滑坡易感性和风险分析的地理空间情报:来自NH31A和东锡金喜马拉雅定居点的见解

Sk Asraful Alam , Sujit Mandal , Ramkrishna Maiti
{"title":"滑坡易感性和风险分析的地理空间情报:来自NH31A和东锡金喜马拉雅定居点的见解","authors":"Sk Asraful Alam ,&nbsp;Sujit Mandal ,&nbsp;Ramkrishna Maiti","doi":"10.1016/j.nhres.2024.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Slope instability is a serious concern in the Sikkim Himalayas. The town and numerous road segments along National Highway 31A were ravaged by multiple landslides that occurred in the nearby region. A bivariate statistical method known as frequency ratio (FR), information value (IV), and certainty factor (CF) analysis was employed in this work to examine landslide risk assessment (LRA) and landslide susceptibility zonation (LSZ) maps in the Rorachu watershed. This study represents the first comprehensive analysis of landslide risk in the populated areas of East Sikkim and along NH31A, offering a deeper understanding of the risks involved and contributing to the enhancement of local resilience against landslide hazards. A total of 153 different landslide locations were mapped using Google Earth and GIS software; 30% (46) of these locations were used to validate the models, and 70% of these (107) served as training data for the FR, IV, and CF models. The thirteen landslide causative factors (geology, soil, elevations, slope, curvature, drainage density (DD), road density (RD), rainfall, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), land use land cover (LULC), topographic position index (TPI), stream power index (SPI), and topographic wetness index (TWI)) were extracted from a spatial database for LSZ mapping. Landslides were most prevalent on slopes (35°–50°), heights (2500–4100 ​m), and rainfall (2000–2500 ​mm and 3000–3300 ​mm). The area under the curves (AUC) for the FR, IV, and CF models are 0.925 (92.50%), 0.846 (84.60%), and 0.868 (86.20%), respectively. The prediction rates are shown by the AUCs for the FR, IV, and CF models, which are 0.828 (82.8%), 0.750 (%), and 0.836 (83.60%), respectively. According to the landslide risk assessment (LRA), the FR (20.75%), IV (40.91%) and CF (18.78%) models showed high risk on Highway 31A, while the FR (9.05%), IV (38.59%) and CF (20.90%) models showed high risk in densely populated areas. These landslide risk and vulnerability maps can be used to develop land use planning strategies that can save lives and are useful for planners and mitigation measures. Special attention should be paid to urbanization, highway construction, and deforestation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100943,"journal":{"name":"Natural Hazards Research","volume":"5 1","pages":"Pages 187-208"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Geospatial intelligence for landslide susceptibility and risk analysis: Insights from NH31A and east Sikkim Himalaya settlements\",\"authors\":\"Sk Asraful Alam ,&nbsp;Sujit Mandal ,&nbsp;Ramkrishna Maiti\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.nhres.2024.10.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Slope instability is a serious concern in the Sikkim Himalayas. The town and numerous road segments along National Highway 31A were ravaged by multiple landslides that occurred in the nearby region. A bivariate statistical method known as frequency ratio (FR), information value (IV), and certainty factor (CF) analysis was employed in this work to examine landslide risk assessment (LRA) and landslide susceptibility zonation (LSZ) maps in the Rorachu watershed. This study represents the first comprehensive analysis of landslide risk in the populated areas of East Sikkim and along NH31A, offering a deeper understanding of the risks involved and contributing to the enhancement of local resilience against landslide hazards. A total of 153 different landslide locations were mapped using Google Earth and GIS software; 30% (46) of these locations were used to validate the models, and 70% of these (107) served as training data for the FR, IV, and CF models. The thirteen landslide causative factors (geology, soil, elevations, slope, curvature, drainage density (DD), road density (RD), rainfall, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), land use land cover (LULC), topographic position index (TPI), stream power index (SPI), and topographic wetness index (TWI)) were extracted from a spatial database for LSZ mapping. Landslides were most prevalent on slopes (35°–50°), heights (2500–4100 ​m), and rainfall (2000–2500 ​mm and 3000–3300 ​mm). The area under the curves (AUC) for the FR, IV, and CF models are 0.925 (92.50%), 0.846 (84.60%), and 0.868 (86.20%), respectively. The prediction rates are shown by the AUCs for the FR, IV, and CF models, which are 0.828 (82.8%), 0.750 (%), and 0.836 (83.60%), respectively. According to the landslide risk assessment (LRA), the FR (20.75%), IV (40.91%) and CF (18.78%) models showed high risk on Highway 31A, while the FR (9.05%), IV (38.59%) and CF (20.90%) models showed high risk in densely populated areas. These landslide risk and vulnerability maps can be used to develop land use planning strategies that can save lives and are useful for planners and mitigation measures. Special attention should be paid to urbanization, highway construction, and deforestation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Natural Hazards Research\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 187-208\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Natural Hazards Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666592124000738\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Natural Hazards Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666592124000738","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

