Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Risk assessment of
simultaneous debris flows
in mountain townships
Peng Cui
CAS Key Lab. of Mountain Hazards and Earth Surface Process, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
Qiang Zou
CAS Key Lab. of Mountain Hazards and Earth Surface Process, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, China; University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, China; and Southwest
University of Science and Technology, China
Ling-zhi Xiang
Chongqing Jiaotong University, China
Chao Zeng
CAS Key Lab. of Mountain Hazards and Earth Surface Process, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, China; and University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
Abstract
Many mountain towns in China are located on the joint alluvial fans of multiple and adjacent past debris flows,
making them vulnerable to large, multiple, and simultaneous debris flows during heavy rainfall. Without
emergency management planning, such flows, often appearing with interconnecting and chain-reaction
processes, can lead to extensive loss of life and property. In the Wenchuan earthquake-affected area, such
disasters are common. We analyzed the compound effects of simultaneous debris flow events, and proposed
three quantitative methods of debris risk assessment based on kinetic energy, flow depth, and inundation
depth. Validated using a field study of actual debris flow disasters, these analyses are useful in determining
the type, quantity, distribution, economic worth, and susceptibility of hazard-affected objects in a region. Subsequently, we established a method to determine the vulnerability of different hazard-affected objects, particularly concerning the susceptibility indexes of buildings or structures. By analyzing the elements underlying
hazard formation conditions, damage potential, and the socio-economic conditions of mountain townships, we
proposed a systematic and quantitative method for risk analysis of mountain townships. Finally, the proposed
method was applied to a case study of Qingping Township, which was affected by 21 simultaneous debris flows
triggered by a 50-year return period precipitation event. The proposed method analyzed the superposition and
chain-reaction effects of disasters and divided the affected area of the township into three risk zones. The analysis indicated that the calculated risk zones coincide with the actual distribution and severity of damage in the
debris flow event, which suggests that the risk assessment is consistent with results from the actual disaster.
Corresponding author:
Peng Cui, 9#, Section 4, Renminnanlu Road, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan, Peoples Republic of China.
Email: pengcui@imde.ac.cn
Cui et al.
517
Keywords
debris flow, hazard analysis, risk assessment, vulnerability, Wenchuan earthquake
I Introduction
On 12 May 2008, a devastating mega-earthquake
of magnitude 8.0 struck the Wenchuan area in
northwestern Sichuan Province, China. The
Wenchuan earthquake caused subsequent debris
flows to be more active and occur on a larger
scale than in previous years (Cui et al., 2010;
You et al., 2010). Large-scale and simultaneous
debris flows caused by heavy rainfall commonly occur in such earthquake-prone areas.
Some large mountain towns in western China
are located on the alluvial fans of several adjacent debris flow catchments, and their similar
geological and geomorphological conditions
can cause simultaneous debris flows to develop
in these gullies during periods of locally heavy
rainfall. Moreover, these simultaneous debris
flows often lead to a complex process of damage
accompanied by multiple hazards, including
direct dynamic impact destruction, debris accumulation, and subsequent damage induced
by lifeline destruction and chain-reaction disasters that occur due to river blockages. The
destruction of Qingping Town, Yingxiu Town,
and Longchi Town by simultaneous debris
flows in August 2010 represents typical examples of this phenomenon (Table 1). Therefore,
it is vital to develop an accurate risk evaluation
of the effects of multiple, simultaneous, or conterminous debris flows on mountain towns.
Debris flow risk assessment plays a crucial role
in disaster prevention and mitigation. In recent
years, several studies have examined hazard and
risk assessment of debris flows (Hurlimann
et al., 2006; Jakob and Hungr, 2005). Generally,
debris flow risk analysis focuses on two scales:
regional studies and on-site or local-scale
studies. Debris flow risk analysis on a regional
scale provides a risk awareness of potential
regional hazards, and may satisfy the needs of
518
Location
Description
Debris flows, triggered by locally intensive rainfall, simultaneously
appeared in 21 catchments around Qingping Township, causing 12
deaths. The debris (about 400 million m3) blocked the Mianyuan River
and silted an area 3.5 km in length and 400500 m wide. The debris
raised the riverbed over 5 m, to a maximum thickness of 13 m in some
areas. Furthermore, the debris flow destroyed 479 houses recently
reconstructed after being destroyed in the Wenchuan earthquake.
