anbruchzone als auch Auslaufbereich sind (orange Rasterzellen). To calculate the run-out zones. In the field. Discussion The hazard map has been worked out for a regional scale (1:25. the hazard areas of shallow landslides are solely based on computer models and represent a typical susceptibility map. red circle in Fig. superficial or near-surface subrosion features (e. the following hazard areas are distinguished: Verified karstification features from the Geological map. which depends foremost on the slope angle. For every raster cell in the starting zone. the degradation factors have been defined quite pessimistically.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 126 influences on karstification. With every step. sinkholes. Optionally. the modelling of the different processes can make no claim to be complete. In the first stage. Considering the root strength and its effect on soil stability it is possible to simulate two scenarios with different intensities of the “root effect” (high and low). using the feature density or a raster based density calculation). Anthropogenic preventive measures have not been introduced into the models. The run-out zones will be calculated for both scenarios. such as geology. frequently occurring events have been modelled since they are more representative and felt more as a risk. DEM) methods. The model is based on neighbourhood statistics. Because of uncertainties concerning complex edge conditions. Therefore. a differentiation between carbonate. Hazard fields can be derived using a point or area statistical evaluation (e. event register or remote sensing (e. Improbable and extreme events have not been considered. depressions. The maps show potentially endangered areas that have been determined on the basis of available information and that has been computed with modern numerical models. Abb. Fig. With this the run-out zones are large enough and rather too large in the case of doubt. sulphate and chloride karstification can be implemented in the first or second stage of the hazard map. Subrosion / karstification Superficial or near-surface subrosion features (sinkholes) and the knowledge of subrodable sediments serve as criteria for the analysis of a process area. In the first stage. the raster cells inside a 20° sector will be analysed (Fig. e. they are presented as hatched areas. a detailed view on particular areas or objects is not allowed. the accumulation will be modelled in the flow direction. Abb. The expansion stops if a defined number of expansion steps is achieved or if the calculated value falls below a defined threshold. Where applicable. Special conditions in individual states. Above a potential accumulation cell. if the predicted consequences of integrated in the calculation of the factor of safety as an additional parameter. can be noted in an additional category. On the contrary. Accumulation will be calculated if there is a starting zone and if the topography in the sector named above is not convex. witnesses of former traces of shallow landslides are hard to find due to weathering. Therefore the boundaries of the hazard areas are not sharply bounded lines and Fig. clefts) are visualised. In both cases. tectonics and hydrogeology. Instead.g. the hazard areas can be coupled with general geotechnical recommendations as to construction work in karst landscapes.000). G. G. It is a general map created under objective scientific criteria and indicating geological hazards that have been identified and localized but not analysed and evaluated in detail. A. PERSONENKREIS “GEOGEFAHREN“ (2008): Geogene Naturgefahren in Deutschland – Empfehlungen der Staatlichen Geologischen Dienste (SGD) zur Erstellung von Gefahrenhinweiskarten. the results are presented to all authorities.): Geographical Information Systems in Assessing Natural Hazards. & GODT. an increasing number of shallow landslides must be taken into account. MORRISSEY.. & HUNGR. harmonizing and improvement of different methods for hazard mapping. & ZINGGELER... (1998): Modellierung der Reichweite von Felsstürzen. In critical cases. http://pubs. (1993): Spatial analysis in GIS for natural hazard assessment. G.T.usgs. A. LIED. A.. M. VON (2010): Danger Map for the Bavarian Alps. LIENER. 9 p. Trieste (Cluet Publisher). D.. (1993): The assessment of rock fall hazards at the base of talus slopes.. WISLOCKI. Stuttgart. PFEIFER. “CatchRisk”.J. P. G. KRUMMENACHER. P. J. 30 (4): 620-636. In this cases a detailed expertise analysis has to decide if measures are technically feasible.bis. – 50 p. M. It helps the planner identify hot spots and make decisions concerning measures of protection. B. 41 p. KEUSEN. Deutschen Geographentag in Basel.J.bayern. C. Council of Canada). and forest management.gov/of/1999/ofr-990578/. M. R. Innsbruck (Selbstverl. WALD UND LANDSCHAFT (BUWAL) [eds. a limited version of the hazard map is published on the Internet (www. M. In: Goodchild. A. & CANDIAN. – In: Tagungsbericht zum 48. K. This would allow the identification of hot spots with heavy rainfall and. Furthermore. – In: U. Work Package 2: Landslide hazard assessment (Rockfall modelling). – Canadian Geotechnical Journal. (1993): Hillslope Materials and Processes.. UMWELTBUNDESAMT [eds. & Guzzetti. SELBY...de). TH.de/ publikationen/fpdf-l/3513. it also shows areas not endangered and free for planning. H. Ges. a higher susceptibility for landslides. Geographica Bernensia G64. F. KIENHOLZ. FIEBIGER. (Hrsg. ERISMANN. BUNDESAMT FÜR WASSER UND GEOLOGIE.. H. POSCHINGER.umweltdaten. (2005): Modellierung von Stein. For the mid-term. In addition. KRAPP. PATULA. not published. To help potential users interpret the hazard map... Geowiss. WIECZOREK. R.] (2005): Empfehlungen Raumplanung und Naturgefahren. K. Climate change predictions could be implemented in the model if maps with predicted precipitation on a local scale were available. O. A hazard map does not contain specifications about the degree of hazard or the intensity or probability of an event. M. – http://www. the goal is to develop hazard maps for the whole of Bavaria. 161/2. But the Alpine part of Bavaria is not the only region affected by geological hazards. California. p. – In: Innsbrucker Geographische Studien. TOBLER. HEGG. 28: 249 p. 90: 51-53. (1977): Rockfall problems in Norway.P. June 2010 MEISSL. S. S. & VON POSCHINGER. EVANS. (1995): Deterministic paths of gravity-driven slope processes: The „Vector Tree Model“. Kartographische Darstellung und Maßnahmen. MAYER. C. Oxford University Press. H. Berechnung der Trajektorien auf Profilen und im 3-D Raum unter Berücksichtigung von Waldbestand und Hindernissen. Program Interreg IIIb – Alpine Space. economically reasonable and under sustainable aspects really necessary. (1999): Rockfall Potential in the Yosemite Valley. Geographisches Institut Universität Bern. des Instituts für Geographie der Universität Innsbruck). Bern. Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Karl Mayer Bavarian Environment Agency (LfU) (Office Munich) Lazarettstraße 67 80636 Munich – GERMANY Andreas von Poschinger Bavarian Environment Agency (LfU) (Office Munich) Lazarettstraße 67 80636 Munich – GERMANY Literatur / References: BUNDESAMT FÜR RAUMENTWICKLUNG. The map will be provided to local and regional planning authorities for water.. therefore. – Regione Autonoma Friuli-Venezia Giulia e Università degli Studi di Trieste. 119-128. an intensive cooperation with the Bavarian Environment Agency is offered. The Alpine foothills and the Swabian-Franconian Jurassic-mountains are affected as well. IOVINE. S.. B. THOM. BUNDESAMT FÜR UMWELT. Res.. & KIENHOLZ. G.pdf WADGE. (1979): Indagine sui limiti di massima invasione dei blocchi franati durante il sisma del Friuli del 1976. 293 – 312. L. 10 figs.. Ottawa (Nat. R. F. Oxford. 9. Zollikofen. ONOFRI.] (2008): Klimaauswirkungen und Anpassung in Deutschland – Phase 1: Erstellung regionaler Klimaszenarien für Deutschland.. (2000): Zur Feststofflieferung in Wildbächen. traffic.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 128 climate change with an increase in extreme rainfalls will come true.2005. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0578. – anlässlich Fan-Forum ETH Zürich am 18.. & Steyaert.O. Bergamo. Z.. New York. K. LEPPIG. E. Conclusions A hazard map is a very helpful tool for planning authorities to get an overview about land use conflicts and potentially endangered areas. & PEARSON. (1993): Naturgefahren: Prozesse. – In: Istituto Sperimentale Modelli e Strutture (ISMES). & MANI. 79 – 92. G. Parks B.02. (eds. The identification of such hot spots is one target in the Alpine Space Programme project AdaptAlp that also focuses on evaluation. In: Carrara.) – Environmental modelling with GIS: 332-338. A.S. M. Dordrecht. LINIGER. Seite 129 . Bern.und Blockschlag.. VON (2005): Final Report and Guidelines: Mitigation of Hydro-Geological Risk in Alpine Catchments. Oxford. Stuttgart. dt. MAYER. the hazard map has to disclose the requirement for further analysis. On the other hand..F. die Vorgaben stammen vom PPR (gemeinsam mit den zugehörigen Bestimmungen). Depending on the objectives. Eines dieser Dokumente befasst sich mit den durch Massenbewegungen verursachten Gefahren. One of these documents is dedicated to mass movement hazards. In this procedure. however. a general methodological guidelines document and other documents specific to the different types of hazards specify the conditions and clarify the method and approach proposed to draw up the PPR. The plan for prevention of natural hazards (plan de prévention des risques naturels prévisibles . Different types of expertise from various experts and approaches contribute to hazard assessment. These are mainly schemes local urban planning at the community scale. PPR). For mass movements. using various approaches. this must be carried out at different scales. Für die Erstellung von Gefährdungsanalysen und die Gefahrenzonenplanung (Gefahrenkartierung) stehen – beruhend auf einem Bestand von Phänomenen und einer Analyse aktueller und vergangener Ereignisse – verschiedene Arten von Informationen und Datenbanken zur Verfügung. d. Hazards mapping and land-use planning Natural hazards must be taken into account in landuse planning documents. based on an inventory of phenomena and a back-analysis of current and past events. the regulations stemming from the PPR (together with the associated regulations). Hazard assessment can also take different forms.e. under the jurisdiction of national or local authorities. Gefährdungsbeurteilung und Kartierungsmethoden sind zumindest für die Verwen- dung im Rahmen der Flächennutzungsplanung standardisiert: Der Plan für die Verhinderung von Naturgefahren (plan de prévention des risques naturels prévisibles. the hazard map is an intermediate step in elaborating the risk map. Im Rahmen dieses Verfahrens beschreiben allgemeine methodologische Richtlinien und andere. Zusammenfassung: Gefahrenbeurteilungen sind für verschiedene Zwecke erforderlich und werden in Form von fachlichen Gutachten auf unterschiedlichen Ebenen anhand verschiedener Ansätze vorgenommen. Gefährdungsanalysen müssen eine gegebene Gefahr in Bezug auf die Intensität und Häufigkeit des Auftretens beschreiben. This is one of the main instruments used by the French national authorities for preventing natural hazards while taking them into account in land use development. It can cover one or several types of hazards and one or several municipalities. i. but most often its final outcome is a hazard map. Seite 131 .Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 130 DIDIER RICHARD Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Rapid Mass Movements in France Standards und Methoden der Gefährdungsanalyse für schnelle Massenbewegungen in Frankreich Summary: Hazard assessment is required for different purposes and is carried out through expertise assessments at different levels. integrates standardized hazard assessment and mapping methods. Within this procedure. The PPR is a specific procedure designed to take into account natural hazards in land-use development. given the specific characteristics of these phenomena. specific approaches are proposed. of territorial coherence at an inter-urban scale and Introduction Hazard assessment of rapid mass movements is required for different purposes than for other natural phenomena. In diesem Verfahren ist der Gefahrenzonenplan ein Zwischenschritt in der Erstellung des Risikoplans. is now one of the national authority’s main instruments for preventing natural hazards.h. establishing standardized approaches. Hazard assessment must characterize a given hazard in terms of intensity and frequency of occurrence.. welche die spezifischen Merkmale dieser Erscheinungen berücksichtigen. The PPR involves the local and regional authorities concerned from the very first steps of its preparation (Fig. für die verschiedenen Arten von Gefahren spezifische Dokumente die Bedingungen und geben Aufschluss über die empfohlenen Methoden und Ansätze zum Erstellen des PPR. The PPR is elaborated under the authority of the department’s prefect. must integrate natural hazards.PPR) established by the law of February 2. 