斜坡失稳是锡金喜马拉雅地区的一个严重问题。附近地区发生的多次山体滑坡破坏了该镇和31A国道沿线的许多路段。采用双变量统计方法,即频率比(FR)、信息值(IV)和确定性因子(CF)分析,对罗罗楚流域的滑坡风险评估(LRA)和滑坡易感性区划(LSZ)图进行了检验。该研究首次对东锡金人口稠密地区和NH31A沿线的滑坡风险进行了全面分析,对所涉及的风险有了更深入的了解,并有助于提高当地对滑坡灾害的抵御能力。利用谷歌Earth和GIS软件绘制了153个不同的滑坡位置;这些位置中的30%(46个)用于验证模型,其中70%(107个)作为FR、IV和CF模型的训练数据。从空间数据库中提取13个滑坡成因因子(地质、土壤、高程、坡度、曲率、排水密度(DD)、道路密度(RD)、降雨、归一化植被差指数(NDVI)、土地利用土地覆盖(LULC)、地形位置指数(TPI)、河流功率指数(SPI)和地形湿度指数(TWI),用于LSZ制图。滑坡在坡度(35°-50°)、高度(2500-4100米)和降雨量(2000-2500毫米和3000-3300毫米)最常见。FR、IV和CF模型的曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.925(92.50%)、0.846(84.60%)和0.868(86.20%)。FR、IV和CF模型的auc预测率分别为0.828(82.8%)、0.750(%)和0.836(83.60%)。根据滑坡风险评价(LRA),在31A高速公路上FR(20.75%)、IV(40.91%)和CF(18.78%)模型的危险性较高,而在人口密集地区FR(9.05%)、IV(38.59%)和CF(20.90%)模型的危险性较高。这些滑坡风险和脆弱性地图可用于制定土地使用规划战略,这些战略可以挽救生命,并有助于规划人员和采取缓解措施。应特别注意城市化、公路建设和森林砍伐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Geospatial intelligence for landslide susceptibility and risk analysis: Insights from NH31A and east Sikkim Himalaya settlements

Geospatial intelligence for landslide susceptibility and risk analysis: Insights from NH31A and east Sikkim Himalaya settlements
Slope instability is a serious concern in the Sikkim Himalayas. The town and numerous road segments along National Highway 31A were ravaged by multiple landslides that occurred in the nearby region. A bivariate statistical method known as frequency ratio (FR), information value (IV), and certainty factor (CF) analysis was employed in this work to examine landslide risk assessment (LRA) and landslide susceptibility zonation (LSZ) maps in the Rorachu watershed. This study represents the first comprehensive analysis of landslide risk in the populated areas of East Sikkim and along NH31A, offering a deeper understanding of the risks involved and contributing to the enhancement of local resilience against landslide hazards. A total of 153 different landslide locations were mapped using Google Earth and GIS software; 30% (46) of these locations were used to validate the models, and 70% of these (107) served as training data for the FR, IV, and CF models. The thirteen landslide causative factors (geology, soil, elevations, slope, curvature, drainage density (DD), road density (RD), rainfall, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), land use land cover (LULC), topographic position index (TPI), stream power index (SPI), and topographic wetness index (TWI)) were extracted from a spatial database for LSZ mapping. Landslides were most prevalent on slopes (35°–50°), heights (2500–4100 ​m), and rainfall (2000–2500 ​mm and 3000–3300 ​mm). The area under the curves (AUC) for the FR, IV, and CF models are 0.925 (92.50%), 0.846 (84.60%), and 0.868 (86.20%), respectively. The prediction rates are shown by the AUCs for the FR, IV, and CF models, which are 0.828 (82.8%), 0.750 (%), and 0.836 (83.60%), respectively. According to the landslide risk assessment (LRA), the FR (20.75%), IV (40.91%) and CF (18.78%) models showed high risk on Highway 31A, while the FR (9.05%), IV (38.59%) and CF (20.90%) models showed high risk in densely populated areas. These landslide risk and vulnerability maps can be used to develop land use planning strategies that can save lives and are useful for planners and mitigation measures. Special attention should be paid to urbanization, highway construction, and deforestation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信