Debris flows occurred in 43 catchments around the town of Longchi in
Dujiangyan County, destroying or seriously silting the buildings along
the nearby watercourse. In total, the debris flows damaged 182
houses, destroyed more than 311 ha of farmland and 3.35 km of
roads, and killed 2682 poultry.
Following heavy rain, a debris flow occurred in Hongchun Gully along
the upper reaches of the Min River, blocking water flow in the river.
Eventually, the backwater of the barrier lake submerged the Yingxiu
hydropower station, the Shaohuoping Bridge (a suspension bridge
upstream of the debris barrier), and national road G213.
Furthermore, the debris forced the main course of the Min River to
shift to the right, flooding Yingxiu town. The township had just been
reconstructed on the first river terrace after the Wenchuan
earthquake, and the new residential buildings and water supply
facilities were seriously damaged.
To date, some scientists have conducted preliminary research on multi-hazard risk assessment and mapping. Carrasco et al. (2003)
applied the Bayes conditioning probabilistic
method and GIS techniques to establish hazard
zoning in the Jerte Valley, Spain, which is subject to frequent landslides and floods. Considering six primary hazards, including shoreline
erosion, riverine flooding, storms, landslides,
seismicity and volcanism, and man-made structures, De Pippo et al. (2008) adopted a semiquantitative method to quantify, rank, and map
the distribution of hazards along the northern
Campanian coastal zone in Italy. PerlesRoselloy et al. (2010) proposed different methods for producing multi-hazard maps, including
a synthetic-hazard map, an aggregate-hazard
map, a stability map, and an accumulated risk
map. These studies improve knowledge of risk
assessment for multiple hazards, notwithstanding
that they focused on various hazards on an
Cui et al.
individual basis. However, each type of hazard displays unique damage characteristics due to idiographic, dynamic, and movement processes.
Consequently, it is difficult to consider the
compound and chain-reaction effects based on
dynamic processes of each hazard in a synthetic-risk assessment for multiple hazards.
Although some semi-quantitative hazard and risk
analysis methods are well established for several
natural hazards (Granger et al., 1999; Marzocchi
et al., 2009; De Pippo et al., 2008), few methods
are available for analyzing the simultaneous
occurrence of multiple debris flows. Therefore,
a method to quantitatively evaluate the risks of
simultaneous debris flows in mountain townships
is necessary in order to develop appropriate risk
management strategies.
This paper explores a new risk analysis
method for mountain towns subject to a group
of large-scale and simultaneously occurring
debris flows, by focusing on analysis of the
superposition effect and of the chain reaction
triggered by multiple debris flows. We propose
a set of hazard evaluation indicators based on
this method to describe the resulting damage.
Finally, we apply the proposed method to conduct a case study of Qingping Township, which
was significantly damaged by debris flows on
13 August 2010.
II Hazard characteristics of
simultaneous debris flows in
mountain townships
1 Simultaneous occurrence of debris flows
In China, many mountain towns are located on
the joint alluvial fans of several adjacent debris
flow catchments. According to investigation
and statistical analysis, more than 1000 such
towns are in Western China. Table 2 lists some
typical cities and towns in the region affected
by several adjacent debris flows. Dongchuan
Township resides just within the debris flow
hazardous area (Figure 1). Due to the similar
519
520
Lanzhou (capital
of Gansu
Province)
Zhouqu
Zhuanglang
Beichuan
Jiuzhaigou
Songpan
Huaying
Yaan (capital of
Yaan
prefecture)
Name of
city or town
No.
E106.44, N30.26
E102.97, N29.97
Sichuan
E103.61, N32.64
E104.23, N33.27
E104.44, N31.89
E106.06, N35.20
Sichuan
Sichuan
Sichuan
Sichuan
Gansu
E104.38, N 33.81
E103.51, N36.04
Gansu
Gansu
Location
Province
15
Number of
debris flows
Luwang Gully,
Ganxi Gully
Hongshui Gully,
Wuquanshan Gully,
Huangyu Gully, Jian
Gully, etc.