1). which approves it after formal consultation with municipalities and a public inquiry. Hazard assessment and mapping methods are standardized at least for their use in the frame of land-use planning in what is called the plan for the prevention of natural hazards (plan de prévention des risques naturels prévisibles. Typically. methods and tools is demanding. Various types of information available and databases can be used for hazard assessment and hazard mapping. Für Massenbewegungen sind spezifische Ansätze empfohlen. 1995. urban planning procedures and decisions. The field of landuse planning. PPR) ist eines der wichtigsten Mittel der französischen nationalen Behörden für die Vermeidung natürlicher Gefahren und findet in der Flächennutzungsplanung Berücksichtigung. Therefore. However. two groups can be distinguished: • Slow movements. commercial or industrial activity. authorities. where requirements to reduce the vulnerability of projects and preventive.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 132 craft. The PPR is designed for urban planning communities and government and is incumbent on everybody: individuals.000 French municipalities are threatened by mass movements. a mass movement along a flat. for property construction that has been allowed in the past. according to the propagation mode of materials: taken into account by communities as well as individuals. to prohibit land development and construction.). for which the deformation is progressive and can be accompanied by collapse but in principle without sudden acceleration: Ground subsidence consecutive to changes in natural or artificial subterranean cavities (quarries or mines).) According to the velocity of movement. resulting from the multiplicity of triggering mechanisms (erosion. only limited improvements whose cost is less than 10% of the market or For areas exposed to greater hazards. the PPR may take an interest in existing structures as well as new projects. As a complement to the PPR – the central tool of the French national authorities’ natural hazards prevention action – other procedures and tools are designed to provide preventive information that must be provided to inhabitants possibly exposed to hazards (information tools: DDRM. This option particularly concerns measures relating to the safety of persons and the organization of rescue operations as well as all general measures that are not specifically related to a particular project. elected officials and economic and consumer representatives without departing from this principle. abnormally heavy rainfall. Seite 133 . etc. It may prohibit or impose requirements on any type of construction. protection and safety measures allowing the organization of emergency services will be set up. this principle remains particularly warranted by the cost of preventive measures to reduce the vulnerability of future constructions and the cost of compensation in cases of disaster. Rapid mass movements Approximately 7. This guides development choices on less exposed land in order to reduce harm and damage to persons and property. but also in other zones that are not in order to avoid aggravating existing risks or causing new ones. Finally. for their completion. For example in urban centres. Creep of plastic materials on low slopes. 1: Programm zur Ausarbeitung eines PPR (Quelle: V. Adequate hazard assessment (and mapping) is of course also necessary for all these prevention tools. This principle must be strictly applied when the safety of persons is involved. The PPR may also define general preventive. deforestation. landslides). Boudières. deformation and collapse under static or dynamic load). dissolution. an earthquake. However. curved or complex discontinuity surface of cohesive grounds (marls and clays). Shrinkage or swelling of certain clayey materials depending on their moisture content. Danger studies are also mandatory for certain classes of hydraulic works (new regulations for dams and dikes).) as well as measures relating to the safety of persons and the organization of rescue operations that must be taken into account by communities and private individuals (safety measures plan: PCS). the PPR is a document which informs the public on zones that expose populations and property to hazards.e. exploitation of materials or groundwater. IAL. it is possible to discuss the limits of prohibitions and requirements with local actors. 2008) are exposed to various phenomena stemming from the instability of slopes and cliffs (collapses. It regulates land use. groundwater characteristics. 1: PPR elaboration scheme (Source: V. In other cases. forestry. Landslides. development or any farming. They vary greatly in form. structure. one-third of which can be highly dangerous for the population. estimated value of the property can be required. therefore. up to total prohibition. DCS. financed by society. geometry of the fracture networks. Mass movements are demonstrations of the gravitational movement of ground masses destabilized under the influence of natural solicitations (snow melting. taking into account natural hazards identified in this zone and goals of nonaggravation of risks. rock falls. etc. use or exploitation and requirements of any kind can be used. • Rapid movements which can be split into two groups. located in mountain regions. Boudières. It regulates projects for new installations. since the prevention objectives are then based on economic considerations. companies. The PPR may operate in zones that are directly at risk. These procedures are mandatory for the municipalities with an existing PPR.) or human activities (excavation. 2008) Abb. vibration. It must therefore be annexed to the local urban planning plan when such a document exists. i. DICRIM. This regulation extends from authorising construction under certain conditions to prohibiting construction in cases where the foreseeable intensity of hazard or the nonaggravation of existing risks warrants such action. etc. protection and safety measures that must be Fig. themselves related to the complexity of the geotechnical behaviour of the materials (geologic structure. peat). Most of these towns. especially when delivering building permits. etc. The basis for the regulation of projects in the perimeter of a PPR is to discontinue development in areas with the greatest hazard and. Compaction by shrinkage of clayey grounds and by consolidation of certain compressible grounds (muck. Adjustments can be accepted when the situation does not allow alternatives. certain activities and policies remain the jurisdiction of centralised authorities. 3: Positionierung des Gefahrenzonenplans in der allgemeinen Ausarbeitungsphase eines PPR Seite 135 . This analysis. overseen by the Ministry of the Environment.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 134 The first group includes: Subsidence resulting from the sudden collapse of the top of natural or artificial subterranean cavities. clarify the method and approach proposed for the various types of risks. Mud flows. such as the policy for natural risk prevention. which result from the transport of materials or viscous or fluid mixtures in the bed of mountain streams. These are risk-prone areas but also areas where development could aggravate the risks or produce new sources of risk. presents the PPR. stating the principles the PPR is based on and commenting the regulations adopted. torrential floods (to be approved)… One of these guideline documents is dedicated to geological hazards. published in August 1997. rock falls. but it excludes debris flows in general. landslides. Their propagation mode is intermediate between mass movement and fluid or viscous transport. Some rock slides. • regulations applied to each of these areas. which depends on the analysis of the natural phenomena that may occur and of their possible consequences in terms of land use and public safety. results organization. without damping by the surface layers. which generally result from the evolution of landslide fronts. possibly supplemented by expert advice on potential hazards. prevention. The regulatory zoning of the PPR is based on risk assessment. The other guidelines.000 and 1:5. 2: Die Sammlung methodologischer Richtlinien für einen PPR Fig. specifies how it should be drawn up and tries to answer the numerous questions that may arise for their implementation.000. Fig. The general methodology establishes that the PPR is composed of: • a presentation report explaining the analysis of the phenomena considered and the study of their impacts on people and existing or future property. This report explains the choices made for prevention. including subsidence. such as the one dedicated to mass movements. 3: Positioning of the hazard map within the general procedure of PPR elaboration Abb. but also measures applicable to existing property and activities. earthquakes. collapse. snow avalanches (to be approved). 2: The PPR methodological guidelines collection Abb. • Knowledge of the historic and active natural phenomena: inventory and description. • Evaluation of the socioeconomic and human stakes subjected to these hazards. Within the framework of this common procedure. Rock falls resulting from the mechanical alteration of fractured cliffs or rocky scarps (volumes ranging from 1 dm3 to 10 or 10 m ). forest fires. 4 5 3 Standards and methods In France’s administrative and institutional sinking. The elaboration of the PPR generally begins with the historical analysis of the main natural phenomena that have affected the studied territory. protection and safety measures that must be taken by individuals or communities. • a regulatory map at a scale generally between 1:10. The second group includes: Debris flows. and associated mud flows. One consequence is the willingness to maintain a minimum homogeneity and coherence at the national level and in the way different types of natural hazards are treated. a general methodological guidelines document has been published. followed by others specific to the different types of hazards: floods. This analysis includes four preliminary stages: • Determination of the risk basin and the study perimeter. which delineates areas controlled by the PPR. • Hazard qualification: characterization of natural phenomena which can arise within the study perimeter. The general guide. The regulations define the conditions required for carrying out projects. This is probably one of the most significant differences compared with other Alpine countries. i. etc. miscellaneous diagnoses. the real regulatory outcome of the PPR (together with the associated regulations). etc. Priority must be given to these elements. • Field surveys and eye witness accounts. 6: Beispiel eines ZERMOSPlans Elements at risk appreciation Risk Prevention Plan (PPR) Necessary information and consultation Risk management Annexation as servitude in the PLU Seite 137 . which is combined with the identification of elements at risk in drawing up the risk map. • Existing databases and maps. Historical and existing studies as well as field investigations are collected for the study of the Fig. field visit reports. brgm. • General and research documents (scientific papers. miscellaneous documents. petitions. civil engineering studies and reports. 4: Der erste Schritt der Gefahrenzonenplanung Fig. monographs. including an analysis of the territory outcomes carried out in consultation with the various local partners. deliberations. 5: Geological maps and databases (www. etc. 1995.). • Parochial archives.fr) Study of phenomena by risk basin Historical and existing studies. The main information sources are: • Municipal archives (technical documents.). brgm. Priority is given to the qualitative general studies and to the back-analysis of past events.). field investigation Informative map of natural phenomena Hazard map Identification of elements at risk Available maps and data bases Regulatory documents Fig. geological guides. in this procedure the hazard map is an intermediate step necessary to elaborate the risk map. 6: Example of a ZERMOS map Abb. The general studies are conducted based on existing data. aerial photographs.fr) Abb. • Engineering consulting firm documents (geotechnical and geological reports. PhD theses. is the basis for reflection during the elaboration of the PPR.). The study of phenomena by risk basin produces the hazard map.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 136 in a hazard map that evaluates the scope of predictable phenomena. This map.e. the back-analysis of past or current events and field surveys. 