Landslide Hazard Mitigation in North America

Wieczorek, Gerald F.; Leahy, P. P.

doi:10.2113/gseegeosci.14.2.133

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There may also be a control on the data set imposed by the economic and social ability of a country or area to invest in landslide mitigation (e.g., Wieczorek and Leahy, 2008). Thus, Italy, which has a long history of signifi cant fatal landslides, does not show a particularly high occurrence of events over this period, probably because of successful landslide mitigation programs (e.g., Guzzetti, 2000), although this may refl ect the comparatively short time series for what is a "noisy" data set at the individual country level.…”

Section: The Spatial Distribution Of Fatal Landslidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global patterns of loss of life from landslides

Petley¹

2012

Geology

1,211

561

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Spatial Distribution Of Fatal Landslidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global patterns of loss of life from landslides

Petley¹

2012

Geology

1,211

561

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Noteworthy is that the only scientific and technical innovation cited in literature is the identification of rainfall thresholds that might trigger LS. Countries where rainfall thresholds have been identified are: Ecuador (Ibadango et al, 2007), India (Bhusan et al, 2014), Jamaica (Miller et al, 2009), Malaysia (Althuwaynee et al, 2014), Mexico (Antinao and Farfan, 2013) and Puerto Rico (Wieczorek and Leahy, 2008).…”

Section: Drr Componentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Landslide risk reduction measures: A review of practices and challenges for the tropics

Maes

Kervyn

Hontheim

et al. 2017

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The overall objective of this review is to gain insights into landslide risk reduction measures that are applied or recommended in tropical landslide-prone countries, and the challenges at play. More specifically, this review aims to (i) presenting an overview of recent studies on landslides and landslide risk reduction in these countries, (ii) exploring the factors controlling the publication output on landslides and landslide risk reduction, (iii) reviewing the various landslide risk reduction measures recommended and implemented, and (iv) identifying the bottlenecks for the implementation of these strategies. A compilation of recommended and implemented landslide risk reduction measures in 99 landslide-prone tropical countries was made, based on an extensive review of scientific literature (382 publications). The documented measures are analysed using a scheme of risk reduction measures that combines classifications of the Hyogo Framework for Action and the SafeLand project. Our literature review shows that the factors influencing the number of publications on landslides and landslide risk reduction per country are (in order of importance) the absolute physical exposure of people to landslides, the population number and the Human Development Index of a country. The ratio of publications on landslide risk reduction versus publications on landslides for landslide-prone tropical countries does not vary much between these countries (average: 0.28). A significant fraction (0.30) of all known landslide hazard reduction measures are neither implemented nor recommended according to our review. The most recommended landslide risk reduction component is ‘risk management and vulnerability reduction’ (0.38). However, the most implemented component is ‘risk assessment’ (0.57). Overall, the ratio of implemented versus recommended landslide risk reduction measures in the tropics is low (<0.50) for most landslide risk reduction components, except for ‘risk assessment’ (3.01). The most cited bottlenecks for implementing landslide risk reduction measures are scientific (0.30) and political (0.29) in nature.

show abstract

“…The resulting strategy was termed "a framework for loss reduction" and received review and support from the National Research Council (Committee on Review of the National Landslide Hazards Mitigation Strategy, 2004). The elements of this strategy are identified as: (1) research, (2) hazard mapping and assessments, (3) real-time monitoring, (4) loss assessment, (5) information collection, interpretation, and dissemination, (6) guidelines and training, (7) public awareness and education, (8) implementation of loss reduction measures, and (9) emergency preparedness, response, and recovery (Spiker and Gori, 2003;Wieczorek and Leahy, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overview map showing landslide incidence and susceptibility in the conterminous United States with the abbreviations for states added indicating those state geological surveys providing the widest range of landslide hazard information to the public (modified fromWieczorek and Leahy, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Landslide Risk Reduction in the United States—Signs of Progress

Graff¹,

Burns²,

McConnell³

2016

Environmental & Engineering Geoscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific literature is replete with papers describing advances in applying new technologies to the study of landslides and advances in our understanding of factors affecting landslide occurrence, distribution, and movement. Far fewer papers look at how this knowledge is implemented to achieve landslide risk reduction. State and local governments exercise the greatest control on how landslide risk reduction is accomplished. Data generated from a questionnaire to state geological surveys, review of their agency Web sites, and two case studies demonstrate that progress has been made during the last 20 years in implementing actionable policy changes and programs to achieve a reduction is landslide risk in the United States. Progress is evident from the pivotal role played by state and local government in the areas of: (1) developing guidelines and training, (2) increasing public awareness and education, (3) implementing loss reduction measures, and (4) conducting emergency preparedness, response, and recovery. The number of states requiring registration for practicing geologists has nearly doubled during the last 20 years. This increase was accompanied by a shift from individual state tests as part of determining competency to a uniform national test. During this period, state geological surveys established Web sites as a primary means for promoting public awareness and education about landslide hazards. Measures reducing the impact of landslides have included providing information specific to residents and landowners, as well as supporting land-use planning efforts by local governments. Many state geological surveys are involved with emergency management of landslide hazards.

show abstract

Landslide Hazard Mitigation in North America

Abstract: Active landslides throughout the states and territories of the United States result in extensive property loss and 25-50 deaths per year.

Cited by 16 publications

References 40 publications

Global patterns of loss of life from landslides

Global patterns of loss of life from landslides

Landslide risk reduction measures: A review of practices and challenges for the tropics

Landslide Risk Reduction in the United States—Signs of Progress

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About