Luojiayu Gully, Sanyanyu
Gully, Dazai Gully
Name of debris
flow catchments
(continued)
Description
521
Ningnan
Maerkang (capital
of Aba Tibet
Autonomous
prefecture)
Jinchuan
Dongchuan
Qiaojia
10
11
12
13
Name of
city or town
No.
Table 2. (continued)
Yunnan
Yunnan
E102.92, N26.90
E103.12, N26.06
E 102.03 N 31.48
E102.22, N31.92
Sichuan
Sichuan
E102.76, N27.07
Location
Sichuan
Province
More than 10
Number of
debris flows
Dalangzu Gully,
Narisichazu Gully
Minjingzhongdui Gully
Sanjiacun Gully,
Chamuqiao Gully, etc.
Babuli Gully, Caijia Gully
Yangjuan Gully,
Yingyang Gully, Shenjia
Gully
Name of debris
flow catchments
Description
522
Figure 1. Dongchuan Township, located on the joint alluvial fan of six debris gullies, repeatedly suffered from
debris flows before it was controlled (SPOT-5 image). In 1964, debris flows simultaneously broke out in Shen
Gully and Shiyang Gully. The catastrophe resulted in eight deaths and the destruction of 300 ha of farmland.
Cui et al.
523
Figure 2. The spatial distribution of debris flows of Xijia Gully, Huashiban Gully, and Weijia Gully. Beichuan
Township is located in the dangerous zone of the three debris flows.
Source: National Administration of Surveying, Mapping, and Geoinfomation.
Figure 3. The debris flow activity and its disastrous results in Qushan Town of Beichuan County after the
earthquake. (A) Qushan Town after the earthquake (before debris flow). (B) Qushan Town after the debris
flow event on 24 September 2010. The debris flow ruined and buried many buildings.
524
downstream. The above successive disasters form a disaster chain called debris
flowbarrier lakeflood.
3. The third characteristic is the continuation of the disaster. Simultaneously
occurring large-magnitude debris flows
are likely to cause huge compound catastrophes and disaster chains. Those interconnecting and superposition hazards
often expand spatially and continue
successively.
The debris flow in Hongchun Gully is a typical
example of these three hazard characteristics. The
debris flow occurred on 14 August 2012, delivering a huge amount of debris that blocked the
watercourse of the Min River. The impounded
water behind the debris barrier submerged Yingxiu Hydropower station, Shaohuoping Bridge,
Cui et al.
525
Figure 5. Disaster chain induced by the debris flow that occurred in Hongchun Gully. The debris flow on 14
August 2010 destroyed and blocked national road G213, delivered debris, and formed a huge barrier in the
channel of Min River which pushed the main stream toward the right bank, and then caused a flood disaster in
the newly reconstructed Yingxiu Township.
Source: Sichuan Bureau of Surveying, Mapping, and Geoinfomation.
526
sgnu
m h2
gh
m h
p 3
B
2B v
kc v u2 v2
Sfy
sgnv
2
m h
gh
m h
where B is the yield stress (N/m2), m is
the density of the debris flow (t/m3); h is the
flow-depth (m), B is the viscous coefficient
(N.s/m2), and kc is the roughness coefficient.
The model treats debris flow masses as
aggregates of many small particles, each of
which has its own mass and velocity. To solve
equation (2) numerically, Hu and Wei (2005)
improved the particle model originally developed by Wang et al. (1997), while Cui et al.
(2011c) discussed the method and approximated the debris flow movement by using the
forward difference for each particle. The
Nni;j V
A
Cui et al.
527
can identify the deposition range and the thickness of each debris flow in the same coordinate
system, and obtain the total thickness of deposition by summing the thickness of each overlapping part.