4: The first step of hazard mapping Abb. 5: Geologische Karten und Datenbanken (www. Data and information The first step in elaborating hazard maps consists of collecting all available data and information that can be exploited for hazard assessment. Therefore. Combining the levels of hazard and outcomes allows defining risk zones. etc. as stipulated by article 3 of the decree of October 5th. general reports or accident reports. • Departmental sources (archive and quarry services. which specifies that the elaboration of PPR takes into account the current state of knowledge. French database of mass movements (www. but presenting the key of the hazard evaluation is strongly recommended. but also on the vulnerability of buildings.000 map. the occurrence probability is not a true probability. etc. hazard evaluation includes both the stability analysis of rock masses and run-out distance evaluation. methods and phenomena step. Different classes of intensity can be identified if these measures remain within the domain of an individual owner or a group of owners or if they require community intervention and investment (Fig. and In the presence of substantial human socioeconomic danger. the information contained in this map will be used to manage and plan land development and construction works..) Medium High Major Fig. 6) of zones exposed to soil movement hazards. la Clapière. the topographic basis used is the IGN (National Geographic Institute) 1:25. There is no general specification for this stage of the hazard evaluation.net) Abb. such as the observed or expected damage or impacts or the cost range of possible countermeasures for the intensity evaluation. a few Zermos maps (Fig. The probabilistic approach based on a frequency analysis is possible only for some phenomena such as rock falls. presence of water. the kinetic energy. It is therefore necessary to refer to more global criteria so they can be compared and their use for regulatory zoning facilitated. 7: BDMVT – französische Datenbank für Massenbewegungen (www. 8: Beispiel der empfohlenen Beziehungen zwischen der Bedeutung der Gegenmaßnahmen und der Intensitätsstufe implement.. a combination of susceptibility levels and geomorphologic features. intensity can be translated in terms of potential for damage. enlarged to 1:10. Hazard assessment Hazard evaluation includes three components: the intensity of mass movements. Different methods are possible to assess a representative intensity level for all phenomena: • As for earthquakes. contrary to earthquakes or floods. damage potential depends not only on the physical phenomenon. fracturing of the rock mass. 7: The BDMVT. except by defining as many hazards as movement types. it is necessary to consider a probability of occurrence of an event qualitatively over a given period (e. Geological hazard qualification is based on In most cases. or the most severe historical event identified on an equivalent site. tools specifying the spatial extension of the phenomena. the time of occurrence and the spatial extension. etc. Maps and databases are available for this work: geological maps at a 1:50. Hazards are thus qualified in terms of intensity. This assumes that sufficient data are available. Generally. bdmvt. relying on elements such as slope angle. which would make the hazard zoning document difficult to read. which are quite old and not exhaustive. etc.www. bdmvt. However. which introduces a bias. In presence of Seite 139 . but is simply a scale of relative susceptibility.fr). and an events database of the RTM services that will soon be on line. the final displacement. As most mass movements are not repetitive processes.000 scale. covering France (Fig.brgm. 10). medium and high. can be used: run-out modelling for rock falls. it is difficult to directly translate their physical characteristics in terms of intensity.bdmvt. geophysics surveys delineating underground mines.g.www. thus reducing uncertainty. Numerical tools are increasingly used to estimate the maximal run-out distance. For instance. The hazard is graded by combining the time occurrence and the intensity.net) Coutermeasures importance level Can be financed by an individual owner Can be financed by a limited group of owners Concerns a spatial area larger than the individual ownership scale and/or very higth cost and/or technically difficult No possible technical countermeasure Only a few cases in France (Séchilienne.net). but the reliability of the results is highly dependent on the experience of the engineering geologist. 8: Example of relationships proposed between the importance of countermeasures and intensity level Abb. In case of rock falls and related phenomena. using parameters such as the volume of soil or rock involved. The reference hazard is the most severe potential events considered by the expert as likely to occur in a 100-year period (or more frequently if human lives are concerned). • Intensity can be assessed according to the importance and the cost of protection measures that would be necessary to qualitative criteria. 50 or 100 years). lithology.000. without reference to numerical values. Once translated into regulatory zoning. Considering the variety of mass movements. 5 . three levels or probabilities may be used: low. a French database of mass movements (Fig. 7 . which is actually rare.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 138 Intensity level Low Fig. typically in a 2D table (Fig. the depth of the failure surface. The frequency of events is estimated on the basis of the historical events identified on the site. 8). net/ WEBSITE OF THE FRENCH MINISTRY IN CHARGE OF RISK PREVENTION POLICY: http://www. As far as very large mass movements are concerned. Risques de mouvements de terrain. it is possible to map the hazards on a 1:5. is François Hédou (Francois.net/ BRGM (bureau de recherches géologiques et minières) Website: http:// www.richard@cemagref. Tel.fr substantial damage potential or if the precision of the study and the amount of available data allow it. 10: Beispiel für die Erstellung einer Übersichtstabelle über Steinschlaggefahr (von CETE du sud-ouest) Fig 10: Example of hazard table determination for rock fall hazard (from CETE du sud-ouest) Seite 141 . : +33 4 76 76 27 73 mail : didier.fr).000-scale map. poorly determined. La Documentation française. 9: Entscheidungsprozess zur Bewertung der Bezugsgefährdung RISK PREVENTION FRENCH WEBPORTAL: www. The geological analysis remains the basis of hazard evaluation.developpement-durable. 71 p.prim. Acknowledgements Jean-Louis Durville. Collection Environnement.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 140 Conclusion Methods assessing hazards for rapid mass movements are still mostly empirical and rely on the experience of the engineering geologist. The intensity of the factors is high. including the monitoring of movement and various computer simulations. The PPR guidelines give a general framework and general principles for hazard assessment and mapping.gouv. involving more than 10 million cubic metres of material. Plans de prévention des risques naturels (PPR).fr/ FRENCH MASS MOVEMENTS DATABASE: http://www. Service de Restauration des Terrains en Montagne de Haute-Savoie. Literatur / References: Anschrift des Verfassers / Author’s address: Didier Richard Fig. Collection Environnement. such as La Clapière (Alpes-Maritimes) Probability of occurrence Intensity level Determining factors identified on the site are diffuse. Conseil général de l'environnement et du développement durable. The person to contact for more information on this policy within the French Ministry of Sustainabledevelopment. 9: Decision process for assessing the reference hazard Abb. LCPC (2000) Caractérisation et cartographie de l'aléa dû aux mouvements de terrain. but numerical tools as GIS and computer simulation are also used. Alison Evans. Precise rules are not yet available at the national level. High Rock Falls < 1 dm3 Rock Falls < 100 m3 Collapses > 100 m3 Low Very low to low hazard Very low to low hazard / Very low to low hazard Medium hazard High hazard / High hazard High hazard Medium High Abb.fr/ LCPC (1999) L'utilisation de la photo-interprétation dans l'établissement des plans de prévention des risques liés aux mouvements de terrain. Cemagref – Unité de Recherche “érosion torrentielle.brgm.prim. HEDOU@developpement-durable. Some factors unlisted can appear with time.gouv. 128 p. MINISTÈRE DE L'AMÉNAGEMENT DU TERRITOIRE (1999).bdmvt. Low Many determining factors are identified on the site.net RISK MAPPING: http://cartorisque. Medium Some nonidentified determining factors on the site. The main requirement is that the method used should be explained. 91 p. ad hoc methods of hazard assessment have been set up. neige et avalanches” BP 76 – F 38402 Saint-Martin-d’Hères Cedex or Séchilienne (Isère). Despite some tests carried out with wide land recovery (Mountain Regions Hazard Map 1:50. at present the work is done mainly on two scales: land planning scale (1:25. These scales imply different approaches and methods to obtain hazard parameters used for such a purpose.000 (MPRGC25M) The most important mapping plan is the Geological Hazard Prevention Map of Catalonia 1:25. susceptibility and natural hazards of geological processes. MARTA GONZÁLEZ. Zusammenfassung: Diese Abhandlung bietet einen Überblick über die verschiedenen Aktivitäten des Geologischen Instituts Katalonien (IGC) für die Kartierung geologischer Gefahren. pedological and geothematic information concerning the whole of the territory in scales suitable for land and urban planning. 1985]. in 2010. The hazard level is qualitatively classified as high (red). Abb. Vilamitjana (65-23). Geo-hazard mapping is an essential part of this information. methodologies and its expected use. Sie beschreibt die unterschiedlichen Kartenserien. Geogefahren. the Parliament of Catalonia approved the creation of the Geological Institute of Catalonia (IGC) assigned to the Ministry of Land Planning and Public Infrastructures (DPTOP) of the Catalonian Government.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 142 Introduction With Law 19/2005.000 scale show hazards caused individually by different phenomena in order to facilitate the Geohazards Mapping in Catalonia Kartierung von geologischen Gefahren in Katalonien Summary: This paper presents the different lines of work being undertaken by the Geological Institute of Catalonia (IGC) on geological hazard mapping. den Umfang der Darstellungen. medium (orange) and low (yellow). One of the functions of the IGC is to “study and assess geological hazards. Fig. and in emergency management”. It describes the different map series. 1: First published sheet. The MPRGC includes the representation of evidence. geo-thematic a component of the Geoworks of the IGC. avalanche and flood hazard. JORDI PINYOL. coastal and flood dynamics) and internal (seismic) geodynamics. integrating and disseminating the basic geological. Katalonien. Therefore. prevention and mitigation and to give support to other agencies competent in land and urban planning. Vilamitjana (65-23). Catalonia.000 or more detailed). and urban planning scale (1:5. These different types of hazard mapping products are explained below. This project started in 2007. Schlüsselwörter: Gefahrenkartierung. and The high density of urban development infrastructures in Catalonia for requires As information planning. These are the processes generated by external geodynamics (such as slope. scales of representation. Several complementary maps on a 1:100. Seite 143 . Geological Hazard Prevention Map of Catalonia 1:25. 2003]).000. including avalanches.000 [ICC. JORDI MARTURIÀ. These maps comply with the Catalan Urban Law PERE OLLER. 1: Das erste veröffentlichte Blatt. spatial and statistical analysis. elaborating. the IGC is in charge of making official hazard maps for such a finality. The main map is presented on a scale of 1:25. Keywords: hazard mapping. snow. The maps are generated in the framework of a mapping plan or as the final product of a specific hazard report. PERE MARTÍNEZ (1/2005) which indicates that building is not allowed in those places where a risk exists. The information is displayed by different maps on each published sheet. Risk Prevention Map of Catalonia 1:50. The methods used to analyze hazards basically consist of geomorphological.000 (MPRGC25M). to propose measures to develop hazard forecast.000). and includes landslide. phenomena. torrent.000 [DGPAT. 2010. the strategic programme aimed at acquiring. geohazards. die angewandte Methodik und den erwarteten Gebrauch der Karten. 3. 4: Darstellung von Mehrfachrisiken. Abb. and from the identification of favourable lithologies and morphologies of the terrain. Two additional maps for flooding and seismic hazards. At the same time. These considerations inform about the need for further detailed studies and advise about the use of corrective measures. a database is being implemented. 