Abstract

Despite the widespread application of landslide susceptibility analyses, there is hardly any information about whether or not the occurrence of recent landslide events was correctly predicted by the relevant susceptibility maps. Hence, the objective of this study is to evaluate four landslide susceptibility maps retrospectively in a landslide-prone area of the Swabian Alb (Germany). The predictive performance of each susceptibility map is evaluated based on a landslide event triggered by heavy rainfalls in the year 2013. The retrospective evaluation revealed significant variations in the predictive accuracy of the analyzed studies. Both completely erroneous as well as very precise predictions were observed. These differences are less attributed to the applied statistical method and more to the quality and comprehensiveness of the used input data. Furthermore, a literature review of 50 peer-reviewed articles showed that most landslide susceptibility analyses achieve very high validation scores. 73% of the analyzed studies achieved an area under curve (AUC) value of at least 80%. These high validation scores, however, do not reflect the high uncertainty in statistical susceptibility analysis. Thus, the quality assessment of landslide susceptibility maps should not only comprise an index-based, quantitative validation, but also an additional qualitative plausibility check considering local geomorphological characteristics and local landslide mechanisms. Finally, the proposed retrospective evaluation approach cannot only help to assess the quality of susceptibility maps and demonstrate the reliability of such statistical methods, but also identify issues that will enable the susceptibility maps to be improved in the future.

Highlights

  • The overriding goal of this study is to provide a positive impulse for quality assessment of landslide susceptibility analysis by focusing on the calculation, and on the evaluation process

  • Considering the impact of inaccurate input data, lacking expert knowledge or the over- and underestimation of causative factors, more attention should be paid to the fact that the creation of the landslide susceptibility map, and the validation itself is prone to several inaccuracies and errors

  • Several authors still validate their results without splitting the landslide inventory, and the impact of the landslide inventory on the predictive accuracy is hardly ever considered

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The overriding goal of this study is to provide a positive impulse for quality assessment of landslide susceptibility analysis by focusing on the calculation, and on the evaluation process. We want to illustrate that the validation procedure of landslide susceptibility maps is not a burdensome obligation, but a chance to increase the reliability, transparency and—last but not least—the acceptance of such. 2620 fatal landslides occurred in the period from 2004 to 2010, claiming 32,322 victims (Petley 2012). The annual global damage from landslides is estimated at 18 billion euros (Haque et al 2016). In Europe, 476 deadly landslides claimed a total of 1370 fatalities in the period from 1995 to 2014. The average annual damage is estimated at 4.7 billion euros in Europe (Haque et al 2016) and 221 million euros in Germany (Klose et al 2016). It is expected that the number of fatal landslides will further increase. The reasons discussed are thawing of permafrost (Gruber and Haeberli 2007; Etzelmüller and Frauenfelder 2009), the increasing number

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call