No abstract

International audienceThe severity of the impact of a natural hazard on a society depends on, among other factors, the intensity of the hazard and the exposure and resistance ability of the elements at risk (e.g., persons, buildings and infrastructures). Social conditions strongly influence the vulnerability factors for both direct and indirect impact and therefore control the possibility to transform the occurrence of a natural hazard into a natural disaster. This article presents a model to assess the relative socioeconomic vulnerability to landslides at the local to regional scale. The model applies an indicator-based approach. The indicators represent the underlying factors that influence a community's ability to prepare for, deal with, and recover from the damage and loss associated with landslides. The proposed model includes indicators that characterize the demographic, social and economic setting as well as indicators representing the degree of preparedness, effectiveness of the response and capacity to recover. Although this model focuses primarily on the indirect losses, it could easily be extended to include physical indicators accounting for the direct losses. Each indicator is individually ranked from 1 (lowest vulnerability) to 5 (highest vulnerability) and weighted, based on its overall degree of influence. The final vulnerability estimate is formulated as a weighted average of the individual indicator scores. The proposed model is applied for six case studies in Europe. The case studies demonstrate that the method gives a reasonable ranking of the vulnerability. The practical experience achieved through the case studies shows that the model is straightforward for users with knowledge on landslide locations and with access to local census data

Landslides are a serious problem for humans and infrastructure in many parts of Europe. Experts know to a certain degree which parts of the continent are most exposed to landslide hazard. Nevertheless, neither the geographical location of previous landslide events nor knowledge of locations with high landslide hazard necessarily point out the areas with highest landslide risk. In addition, landslides often occur unexpectedly and the decisions on where investments should be made to manage and mitigate future events are based on the need to demonstrate action and political will. The goal of this study was to undertake a uniform and objective analysis of landslide hazard and risk for Europe. Two independent models, an expert-based or heuristic and a statistical model (logistic regression), were developed to assess the landslide hazard. Both models are based on applying an appropriate combination of the parameters representing susceptibility factors (slope, lithology, soil moisture, vegetation cover and other-factors if available) and triggering factors (extreme precipitation and seismicity). The weights of different susceptibility and triggering factors are calibrated to the information available in landslide inventories and physical processes. The analysis is based on uniform gridded data for Europe with a pixel resolution of roughly 30 m 9 30 m. A validation of the two hazard models by organizations in Scotland, Italy, and Romania showed good agreement for shallow landslides and rockfalls, but the hazard models fail to cover areas with slow moving landslides. In general, the results from the two models agree well pointing out the same countries with the highest total and relative area exposed to landslides. Landslide risk was quantified by counting the number of exposed people and exposed kilometers of roads and railways in each country. This process was repeated for both models. The results show the highest relative exposure to landslides in small alpine countries such as Lichtenstein. In terms of total values on a national level, Italy scores highest in both the extent of exposed area and the number for exposed population. Again, results agree between the two models, but differences between the models are higher for the risk than for the hazard results. The analysis gives a good overview of the landslide hazard and risk hotspots in Europe and allows a simple ranking of areas where mitigation measures might be most effective.

No abstract

Abstract. Whilst the last decades have seen a clear shift in emphasis from managing natural hazards to managing risk, the majority of natural-hazard risk research still focuses on single hazards. Internationally, there are calls for more attention for multi-hazards and multi-risks. Within the European Union (EU), the concepts of multi-hazard and multi-risk assessment and management have taken centre stage in recent years. In this perspective paper, we outline several key developments in multi-(hazard-)risk research in the last decade, with a particular focus on the EU. We present challenges for multi-(hazard-)risk management as outlined in several research projects and papers. We then present a research agenda for addressing these challenges. We argue for an approach that addresses multi-(hazard-)risk management through the lens of sustainability challenges that cut across sectors, regions, and hazards. In this approach, the starting point is a specific sustainability challenge, rather than an individual hazard or sector, and trade-offs and synergies are examined across sectors, regions, and hazards. We argue for in-depth case studies in which various approaches for multi-(hazard-)risk management are co-developed and tested in practice. Finally, we present a new pan-European research project in which our proposed research agenda will be implemented, with the goal of enabling stakeholders to develop forward-looking disaster risk management pathways that assess trade-offs and synergies of various strategies across sectors, hazards, and spatial scales.