2001). d for rockfalls. indicates the value of hazard (A for high hazard. Field analysis allows a better approach and understanding. 1985. 3: Prevention recommendations. Fig.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 144 reading of the sheet and understanding of the mapped phenomena. Absenkung und Hochwasser nach geomorphologischen Kriterien. It is done through a survey to witnesses who live and/or work in the study areas. It consists of a geomorphologic approach and it comprises the following phases: 1. Hazard from each phenomena is analyzed individually. hazard is estimated on the basis of the analysis of the magnitude and frequency (or activity) of the observed or potential phenomena. 6: Hauptkarte 1:25000. 2001). Photointerpretation: carried out on vertical aerial photos of flights from different years (1957. 3). Fig. represented on a 1:50. indicates the type of phenomena (e for large landslides. Hazard zones are represented as follows: areas where no hazard was detected (white). Finally. Abb. In a second step. Fig. 2: Gefahrenmatrix (auf der Grundlage von Altimir et al. Population inquiries: the goal of this stage is to complement the information obtained in the earlier stages. Fig. the first in capital letters. Bibliographic and cartographic search: the information available in archives and databases is collected. Abb. the longer the epigraph will be. 4: Multi-hazard representation. geomorphological indicators of activity. which includes landslides. 4). 3: Empfohlene Präventivmaßnahmen. a for avalanches and f for subsidence and collapses). 4. but in any case. are added to the sheet. Susceptibility areas are classified according to the hazard matrix represented in Fig. especially in overlapping areas (Fig. x for flows. but magnitude values were adapted to each of them. It can be extensively applied with satisfactory results with regard to the scale and purpose of the work. zones with low hazard (yellow). identifying areas where it is advisable to carry out detailed studies in case of action planning. 2. The main challenge of the map is to easily present the overlapping hazard of different phenomena. Abb. In the future it will become the Geological Hazard Information System of Catalonia (SIRGC). In order to obtain an equivalent hazard for each phenomena.000 scale. medium hazard zones (orange). The same frequency/activity values were used for all phenomena. avalanches. 5: Beispiel von Mehrfachrisiken. This phase includes the completion of GIS and statistical analysis to support the determination of the starting and run-out zone. to identify the hazard level and the phenomena that causes it. an effort was made to equate the parameters that define them.Hazard determination The catalogue of phenomena and evidence is the base of the further susceptibility and hazard analysis. It will incorporate all the information obtained from these maps.Susceptibility determination 3. and areas with high hazard (red). Field survey: checking and contrasting on the field. etc. and the second. 2. The observation of the topography and the vegetation allows the identification of areas with signs of instability coming from the identification and characterization of events that occurred recently or in the past. The map is to provides government and individuals with an overview of the territory with respect to geological hazards. Each hazard level contains some considerations for prevention (Fig. Abb. It indicates what the maximum overlapped hazard is (Fig.Catalogue of phenomena and evidences 2. 2: Hazard matrix (based on Altimir et al. 5: Example of multi-hazard representation. The higher the overlapping is. sie veranschaulicht die Gefahren hinsichtlich Bergstürze. This epigraph consists of two characters. 1977. without obtaining new hazard values. and from activity indicators. Seite 145 . A methodology identifying that this overlap exists has been established with this objective in mind. and therefore identifying signs and phenomena are not observable through the photointerpretation. in lower-case. especially in aspects such as the intensity and frequency. the elements identified in the previous phases. 6: Main map 1:25000. 2003. M for medium hazard and B for low hazard). sinking and flooding according to geomorphologic criteria. s for landslides. Their limits are drawn taking into account the catalogue of phenomena.). An epigraph is assigned. Fig. The procedure followed in the main map consists of three steps: 1. Lawinen. areas susceptible to be affected by the phenomena are identified from the starting zone to the maximum extent determinable at the scale of work. 5). 11: Flooding hazard map symbology. vision of the avalanche hazard distribution in this region. Hazard maps for urban planning At present. and the inventory information (witness surveys.000 into 4 types was carried out: R (hard rock). field surveys and dendrochronology) is represented in violet. The final map (Fig. During this process 17. Flooding hazard map The flooding hazard map at 1:50. already finished. An extent of 5. the process finishes. and considering the effects of soil amplification. for all the municipalities that want to increase their building limits. 1:100.000 scale shows the limits of the hydraulic modeling for periods of 50. The purpose of these maps is to facilitate the interpretation of the main map. Abb. mapped from terrain analysis (photointerpretation and field work). all the avalanche information is stored in the avalanche database of Catalonia (BDAC). B (semi-compacted material) and C (non cohesive material).91% of the Catalan country.000. The information is available via the Internet at: http://www. it affects 36%. A second mapping plan.000. This is a susceptibility map on a scale of 1:25. It was begun in 1996 and finished in 2006. The termination of the MZA allows a first global Fig. Fig. and advanced modelling. 8: Seismische Gefahrenzonenkarte. 7: Complementary map of surface landslide hazard. which states if a hazard exists or not.092 km2 was surveyed. The area potentially affected by avalanches covers 1.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 146 Complementary maps Complementary maps represent the hazard established for each individual phenomena at 1:100. a geotechnical classification of lithologies from the Geological Map of Catalonia 1:25.000 scale. Abb. 11: Symbologie Hochwasser-Gefahrenzonenkarte. This classification is based on the speed of the S-wave through them (Fleta et al. are represented in orange.. Abb. coming from avalanche observation.5 degrees of intensity. 100 and 500 years provided by the Catalan Water Agency (ACA). Avalanche Paths Map (MZA) of the seismic motion due to soft ground. useful for land planning in the Pyrenean areas.000 auf der Grundlage hydraulischer Modellierung. 8) also represents the values of the basic seismic acceleration of the compulsory "Norma de Construcción Sismorresistente Española" (NCSE-02) for a placement in rock. Seismic hazard map This map was obtained from the map of seismic areas for a return period of 500 years. Abb. in fact. On this map. 9: Symbologie seismische Gefahrenzonenkarte. the number of complementary maps can vary from 1 to 6. and considering the Pyrenean territory. and the intensity of the seismic emergency plan (SISMICAT). more detailed studies have to be completed. “Val d’Aran Nord”. Abb. in 1996. At present. Seite 147 . For types R and A no additions of any degree of intensity were made.518 avalanche paths were mapped. A flooding map according to geomorphologic criteria was done in those streams were hydraulic modeling was not performed.cat/msbdac/.257 km2. is the Avalanche Paths Map (MZA). To take into account the amplification Fig. 7: Komplementärkarte über Erdrutschrisiken.000 based on hydraulic modeling. 1993). the procedure is first of all to make a preliminary hazard map on a 1:5. but for types B and C. 1998). That is at 3. This element is. A (compact rocks). 12: First published Avalanche Paths Map. 8: Seismic hazard map 1:100.000 scale. The proposed amplifications were assigned to each group of lithologies. Fig. 10: Flooding hazard map 1:100. other geotechnical work. there was an addition of 0. 1996. are added to this database. If the municipality decides not to develop in hazardous areas. for a middle ground. 9: Seismic hazard map symbology. These studies include complex data collection. In the case that the municipality wants to build in the hazardzone areas. The methodology is based on the French “Carte de Localisation des Phénomènes d’Avalanches” (Pietri. historical documents. the avalanche paths. Depending on the type of phenomena identified in the main map.icc. Fig. 10: Hochwasser-Gefahrenzonenkarte 1:100. Abb. usually via drilling specific boreholes. just a map of “yes or no”. 12: Erste veröffentlichte Lawinenzugkarte „Val d’Aran Nord“. Fig. New events.000. (2001): Zonificació del territori segons el grau de perillositat d’esllavissades al Principat d’Andorra. avalanche inventory.. Jordi Marturià. NCSE-02 (2002). 13: Benutzeroberfläche des Lawinendatenservers Literatur / References: PIETRI. COROMINAS. The mapping methodology includes terrain analysis. C. AGÈNCIA CATALANA DE L’AIGUA (Departament de Medi Ambient i Habitatge). P.. J. Seite 149 . There are preliminary studies of a hazard mapping plan 1:5. ESTRUCH. R. Urban planning implications regarding hazard have not been defined yet. and to support the observational data and expert criteria.000 for snow avalanches. COPONS. Boletín Oficial del Estado nº 244. Up to the present day. TORREBADELLA. 13 I 14 de setembre de 2001. An analysis of the MZA. J. Pere Martínez Institut Geològic de Catalunya C/ Balmes 209/211 08006 Barcelona Fig. FLETA. Advanced modelling analysis is performed in order to obtain the most accurate results. 13: Interface of the avalanche data server Abb. Revue de Géographie Alpine nº1. setembre 1998. AND VILAPLANA. 119-132.. Proceedings 4th Meeting of the Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society. Parte General y de Edificación. I. there is no standard methodology. (1998). 85-97.M. 1993: Rénovation de la carte de localisation probable des avalanches.. nivometeorological analysis and numerical modelling to complete the information. 699-702. Marta González. P.. viernes 11 de octubre de 2002. The current challenge for the IGC is to prepare guidelines for such a goal in order to guarantee the standards of quality and homogeneity. J. 45 pp. AMIGÓ. the hazard mapping is obtained from frequency/intensity analysis. Real Decreto 997/2002 del 27 de septiembre de 2002. ALTIMIR.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 148 Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Pere Oller. P. In these maps. J. The phenomena taken into account are landslides. rock falls. Actes de les 1es Jornades del CRECIT. resulted in the identification of 24 urban areas to be mapped. J. Barcelona. supported by the statistical α−β model. I GOULA. In this map terrain is classified into high hazard (red). Ministerio de Fomento. pàg. Comisión Permanente de Normas Sismorresistentes. sinking and snow avalanches. X. Geotechnical characterization for the regional assesment of seismic risk in Catalonia.. Guia tècnica. 35898-35987. Jordi Pinyol. medium hazard (blue) and low hazard (yellow). J. Directrius de planificació i gestió de l’espai fluvial. Norma de Construcción Sismorresistente Española. Debris flows and rock falls common to higher relief areas of Europe occur but are less likely to interfere with development and population centres. anwendbare Informationen über Rutschungen zu erstellen. Die Erstellung der nationalen Gefahrenhinweiskarte (GeoSure) war auf der Grundlage umfangreicher Datenarchive möglich. This susceptibility map has been extensively used by the insurance industry and has also been adopted for a number of externally funded projects targeting specific problems. The Aberfan landslide and costly disruptions to infrastructure projects in the 1960/70’s (Skempton & Weeks 1976 and Early & Skempton 1972) strengthened the view that the extent of ground instability was neither well understood nor managed by developers or of landslides being carried out in the 1980’s and 1990’s on which the current national policy is largely based. In the years following the disaster. limited resources since this initial push to understand the problem meant that these initiatives have failed to develop into an effective. REEVES Standards and Methods of Hazard Assessment for Mass Movements in Great Britain Standards und Methoden der Gefahrenbewertung von Massenbewegungen in Großbritannien Summary: With less extreme topography and limited tectonic activity. National Landslide Database planners. However. MATTHEW HARRISON. operational regulations and building codes (Building Regulations. which are neither centralized nor legally binding. Landslides. to some degree. ist gering. These assessments provided the basis for planning policies and guidance that. haben eine hohe Anzahl von vorzeitlichen oder relikten Bergstürzen verursacht. die auf bestimmte Probleme abzielen. Italien und Frankreich. With the exception of the Building Regulations. continue to control development on or around unstable ground. 