In order to characterize quantitatively the largest impact hazard at each grid position, we index
the impact force and damage capability of a debris flow by applying the maximum kinetic
energy. This process allows us to calculate the
impact degree of each grid square for the entire
dynamic debris flow process. The simulation
starts from the gully mouth (at the top of the
alluvial fan) and is implemented by determining:
De A max u2 v2 h
t>0
Nn
1 Xij
uk
u
Nnij k1
Nn
1 Xij
vk
Nnij k1
proposed the following fundamental discriminant in order to identify whether a debris flow
has the capacity to block the main channel of
a river (Cui et al., 2006):
CM 1:1891 cos 2 3:677B =M
1nQM M =QB B 12:132
CF 0:8831 cos 2 2:587B =M
7
8
528
11
nQ
LM
0
R2=3 I 1=2
Af
14
2=3
1=2
Q
nQ
LM
0 R
I Bi
15
Df
where Q0 is the flow capacity of each selected
river cross-section (m3/s), R is the hydraulic
radius (m), I is the hydraulic slope, Bi is the
width of the river cross-section (m), and n is
roughness of river channel.
After identifying all the information concerning potential debris flow and flood inundation
damage, the distribution of the debris flows
destructive power, the debris flow depth, and
the dam-failure flood depth can be calculated
using GIS spatial analysis functions. This process thus provides a complete hazard zoning for
mountain townships. In general, the collapse of
an upstream debris dam often occurs after debris
flow has deposited debris in the township. In
order to calculate the inundation range of the
upstream dam-failure flood, we start with the
method proposed by Cui and Hu (Cui et al.,
2011c; Hu and Wei, 2005) to calculate the range
and depth of the debris flow deposit within the
urban area, then input the changed topographic
conditions of the silted township as a new
variable for calculating the inundation range and
flood depth of the dam-failure flood from
upstream. If one location suffers from several
hazards (e.g. impact force, silt buildup, and flood
inundation), the largest hazard value is selected
Cui et al.
to express the hazard degree in one hazard process, and then the sum of each individual largest
value of different hazard processes will represent
the total degree of hazard for that location.
529
16
17
hD
HC
18
530
Susceptibility Susceptibility
grades
values
Characteristics*
V
0.9*1.0
IV
0.8*0.9
Brick-wood
structure
Brick-concrete
structure
III
0.5*0.8
II
0.2*0.5
Steel reinforced
concrete
structure
0.1*0.2
*According to the Specification of Geological Investigation for Debris Flow Stabilization (DZ/T 0220-2006), four grades
of debris-flow magnitude are classified by the total runoff as small-scale debris flow for the total runoff less than
1104 m3, medium-scale debris flow for between 1104 m3 * 10104 m3, large-scale debris flow for between
10104 m3 * 100104 m3, and mega debris flow for larger than 100104 m3.
19
Cui et al.
531
Figure 6. Flow chart of the risk assessment process for debris flows.
b Data normalization method. According to equation (19), the degree of risk is the product of the
hazard degree and the degree of vulnerability.
Since the dimensions of the hazard index and
the vulnerability index are different, we must
normalize the hazard and vulnerability data.
We normalize the indexes by adopting the
following approach:
Hi
Vi
0
0
; Vi
20
Hi
Hmax
Vmax
0
532
where M(r) and V(r) are the mean value and variance of the evaluation indicators, respectively
(where i is the number of grades). If the value of
grid r falls in the range of [M(r), M(r) V(r)], the
indicator is regarded as medium level. In the same
way, the range >M(r) V(r) belongs to the high
category, and the range <M(r) identifies the low
category. Note that if more grades are required, i
can be assigned a larger number such as 4 or 5. This
method generates reasonable results and avoids
the negative effects caused by abnormal data.
d Risk mapping. Two kinds of hazards must be
determined to develop a debris flow risk map for
mountain townships: the impact and sediment
hazards directly resulting from the debris flow
and the indirect hazards such as dam-failure
floods and backwater inundation induced by
a debris flow barrier lake. Features such as the
distribution of risk degree, levels of risk, and
location of the risk zone are key factors in risk
mapping. Applying GIS-based multi-map algebra analysis (David, 2001) using ArcGIS 9.3,
we can calculate the distribution of the degree
of risk based on the results of the hazard and vulnerability analyses. Using the calculated data and
grading method described above, we establish
the three risk levels of high, medium, and low
risk, combining grids belonging to the same level
of risk and applying different colors to represent
each of the different levels. We can then use this
data to construct a map of risk zonation for debris
flows by constructing polygons in ArcGIS.
Cui et al.