2006). The current systems. The British Geological Survey has developed a national landslide susceptibility map which can be used to highlight potential areas of instability. denen schwierige periglaziale Bedingungen folgten. followed by severe periglacial conditions have led to the presence of high numbers of ancient or relict landslides. Rutschungen. z. Great Britain experiences a different landslide regime than countries in many other parts of the world e. integrated. GeoSure. Glaziale Veränderungen der Landschaft während des Pleistozäns. Entwicklungs. a limited amount of research into landslide distribution and mechanisms was undertaken but failed to lead to a structured regulatory framework for managing landslide risk. der National Geotechnical Database und von digitalen geologischen Karten angelegt wurden. Diese Gefahrenhinweiskarte findet beispielsweise in der Versicherungsbranche Anwendung und wurde für eine Reihe extern finanzierter Projekte übernommen. Trotz des häufig geringen Ausmaßes von Erdrutschen in Großbritannien heben zahlreiche bekannte Ereignisse der letzten Jahre nach wie vor die Notwendigkeit hervor. Die für höhere Entlastungszonen in Europa typischen Muren und Felsstürze treten zwar auf. numerous high profile events in recent years have highlighted the continued need to produce useable. doch ihre Wahrscheinlichkeit. Glacial modification of the landscape during the Pleistocene. Despite the often subdued nature of landslides in Great Britain.B. This view led to national assessments Background on landslide research and planning in Great Britain Prior to the 1966 Aberfan disaster. GeoSure.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 150 CLAIRE FOSTER. Vom British Geological Survey (BGS) wurde eine nationale Gefahrenhinweiskarte für Rutschungen entwickelt. National Landslide Database Zusammenfassung: Aufgrund einer weniger extremen Topographie und der beschränkten tektonischen Aktivität des Landes unterscheiden sich Auftreten und Verlauf von Erdrutschen in Großbritannien von denen in vielen anderen Ländern der Welt. which led to the deaths of 144 people. Italy and France. applied landslide information.und Bevölkerungszentren zu beschädigen. Keywords British Geological Survey. none of these legal statutes specifically mention Seite 151 . die vom BGS zum Beispiel auf der Grundlage der National Landslide Database. comprise a system of planning regulations (Town and Country Panning Act 1990). HELEN J. national response to deal with landslides in GB. landsliding was not widely considered to be particularly extensive or problematic in Great Britain (GB). Schlüsselwörter British Geological Survey. National Geotechnical Database and digital geological maps. guidance notes.g. anhand derer potentielle Bereiche von Instabilität aufgezeigt werden können. It has been possible to create the national susceptibility map (GeoSure) because of the existence of vast data archives collected by the survey such as the National Landslide Database. 1).000 households in the UK. The first systematic assessment of hazards was triggered by the insurance industry after it identified a need to better understand geological hazards. are in areas considered to have a 'significant' landslide susceptibility (Rated E). GeoSure is produced at 1:50. 2004). national guidance has never been updated to take this into account. These documents provide recommendations that slope instability be considered in any planning decision.000 scale and can be integrated to show the spatial distribution of landslide susceptibility in relation to buildings and infrastructure. The guidance notes do not specifically refer to geological or geotechnical expertise but details of some information sources of are provided. thus. Seite 153 . Scores were defined in line with those used in the British Standard 5930: Field Description of Rocks and Soils (British Standards Institute 1990) and by Bieniawski (1989). The BGS holds large amounts of information about the lithological nature of the rocks and soils within Great Britain. The majority of the legislation can be interpreted as placing responsibility with the developer. there is no legal compulsion for a planning authority to understand the extent or nature of landslide hazards within their area of concern and. 2008). However. The main source of regulatory information regarding slope instability issues is contained within Planning Policy Guidance Note 14 (PPG14) and its associated Annex (Anon 1990. Analysis of known landslides showed that slope angle is one of the major controlling factors and this was derived from the NEXTMap digital terrain model of Britain at a 5m resolution. PPG14 is not legally compulsory and only recommends that the local planning authorities should endeavour to make use of any relevant expertise when assessing whether a planning application may be affected by ground instability. The scores for all the causative factors at each grid cell are combined in an algorithm to give an overall score based on the relative susceptibility to landsliding. This first decision support system (DSS) gave a weighted averaged result for each of the 10000 postcode sectors in GB and came to be used by around 35% of the Industry (Culshaw & Kelk. utility operator or landowner to ensure landslides are not an issue. These sources of information have been superseded by the BGS’s ‘GeoSure’ and continually updated National Landslide Database. Building regulations put further emphasis on the role of the developer to control the impact of instability requiring that “The building shall be constructed so that ground movement caused by…. 1994). improvements in GIS technology and the availability of digital topographical and geological mapping for 98% of GB have led to advances in the methods used to map geohazard potential. 1994). which has been simplified for Fig. One output is a GIS layer that provides ratings of the susceptibility of the country to landsliding on a rating scale of A (low or nil) to E (significant). but where a landslide hazard is most likely to occur if the slope conditions are adversely altered by a change in one or more of the factors controlling slope instability (Fig. 1: GeoSure layer showing the potential for landslide hazard Abb. 2008. The scores assigned to each lithology are based on material strength. land-slip or subsidence (other than subsidence arising from shrinkage). Despite this. The method is flexible enough to allow alteration (nationally or locally) of the algorithm in the future and include other factors such as the presence and nature of superficial deposits.” (Anon. 350. a digital geohazard information system (GHASP – GeoHAzard Susceptibility Package) was developed by the BGS. there is still no legal compulsion to use or consider it within a planning application in GB. GeoSure works by modelling the causative factors of landsliding: lithology. 1. The BGS has since developed a Geographical Information System (GIS)-based system (GeoSure) to assess the principal geological hazards across the country (Foster et al. The GeoSure methodology uses a heuristic approach to assess and classify the propensity of a geological formation to fail as well as to score the relevant causative factors. These early steps have paved the way for the development of much more detailed hazard maps that cover the whole of Great Britain and are complimented by detailed landslide mapping and an extensive National Landslide Database (NLD). According to the dataset. The National Geotechnical Physical Properties database contains information on the geographical distribution of physical properties (such as strength) of a wide range of rocks and soils present in GB. a high susceptibility score does not necessarily mean that a landslide has happened in the past or will do so in the future. Since the development of GHASP. representing 1% of all housing stock. including BGS data. as a result. Discontinuities were assessed as an important causative factor as they reflect the mass strength of a material. If landsliding is a known issue.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 152 landslides. This has been made possible through the use of GIS due to its ability to spatially display and manipulate data (Soeters & Van Westen. 1996). Walsby 2007. 1: GeoSure-Schicht veranschaulicht das Potential von Rutschungsgefährdungen. its susceptibility to failure and its ability to allow water to penetrate a rock mass. The current PPG14 predates the era of GIS and advises that citizens consult geological maps and the now defunct Department of the Environment Landslide Database. slope angle and discontinuities being of prime importance. in so far as the risk can be reasonably foreseen. This information is vitally important in determining the propensity of a material to fail. Development of landslide susceptibility maps and databases in GB BGS began to map geological hazards digitally in the mid 1990’s. through design to construction. Insurance losses caused by ground movements (including subsidence) between 1989 and 1991 reached around £12bn following a particularly dry period and. Importantly. will not impair the stability of any part of the building. ‘a developer’ must provide evidence that any development activity will not exacerbate landslide activity and that any building will be safe. The Annex sets out the procedure for landslide recognition and hazard assessment and emphasises the need to consider ground instability throughout the whole development process from land-use planning. Fig. include them in planning decisions. permeability and known susceptibility to instability. Despite the availability of these resources. Despite the advances in landslide mapping and hazard mapping. 1993) and the WP/WLI (1990). it is extremely difficult to date ancient landslide events with any degree of accuracy and. inactive and stabilised whilst also adding descriptions on the state of development (Advanced. work is ongoing to validate the current methodology against statistical methods such as bivariate statistical analysis and probabilistic methods. Alle Rechte vorbehalten. is included in the NLD. either for the NLD or for digital maps.000+ landslide records can hold information on over 35 attributes including location. Proximity of stream channels 5. As a consequence of this event and others during the same period. Naranjo et al. OS topography © Crown Copyright.. it has simplified the state of activity terms defined by Varnes (1978) into active. Jordan et al. All rights reserved. Slope angle It was considered that information regarding each of these could be extracted from existing digital datasets. The GeoSure method is based upon expert knowledge and a heuristic approach which is being tested against more statistic-based approaches to assess its validity. 1993). trigger mechanism. Landslide databases are commonplace in Europe but there is variability in their complexity and amount of further work carried out to further enhance or update the datasets. 2: Distribution of landslide database points from the National Landslide GIS database. 2005). slope aspect. Land use 4. methodology. (1994) consider statistical methods to be the most appropriate method for mapping regional landslide susceptibility because the technique is objective. The resulting interpreted data were combined to produce a working model of debris flow hazard that could be validated by comparing with known events (Fig. as such. Each of the 15. 2). the dictionary definitions follow the conventions set out by Varnes (1978). 'style of activity. The WP/WLI (1990) regrouped the Varnes (1978) definitions on age and activity under the following headings: 'state of activity.