533
Figure 7. Distribution of the debris flows that occurred simultaneously during a rainstorm on 13 August
2010. The clustered debris flows hit Qingping Township heavily.
3 Risk calculation
a Deposition range simulation. Through field survey data and visits with local people, we obtained
the basic parameters of the debris flows: length
of main channel, area of catchment, channel
slope, roughness coefficient of each channel,
534
Figure 8. Scenario of the debris flow disaster in Qingping Township on 13 August 2010.
Source: Land and Resources Department of Sichuan Province.
27:0
0:1
; 2:0 t=m3
1:635
4:42
; 2:0 t=m3
0:1
0:60
23
7:41
; 2:2 t=m3
1:394
45:0
; 2:2 t=m3
0:1
2:096
24
0:1
QP 1 QB DU
25
! = S
26
The simulated debris flow generates the spatial distribution of the velocity and flow depth
(Figure 10a) at each grid in the alluvial area,
with the deposition range provided by supporting GIS-based data conversion analysis using
ArcGIS 9.3. The simulated results show that
the debris flows in Luojia Gully, Wawa Gully,
Dongzi Gully, Linjia Gully, and Taiyang Gully
directly destroy buildings and bury roads, and
the debris flows in Wenjia Gully and Zoumaling Gully obviously block the Mianyuan River
and damage roads, farmland, and houses along
riverbanks. Using equation (12), we calculated
the maximum flood discharge at the dam site,
and the maximum discharge of river crosssection downstream of the barrier using equation (13). We then combined these results with
equations (14) and (15) by using ArcEngine
and C# to get the inundated area and flood
depth of each grid, as shown in Figure 10b.
b Hazard degree calculation. According to the
simulation results above, each component De,
Dh, Di, Df can be acquired through the hazard
analysis method in subsection III.1. Then, by
applying the normalization method from equation (20), the hazard degree (D) in the alluvial
area is calculated by applying equation (1), with
division values of 0.6 and 3.0 as given by
Cui et al.
535
Rheological
parameters
Kinematic
parameters
5.46
1.30
0.20
0.56
3.10
1.10
0.48
0.92
183.13
0.44
0.44
0.41
0.44
2.15
2.48
2.15
2.48
2.10
2.08
2.10
2.08
162.50
0.20
774
162.50
0.20
323
86.09 86.09
0.20
0.20
62
130
536
Figure 10. Calculated results and risk map of Qingping Township. (a) Distribution of flow depth in the debrisflow affected area. (b) Distribution of flow depth of the dam-breaking flood. (c) Hazard zonation map. (d) Vulnerability zonation map. (e) Distribution of risk degree in Qingping Township. (f) Risk map of Qingping Township.
Cui et al.
537
c Vulnerability degree calculation. Using the vulnerability analysis method in section III.2, the
hazard-affected objects were classified into four
categories based on the different characteristics
of the geographic elements in the area surrounding the township: buildings, roads, cropland,
and grassland. After identifying the shape, size,
image, shadow, and texture of each type of
hazard-affected object from 0.5 m resolution
aerial panchromatic images, the quantity of the
objects was determined.
In order to calculate the vulnerability degree,
we had to determine the integrated economic
value and susceptibility of the hazard-affected
objects. The value of V was determined for the
area surrounding the various hazard-affected
objects by applying the analytical tools available with ArcGIS, which can calculate area and
perimeter for each polygon. The economic value
of each hazard-affected object was obtained from
local government documents and on-site
538
539
Medium-risk zone
Low-risk zone
Total
134,000
6800
495,000
107,000
0.7
1.5
0.6
4.7
25,000
1000
66,000
35,000
26,000
900
63,000
36,000
3.8
11.1
4.8
2.8
5700
400
12,300
14,000
6000
400
12,700
15,600
5.0
0.0
3.1
10.3
165,700
8300
576,300
161,000
166,000
8100
570,700
158,600
0.2
2.5
1.0
1.5
Simulated Actual
Deviation Simulated Actual Deviation Simulated Actual Deviation Simulated Actual Deviation
damaged damaged percentage damaged damaged percentage damaged damaged percentage damaged damaged percentage
value
value
(%)
value
value
(%)
value
value
(%)
value
value
(%)
Houses (m2)
135,000
Roads (m)
6900
Cropland (m2) 498,000
112,000
Forest and
grassland (m2)
Hazardaffected
objects
High-risk zone
Table 5. Statistics of the hazard-affected objects in three risk zones in Qingping township.