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 154 Another important tool to both inform and assess landslide susceptibility in GB is the National Landslide Database (NLD). limited to those most likely to be identifiable and relevant in GB. incipient). A fully digital workflow has been developed at BGS to enable capture of landslide information. BGS was involved in the provision of a GIS layer highlighting slopes susceptible to debris flows. Whilst activity state and style have been described in the WP/ WLI definitions (WP/WLI. age has been somewhat neglected. An initial study determined five main components which should be considered when determining the hazard potential of debris flows affecting the road network: 1. Hydrogeological conditions 3. This modified assessment sought to digitally capture this set of criteria and create a layer showing areas where debris flows dictionaries internationally have been produced terminology. The National Landslide Database is the most comprehensive source of information on recorded landslides in GB and currently holds records of over 15. Age and activity of a landslide are important factors to record within a landslide inventory.000 landslide events (Fig. movement date. and is used extensively for all geological mapping activities within the British Geological Survey (Jordan et al. worked consortium including the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) and the Scottish Executive to create a digital hazard layer specifically for debris flows. internationally recognised standards have been followed where appropriate. using For recognised Future Developments Currently. one of the five main types of landslides.. have a specific set of preparatory criteria which differs from translational and rotational slides.C. BGS·SIGMAmobile is the BGS digital field data capture system running on rugged tablet PCs with integrated GPS units. the ages assigned to landslides only provide an arbitrary indication of age. 2). material. However.. The A85 debris flow event in 2004 is shown alongside the modelled susceptibility layer. This work was triggered in August 2004 following a period of intense rainfall which led to two debris flows trapping 57 motorists on the A85 trunk road in Scotland. Assessing an area’s susceptibility to landsliding requires knowledge of the distribution of existing failures and also an understanding of the causative factors and their spatial distribution. degraded. OS Topographie © Crown Copyright. The first stage of the process involves using digital aerial photograph interpretation software (SocetSet) to capture digital landslide polygons which can then be altered through field checking using BGS·SIGMA mobile technology (Jordan 2009. Temporal landslide data is as important to understanding the geomorphic evolution of an area as the spatial distribution of slides. Availability of debris material 2. the NLD has incorporated both triggering and preparatory factors. Abb. existing drainage channels are shown as particularly susceptible to failure through debris flows. Bivariate analysis for instance relies upon the availability of landslide occurrence and causal parameter maps. which are compared against landslide type. it does not attempt to model the run-out of such failures. 2005).' Whilst the NLD follows the style of activity definitions. J.' 'distribution of activity' and Seite 155 . Data for modern landslides observed either at the time of the event or through comparison of aerial photographs and geological mapping. Debris flows. hydrogeology. development and a full bibliographic reference. To record cause. vegetation. Whilst the assessment of debris flows highlights areas where they may occur in the future. damage caused. The database Fig. 2008). 2: Verteilung der Rutschungs-Datenbankpunkte von der National Landslide GIS Datenbank. Further adaptations of landslide susceptibility maps in Great Britain Following the creation BGS has of the Geosure within a are most likely to occur in the future. the Scottish Executive commissioned a study to assess the potential impact of further debris flows on the transport network of Scotland (Winter et al. the EPOCH project (Flageollet. This type of information is only available from a detailed database of past events from which one can draw out relevant information which may inform the user of where landslides may occur in the future.. dimensions. When collecting landslide information. age. slope angle. landslide type. reproducible and easily updateable. The definitions are based upon the WP/WLI (1990). . 129-177. H + 35 others (eds).. Toronto. GeoSure.ac. JORDAN. SUZEN. Welsh Office. National Research Council. GIS and Spatial Analysis: Annual Conference of the International Association for Mathematical Geology. European Community. JC (2008). R. V. (2004). Bulletin Engineering Geology and Environment. United Kingdom. G (2008). 886-891. 1990. By using these methodologies and datasets. BIENIAWSKI Z T (1989). LAWLEY. L (Eds) 2005. 1999. Parallel Session Volume.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 156 distributed data and causal factor information contained in the National Landslide Database of Great Britain.L. United Nations University. Digital Mapping Techniques 2009 Proceedings.E. WALSBY. assesses the landslide susceptibility in Great Britain. A suggested method for describing the activity of a landslide. have highlighted the importance of understanding the distribution and mechanisms that cause landslide mass movement events in Great Britain. 1976 The Quaternary history of the Lower Greensand escarpment and Weald Clay vale near Sevenoaks. In: Sassa.L. JC (2007). 58. Transportation Research Board Sp. Proceedings of the First World Landslide Forum. 19-41.+44 (0)115 936 3381 Mobile:. AND DOYURAN. MACGREGOR.. Geological Survey Openfile Report. AND CHOWDHURY. 3a: Ausschnitt der Gefahrenhinweiskarte für Muren. London. Slope instability recognition. A suggested method for reporting a landslide. ANON. May 1013. National Academy Press. Vol. R. WP/ WLI. No. C. 21–44. In: Schuster R. 2004. 176. C. 305: 81-87. 272 p BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTE. THE BUILDING AND APPROVED INSPECTORS REGULATIONS (Amendment). FOSTER. J. FLAGEOLLET.679. S. JORDAN. E. BS 5930. a national assessment of the potential hazard to landsliding mass movement events in Great Britain can therefore be undertaken. 1972. B (1994). 2004 Edition. WINTER. Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Dr. (1990). 1993. HMSO. G. pp. HOWARD. Fukuoka. Landslide hazard assessment: Summary review and new perspectives.J. Wiley Interscience.. VARNES D. 11–33. J. Her Majesty's Stationery Office. J. The development of digital field data collection systems to fulfil the British Geological Survey mapping requirements. analysis and control. A comparison of the GIS based landslide susceptibility assessment methods: multivariate versus bivariate.. Temporal occurrence and forecasting of landslides in the. SMITH. The heuristic approach is able to produce national scale assessments which could be refined Keyworth. B (eds. London. Italy. 3p.) Communicating environmental geoscience. 1978. Geological Society. P. Bologna. Reeves Head of Science Land Use Fig. A. Abb. & SKEMPTON. (1994).G. NG12 5GG. L. oi Sciences. the BGS Digital Field Mapping System in Action. Welsh Office. CULSHAW. 5. It assesses and classifies the propensity of a geological formation to fail as well as to score the relevant causative factors (e.uk Seite 157 . Another issue with the conditional probability technique is that it relies on the assumption that all the parameters are mutually exclusive. The Code of practice for site investigations. NARANJO. York University. The International Promotion Committee of the International Programme on Landslides (IPL). 665. D. Department of the Environment. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology. 3a: Extract from the debris flow susceptibility layer along with b: the Glen Ogle debris flow of 2004. No. Helen J. M. Conclusion In Great Britain. WP/ WLI. Anon. The BGS GeoSure methodology. in small areas. this approach only works where landslides have been mapped. Rep. London. BEE. New York. 1994. In: Transportation Research Board Special Report 247.J. C.. 3 : 292–300 SKEMPTON. Special Publications. are planned for the future. 41. R. Edinburgh. A. Department of the Environment. pp. 283. AD & WILDMAN.. CPG & Marker. such as the Aberfan disaster and Scottish debris flow events (Winter et al. J. AND LAXTON. London. Environmental Geology. using spatially Literatur / References: ALEOTTI. gemeinsam mit b: dem Murgang in Glen Ogle. The value of the heuristic approach is its ability to highlight areas where there are no known landslides but where there is existing knowledge on the underlying causative factors. Tokyo. 171/172: 179-185. Nottingham. K. A national geo-hazard information system for the UK insurance industry . analysis and zonation. Geohazard information to meet the needs of the British public and government policy. slope angle). ANON. 5-12. Engineering Rock Mass Classifications. In: Proceedings of the 1st European Congress on Regional Geological Cartography and Information Systems. The Scottish Executive. Planning & Development British Geological Survey.+44 (0)7989301144 Fax:. Acad. a bridge between geology and decision-makers. bivariate (conditional probability) and probabilistic approaches are able to more accurately predict landslide susceptibility than GeoSure. 2009. C. West Virginia. C. landsliding does not have a structured regulatory framework. FORD. A.R. VAN WESTEN. BGS∙SIGMAmobile. Paper 111.+44 (0)115 936 3385 E-mail:. 1996. Rock fall hazard could be another type of mass movement that is investigated using the heuristic GeoSure approach applying different causal factors and scoring algorithms.g. 2006. HMSO. SOETERS. A. A. Pereira. U.the development of a commercial product in a geological survey environment. (1990).. Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 2005. London. Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 2004. Planning Policy Guidance 14: Development on Unstable Land. This technique cannot be used where no landslide mapping has been undertaken. 53-57. AND SOETERS.hjre@bgs. J. K. 4. Investigation of the landslide at Walton's Wood. 47. Staffordshire. In: Liverman. Quaternary International.. Morgantown. Further adaptations to the GeoSure methodology. 493-526. (Ed) 1993. The Building Regulations 2000 (Structure). regional studies. (International Geotechnical Societies UNESCO Working Party on World Landslide Inventory) 1990. Vol. 45. Landslides. Washington. The new national landslide database and landslide hazards assessment of Great Britain.. each other to create a weighted value for each parameter determined by calculating the landslide density (Aleotti and Chowdhury. Kent. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology. S. Kingsley Dunham Centre. Planning Policy Guidance 14 (Annex 1): Development on Unstable Land: Landslides and Planning. J.S.. & WEEKS. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology. WALSBY. Ed. 2005). Scottish Road Network Landslides Study. Tokyo. Canada.. HMSO. 203-206. 2004). but historical events. L. J. where detailed landslide mapping exists. & Krizek R. H & Nagai. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. No. EPOCH (European Community Programme). in the future by numerical methods for smaller. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT. & VAN WESTEN. J. Nat.. Evaluating the use of training areas in bivariate statistical landslide hazard analysis: a case study in Colombia. However. USA. 1999 and Süzen and Doyuran.. C. Direct Tel:.: Slope movement types and processes. 206 p EARLY. C. International Institute for Aerial Survey and Earth Sciences. MG & KELK. R. Results from an initial pilot study suggest that. D. M. N. It uses a heuristic approach to model the causative factors that cause these events. J. F & SHACKMAN. A. GIBSON. similar to those used to assess debris flows. Approved Document A. With these matrices. März 2010 Summary: The AdaptAlp work package 5 “Expert Hearing” on March 17th. Because of a time limitation of active measures (e. In einem weiteren Schritt wurden auf Basis dieser Beiträge zwei Tabellen erstellt. are used in the different European countries to prevent natural disasters. “Hazard Exactly this variety.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 158 KARL MAYER. 2010 in Bolzano was attended by 28 experts from eight countries. Felgentreff 2008. In a further step. a large variety of maps and methods 1. based on these abstracts and the presentations. which reaches Zone Plans” (Gefahrenzonenplan). This article focuses on the AdaptAlp “Expert Hearing” from 17 March 2010 take place in Bolzano and which dedicates the contents of work package 5.adaptalp. Countless types of “Danger. measures come to implementation to minimize risk. which build the basis for the further approach. a compilation of minimum requirements to the creation of “Danger. the “state of the art” in hazard mapping for each involved region was presented by several people responsible. as a result. in 1954 in the Swiss municipal Gadmen. almost 60 years later. Hazard and Risk maps” are produced for all kinds of risks. especially geological Seite 159 .org) einzusehen sind. These short descriptions can be seen inside the official Hearings report published on the AdaptAlp Homepage (www. all used maps were grouped according to different types and on the other hand diverse characteristics of maps were summarized and compared at the country level. It was dedicated to the goals of action 5. Nowadays. two tables were created. BERNHARD LOCHNER International Comparison: Summary of the Expert Hearing in Bolzano on 17 March 2010 Internationaler Vergleich: Zusammenfassung des Expert Hearings in Bozen vom 17.g. Mithilfe dieser Matrizen werden Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede zwischen den beteiligten Regionen sichtbar und ein „kleinster gemeinsamer Nenner“ kann erarbeitet und in einem nächsten Meeting (Dezember 2010) fixiert werden. but a development of a “least common denominator” which includes the minimum requirements for the creation of Danger. These denominators should be discussed at the next meeting (December 2010) and. welche einerseits alle verwendeten Karten strukturiert nach verschiedenen Typen und andererseits unterschiedliche Charakteristiken von Karten zusammenfassen und auf Länderebene vergleichen. März 2010 in Bozen wurde von 28 Experten aus acht Ländern besucht und widmete sich inhaltlich vollständig den Zielen von Action 5. Ausgehend von diesen Präsentationen. Neben einer kurzen Vorstellung des Projektfortschrittes und der weiteren Vorgehensweise hinsichtlich der Erarbeitung eines mehrsprachigen Glossars wurde von Vertretern aus allen beteiligten Ländern der jeweilige „State oft the Art“ bezüglich Gefahrenkartierung vorgestellt.adaptalp. Hazard and Risk maps. Introduction In dealing with geological and hazards spatial today. wurden im Anschluss an das Treffen Kurzzusammenfassungen für jede Region verfasst. However main goal of work package 5 (WP 5) is not only the description of this variety. Ergebnis dieses Vorgehens und des Projektteiles wird eine Zusammenstellung von Mindestanforderungen zur Erstellung von Gefahrenhinweiskarten und Gefahrenkarten sein. welche innerhalb eines Gesamtberichtes auf der AdaptAlp Homepage (www. the first “Avalanche-ZonePlan” was passed.org). “hazard mapping” is a central part in risk management. Glade a. Beside a short presentation on the progress and the further approach of the multilingual glossary. spatial planning gets more and more important. On the one hand. p 160f). geotechnical (active) (passive) from simple danger mappings to legally binding should be shown inside this part of the AdaptAlp project. With regard to natural hazards. Due to avalanche catastrophes in the 1950’s which were affecting large parts of the Alps. In the following sections. Based on these presentations. Hazard and Risk maps” will be published. In the final chapter. Zusammenfassung: Das AdaptAlp Workpackage 5 „Expert Hearing“ am 17. This was the first time a natural hazard was considered in spatial planning (cf. short abstracts were composed for each region.1: The creation of a multilingual glossary on landslides and especially the elaboration of minimum requirements for “hazard mapping”. first basic approaches concerning a possible synthesis out of the big variety of “hazard planning methods” is pointed out.1: Der Aufbau eines mehrsprachigen Glossars zu Hangbewegungen und insbesondere die Erarbeitung von Mindestanforderungen zur Erstellung von Gefahrenkarten. protective walls) and the decrease of space for permanent settlings. the main goals of this meeting and the contributions from the involved experts were shown. similarities and differences between the involved regions become visible and a “least common denominator” could be elaborated. welche die Grundlage für das weitere Vorgehen bilden. processes. org).Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 160 2. the areas in which natural hazards are possible are not delineated precisely and local conditions (e. The rest of this one-day session was dedicated to the contents of hazard mapping. An important component for developing danger maps is the construction and evaluation of landslide inventories (e. 3. The intensity and probability of a possible event cannot be extracted from the map. etc. Seite 161 . • Specific technical data of the subject area mass movement and subrosion / karst • Surface data concerning subsidence and uplift Regarding landslides. As announced in the introduction. fall. prevention schemes. The formulation of these hazard zones is an important aspect of spatial planning. the “state of the art presentations” from several experts in Bolzano are shown in short summaries for each country. Main goals of the “Expert Hearing” The topics of the expert hearing are all about the goals of the AdaptAlp Work package 5 – “Hazard Mapping”: “Hazard zones are designated areas threatened by natural risks such as avalanches. hazard and risk maps and also information on the creation of such maps were given in short presentations. the main focus of the hearing in Bolzano lies on the elaboration of basics for the definition of minimum standards for hazard mapping. Methods lasting from field studies to computerized modelling are used for the creation of these “danger maps”. etc. Due to this and the fact that the glossary part is already described in detail within chapter 2. Exactly this point was the intention and the main goal of the hearing in Bolzano. This includes the generation of “hazard zoning maps” (“Gefahrenzonenplan”). this article only refers to the hazard mapping part. WLV). it is important to clarify that. shall in future be recorded. because of the scheduled timing of the project. In general the course of action in getting a “synthesis” to hazard mapping is structured in three steps. avalanches and debris flows are regulated by law. about determination of coordinates. large scale flooding. Only the course of actions concerning floods.g. Nevertheless. landslide or sinkhole inventories). the theoretical approach and the already achieved marks can be shown. 4. Focus will be on a comparison of methods for mapping geological and water risks in the individual countries. karstification. First step is the evaluation of the “state of the art” in hazard mapping in each country involved. such as mass movements.1 Germany In Germany. slide. Therefore similarities should be worked out and the “least common denominator” in the methods of hazard mapping should be found. each participant gave a short overview of the official used danger. at this time no final results can be presented.” 4.und Lawinenverbauung.g. danger maps serve as a first estimation of possible natural hazards caused by certain geological conditions and should serve as a planning reference for possible investigations of individual objects where necessary. These are generated by the Austrian Service for Torrent and Avalanche Control (Forsttechnischer Dienst für Wildbach. which rather sounds like a legal term. landslides or flooding. harmonise and improve different methods of hazard zone planning applied in the Alpine area. methods to adapt risk analysis to the impact of climate change will be tested. Areas within the immediate vicinity of danger fields can also be affected. Two main questions remained to be answered: • What kinds of danger. • Commonly shared technical data of the subject area mass movements and subrosion / karst with information about the date of origin. This second step is to be discussed in detail in the next workshop at the end of 2010. which includes the results of this “harmonisation”. Short summary from the “expert-contributions” in Bolzano In the following sections. Therefore the progress of the glossary was only addressed inside a short presentation at the beginning of this meeting. hazard and risk maps”. flow and subrosion processes are recorded in the inventories. assessed and spatially represented using a common minimum standard. This should support the development of hazard zone planning towards a climate change adaptation strategy.2 Austria At this time there is no regulatory framework or technical norm concerning mass movements in Austria. the involved experts decided to switch to word standards with “requirements”. In selected model regions. The results will be summarized in a synthesis report (www. 4. it is recommended adding the following annotations for each subject area: “The following map was created for a 1:25. A glossary will facilitate transdisciplinary and translingual cooperation as well as support the harmonisation of the various methods. geogenic natural hazards. hazard and risk maps”. So this legal character is avoided and the final report will include a part with “minimum requirements to the creation of danger. as well as building ground that is affected by subsidence and uplift. The second step will be the “harmonisation” of the different methods used in several countries. about the land use and about damage. topographic peculiarities) are not taken into consideration in every case. The final part will be the creation of a report. In Germany.000 scale and is not precise. The two main goals are the elaboration of a “multilingual glossary to landslides” and the development of “minimum standards to create danger.1 under the leadership of the Bavarian Environment Agency (LfU) in collaboration with the alpS – Centre for Natural Hazard and Risk Management in Innsbruck and with the inputs from the international experts of the project partners. The recorded data in the inventories should have a minimal nationwide standards and are divided into: • Main data on the topic area mass movements and subrosion / karst with information about the spatial positioning. AdaptAlp will evaluate. Within the hearing in Bolzano. However the title of the project contained the term “minimum standards”. It serves as a first estimation of possible engineering geological hazards and cannot replace a geotechnical survey. The official description of WP 5 shows two main parts (goals). On the danger map. the plenum discussed the possible commitment of such a report for each country.6 of this publication. Because of these reasons. Hazard mapping in the Alpine regions At the beginning of this chapter.adaptalp. which are worked out in Action 5. hazard and risk maps are officially applied in each country? • Which standards are these maps based on? To answer these questions. It can handle only one type of hazard or more and cover one or several municipalities. Finally. In settlements.uk). As a component of the Geoworks of the IGC. all new construction is forbidden. 4. And then there are states that can rely on a lot of digitally available data and are working on generating landslide susceptibility maps. At the beginning of ‘70s the land use management was transferred to regions. but also to floods and snow avalanches. the federal states are all following a different course of action.7 Spain (Catalonia) The Parliament of Catalonia approved. It is a national program of landslides inventory. 2) Secondly.000 landslides. Sudden slope movements with velocities up to 40 m/s are also observed (e.ac.g. the strategic program 4. enforce rules and obligations addressing landslide hazard reduction: only existing hamlets and villages can extend on dormant landslides.000 (MPRGC25M). residual danger (yellow-white zone) and no danger (white zone). 183/1989 introduced land use planning at a basin scale. building codes. The techniques de prévention des risques naturels prévisibles PPR) established by the law of 2 February 1995 is the “central” tool of the French State's action in preventing natural hazards. three kinds of measures can be then taken (third step): planning measures. The status of available data is very different in the individual states.3 Italy (Piemonte. and is therefore a frequent bone of contention. The nontechnical. The government sets the standards and general aims without fixing a methodology to analyse and evaluate the dangers. restricts the usability of this map. technical measures and organizational measures. on active ones. In the frame of this common procedure. After the Aberfan disaster (where 144 people. but excludes debris flows. being often obsolete. landslides. collapse. moderate danger (blue zone). a 1:5. Also the role of municipalities was defined to carry out the planning within three years. 4. and associated mud flows. Active and dormant landslides take some 6% of the national surface.600 landslide events.4 Switzerland The plan for prevention of natural hazards (plan Switzerland is a hazard-prone country exposed to many mass movements. Emilia-Romagna. a general methodological guidelines document has been published. sponsored by national authorities and made locally by the regions. The most important mapping plan is the Geological Hazard Prevention Map of Catalonia 1:25. the UK Government were not interested in Geohazards. zoning. preventive measures are of particular importance: land-use planning. n. rock falls. It is the first try of an inventory based on common graphical legend and glossary. The Emilia-Romagna Landslide Inventory Map (LIM) reports over 70.000 scale and in other regions a 1:10. the use of a purely descriptive terminology (active. ac. An inventory is the first step in building an understanding of the occurrence of geohazards. which approves it after formal consultation of municipalities and a public inquiry. From this understanding susceptibility can be assessed. BGS developed a nationwide susceptibility assessment of deterministic geohazards such as landslides. 116 of them children).Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 162 As there are no legal instructions or standards in Austria about if or how to deal with the evaluation of mass movements. they were more interested in finding oil and gas to help the UK economy develop and expand.bgs. the UK government were much more interested and funded a number of research projects to look at the UK’s geohazards. 4. 3267/1923) were the first public regulations on land use planning. the creation of the Geological Institute of Catalonia (IGC). with Law 19/2005. Five classes of hazard are determined in Switzerland: high danger (red zone). hazard assessment implies the determination of magnitude or intensity over time. The national Law n. dormant).uk/products/geosure/). skrink-swell. hazards and risks related to natural phenomena.5 France documents is dedicated to geological hazards. while the historical data base contains about 6. assigned to the Ministry of Land Planning and Public Infrastructures (DPTOP) of the Catalonian Government. sinking. The elaboration of the PPR is conducted under the authority of the prefect of the department. In the federal state law from 11 August 1997. Province Bolzano) In Italy the national law (high level. the base for the approval of guidelines to the creation of hazard plans (Gefahrenzonenpläne) for South Tyrol was laid. rock avalanches). 3) Based on the hazard maps and risk analysis. Currently BGS maintains two main shallow geohazard databases: the National Landslide and Karst Database (www. 4. an indispensable prerequisite for the landslide hazard identification is obtaining information about past slope failure events: the maps of phenomena and the registration of events (database). Otherwise. One of these guideline Seite 163 . Most of the landslides are very slow or slow reaching some millimetres to centimetres of displacement per year. a tool for planning actions and rules for conservation and protection of the territory. The same law designated the Autorità di Bacino (Basin Authority) whose main goal is to draw up the Basin Plan. The federal laws came into force in 1991 and are based on an integrated approach to protect people and property from natural hazards. based on this. LIM may be considered as an elementary form of a hazard map and. One of the available tools produced by ARPA Piemonte is the Italian Landslides Inventory (IFFI). The PPR is achieved by involving local and regional concerned authorities from the beginning of its preparation. etc.bgs. (n. The reference documents in Switzerland are the natural hazard maps. which includes subsidence. hydrological hazards and avalanches are analyzed. In some of the federal states almost no data is available.6 England Up until 1966. The scale of this legal binding hazard plan (“Gefahrenzonenplan”) in South Tyrol tends to the working level of detail for the analyzed area. for developing these maps are outlined in the federal guideline where a three step procedure is proposed: 1) Firstly.000 scale is used and landslides. These inventories provide the basis for analysing the spatial distribution of the geohazard and their causal factors. the approval of plans and the role of coinvolved partners are also part of this law. 445/1908) and Royal Decree R. In 2002. low danger (yellow zone).D. called GeoSure (http://www. others have a lot of data but not digitally available. 000 (St.000 1:2.000 1:5. 1:10.000 to 1:2.000 1:10.0001:25. danger map (Gefahrenhinweiskarte) hazard index map Hazard map 1:10.000 1:5.000 yes 1:25.000 (K.000 1:1. regional).000.000 1:10. 1:2.000 1:10.000-1:2. 1:10.000 to 1:5.000-1:50.000 1:200.000 or bigger (M3) 1:25.000-1:50.000 and bigger 1:10. >1:50.000 and bigger 1:10.000 hazard Detailed Study (Detailstudie) Hazard zone map (Gefahrenzonenkarte) Hazard zone map of the development plan Map of potential damage risk Vulnerability map Risk zoning map.000 to 1:50.000 Map of phenomena 1:50.000 1:250.000 1:5. risk map Fig.000 France France Spain Catalonia 1:10.000 1:10.000 1:5.000 (M2).000 or 1:10.000 1:25.000 (2009) 1:25. Bleiberg: 1:10.000 1:10.000 and 1:25.0001:50. 1: Comparison of different maps and their scales Abb.000 Slovenia Slovenia Arpa Piemonte 1:10.000-1:10.000 Emilia Romagna 1:10. 1:10.000 UK UK variable Inventory map inventory 1:25.000 1:5.000 1:50. 1:2.1:10.000 1:25.000 to 1:50.000-1:2.000 Italy South Tyrol 1:5.000 or bigger (M3) GBA and Kärnten large scale 1:5.000 Municipal 1:25.000-1:2.0001:25..000 1:5.000 1:10.0001:25. 1:10. 1:5.000 1:100.000 Multi-temporal inventory map 1:10.000 1:5.000 variable scales 1:10.000 1:10.000.000 1:250.000 1:5.000 or more not smaller than 1:50.000 1:5.000 1:10.000. 1:50.000 1:10.000 1:250.000 (M1).000 1:5. local) K.000 (2000) 1:5. 1: Vergleich unterschiedlicher Karten und deren Maßstab Seite 165 .000.000.000-1:50.000 suscepti-bility Map of area of activity Landslide susceptibility map.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 164 Comparison of different maps and their scales Austria Level basic Type of map Geomorphologic map Geotechnical map Engineering geological map Level of attention 1:5.000 (landslides) WLV Germany Bayern Switzerland CH variable scales 1:200.0001:10.000. usually 1:2.000 (M1).000 1:10.000 1:25.000-1:50.000 1:50.000 (M2).000 1:25.0001:10. …) x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Ger By x x x x x x x x x x x x x CH SLO EmRo AP ST F UK Catalan CH SLO Italy F UK ES Seite 166 K x x rock mass structure joints joint spacing discontinuities structural contributions Land cover Land use Hydrogeology Relationship to rainfall Classification of mass movements (not specified) Classification type rate of movement material water content Causes Trigger Precursory signs (fissures..) slope position approx. debris) geotechnical parameters (shear.…) Degree of precision of information Certainty/ reliability of information Investigations. reports. aerial photo-interpretation.…) Silent witnesses Rock fall: shadow angle Rock fall: (geometric) slope gradient Damage "Hazard" to infrastructure Remedial measures Costs of rem. Measures Costs of investigation Method used to gather info (field survey.Comparison of information collected for different inventories Characteristics Austria GBA Inventory x national scale regional scale study/ detailed scale geometry (width... original slope positional accuracy site description depth to bedrock depth to basal failure plane slope aspect slope Geology in general Geology. documentation.. 2: Comparison of characteristics and information collected for different inventories and maps Abb.) Basic information where when what why who reported when Landslide conditions activity ( number of events. length. references included Bibliography included Fig. 2: Vergleich von Charakteristiken und eingehende Informationen für unterschiedliche Inventare und Karte x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Seite 167 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x . specified geologic unit tectonic unit lithology stratigraphy bedding attitude weathering geotechnical properties (rock. based thereon. Hazard and Risk maps”. “susceptibility” (e.. dt. M.. pedological and geothematic information concerning the whole of the territory in the suitable scales for the land and urban planning. Stuttgart. Ges. These processes are generated by external geodynamics (such as slope.000) and a “debris-flow susceptibility map” (scale 1:250. The information is displayed by different maps on each published sheet. 87-104. Poschinger. Geologija.Hazard assessment and mapping of mass-movements in the EU Seite 168 aimed to acquiring. P. D. Seite 169 . BOLLINGER. Anschrift der Verfasser / Authors’ addresses: Karl Mayer Bavarian Environment Agency (LfU) (Office Munich) Lazarettstraße 67 80636 Munich – GERMANY Bernhard Lochner alpS – Centre for Natural Hazard and Risk Management Grabenweg 3 6020 Innsbruck . 1). Keith Turner & Robert L. Krapp. L. evidence. 295-309. & VARNES.000.. phenomena. Washington: National Academy Press. Geowiss.J. In the MPRGC. All the characteristics used in any involved country (e. & RIBIČIČ. June 2010 RAETZO. H. B. and includes landslide. M.8 Slovenia Legislation. hazard map) to “risk” (e. Leppig. KOMAC. 49/2. Patula. 48/2. Slovenia. M...g. TRIPET. M. Z. (2006): Novelacija in nadgradnja informacijskega sistema o zemeljskih plazovih in vključitev v bazo GIS_UJME : končno poročilo. & KOSMATIN FRAS. KOMAC. Finally. coastal and flood dynamics) and internal (seismic) geodynamics. susceptibility and natural hazards of geological processes are represented.M. (2009): Debris-flow susceptibility model of Slovenia at scale 1: 250.g. medium (orange) and low (yellow). J. MAYER.. GVOZDANOVIČ. A. a matrix (see Fig. (2005): Probabilistic model of slope mass movement susceptibility . M. Furthermore. P. Geologija. O.000.. The main map is presented on a scale of 1:25..000) is elaborated by the Geological Survey of Slovenia. 5.. Schuster (eds). T.. “CatchRisk”. Thom. Heidelberg. Program Interreg IIIb – Alpine Space. The final report on the whole project will include a chapter with the decided minimum requirements to the creation of “Danger. elaborating. This project started in 2007. Work Package 2: Landslide hazard assessment (Rockfall modelling). KOMEL. S.g. A. MIKOŠ. Geologija. In A. FAJFAR. & POSCHINGER.. torrent. (Hrsg. but a common methodology and procedures to prevent geologyrelated natural disasters does not exist yet. (2006): Landslide susceptibility map of Slovenia at scale 1:250. inventory map). RIBIČIČ. the final minimum requirements should be fixed in the next workshop on December 2010 in Munich. & GLADE. spatial and statistical analysis. M. of Engineering Geology and the Environment 61(3): 263-268.000. susceptibility map) and “hazard” (e. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za gradbeništvo in geodezijo (in Slovene). M. in a first step the big variety of maps applied in the several regions was summarized in one table (see Fig. KOMAC.P. To solve this problem. KOMAC. snow. (1996): Landslide types and processes. Bull. D. 454 S. inventory) form the basis for the definition of minimum requirements to “hazard mapping”. K. Š. p. The updated Act on Spatial planning from 2007.a case study of Bovec municipality. Landslide investigation and mitigation: 36-75.. the “state of the art in hazard mapping“ in the involved countries isn’t in balance.. M. KUMELJ. Transportation Research Board. out of these two matrices a recommendation will be created and. RAVNIK. This fact was also confirmed inside the “Expert Hearing” in Bolzano. FELGENTREFF.g. At the moment for Slovenia. planning and prevention measures are not satisfying in the field of landslides in Slovenia and the primary activities are still focused on remediation instead on the prevention measures. MIKLAVČIČ. 119-128. Spektrum Akademischer Verlag. MAYER. geomorphologic maps) over “inventories” (e. (2002): Hazard assessment in Switzerland – codes of practice for mass movements. D. Slovenia. & RIBIČIČ. von (2005): Final Report and Guidelines: Mitigation of Hydro-Geological Risk in Alpine Catchments. T.. D. 52/1. 10 figs. M. risk map). von (2010): Danger Map for the Bavarian Alps. 4. avalanche and flood hazard. Hazard level is qualitatively classified as high (red). It is structured into different levels and the associated type of maps. 2) with specified characteristics and information collected for different maps was created out of the great wealth of information given at the hearing in Bolzano. M. LATELTIN. integrating and disseminating the basic geological. Conclusion As mentioned in the introduction of this article. a probabilistic model of slope mass movement susceptibility for the Bovec municipality in north-western Slovenia was developed based on the expert geohazard map at scale 1:25.000 and several other relevant influence factors. D.. 311-340. The levels lasting from “basic” (e.AUSTRIAText Literatur / References: CRUDEN. The methods used to analyze hazards basically consist of geomorphologic. a “landslide susceptibility map” (scale 1:250. 161/2. K. In addition to this.g. C..) (2008): Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen. In particular. this table should help to find accordance’s between the different approaches. This chart builds the basis for further actions concerning the creation of minimum requirements.g. special report 247. governing natural disasters also discusses problems with mass movements.. Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft Abteilung IV/5 Marxergasse 3 1030 Wien Tel. MBA Bundesministerium für Land.und Forstwirtschaft.7334 Fax: 01/71100 .Seite 170 AdaptAlp DI Maria Patek.: 01/711 00 .at
[email protected] E-Mail: die.