540
generally lead to compound hazards for mountain townships, including direct impacts and
silting destruction by the debris flow itself, and
indirect damage from backwater inundation
and dam-failure floods induced by debris flow
barrier lakes created in nearby rivers. In addition, these chain-reaction effects induce these
disasters to expand spatially and continue successively due to a positive feedback effect.
Reasonable and quantitative assessment of
the risks of multiple debris flows is complex and
beyond the ability of existing risk analysis
methods based on single debris flow. Accordingly, we established indicators to describe
compound disasters and chain-reaction effects,
and provided a quantitative method for analyzing the hazards associated with simultaneous
debris flows in mountain townships. The capacities for impact damage, silting damage, and
flooding damage were quantified using the
maximum values of kinetic energy, flow depth,
and inundated depth, respectively.
In recent studies on vulnerability, scientists
have made great progress in producing vulnerability curves or functions (Fuchs et al., 2007,
2012; Jakob and Hungr, 2005; Papathoma-Kohle
et al., 2012; Totschnig et al., 2011). In this paper,
we further considered the spatial distribution and
resistance of hazard-affected objects, and developed a method to determine vulnerability of
various hazard-affected objects, with particular
emphasis on the susceptibility indexes of buildings or structures. In the proposed method, five
steps are adopted to analyze the vulnerability of
different hazard-affected objects. The necessary
information about the potential hazard-affected
objects, in terms of type, quantity, and distribution, can be extracted from panchromatic, highresolution (0.5 m) aerial images.
With the support of a debris flow movement
numerical simulation, flood analysis, remote sensing (RS), and GIS techniques, we developed a
systematic and quantitative method of risk
assessment for mountain towns. Finally, this
method was applied to the case study of the
Funding
This research was supported by the National Basic
Research Program of China (973 Program) (Grant
No. 2011CB409902; 2008CB425802) and the National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant
No. 41030742).
Cui et al.
References
Archetti R and Lamberti L (2003) Assessment of risk due
to debris flow events. Natural Hazards Review 4:
115125.
Alcantara-Ayala I and Goudie AS (2010) Geomorphological Hazards and Disaster Prevention. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bisson M, Favalli M, Fornaciai A, et al. (2005) A rapid
method to assess fire-related debris flow hazard in the
Mediterranean region: An example from Sicily (southern Italy). International Journal of Applied Earth
Observation and Geoinformation 7: 217231.
Bohle HG and Glade T (2007) Vulnerabilitatskonzepte in
Sozial- und Naturwissenschaften. In: Felgentreff C and
Glade T (eds) Naturrisiken und Sozialkatastrophen.
Berlin: Springer, 99119.
Calvo B and Savi F (2009) A real-world application of
Monte Carlo procedure for debris flow risk assessment.
Computers and Geosciences 35: 967977.
Cannon SH, Gartner JE, Rupert MG, et al. (2010) Predicting the probability and volume of postwildfire
debris flows in the intermountain western United
States. Geological Society of America Bulletin 122:
127144.
Carrasco RM, Pedraza J, Martin-Duque JF, et al. (2003)
Hazard zoning for landslides connected to torrential
floods in the Jerte Valley (Spain) by using GIS techniques. Natural Hazards 30: 361381.
Chen GW (2002) Study on quasi-period of breaking out
debris flow under storm. Journal of Natural Disasters
4: 4954 (in Chinese).
Chen NS, Cui P, Liu ZG, et al. (2003) Calculation of the
debris flow concentration based on clay content. Science in China (Series E), Technological Sciences 46
(Supp.): 164174.
Cui P, Chen XQ, Zhu YY, et al. (2011a) The Wenchuan Earthquake (May 12, 2008), Sichuan Province,
China, and resulting geohazards. Natural Hazards
56: 1936.
Cui P, He YP, and Chen J (2006) Debris flow sediment
transportation and its effect on rivers in mountain areas.
Journal of Mountain Science 24: 539549 (in Chinese).
Cui P, He SM, Yao LK, et al. (2011b) The Formation
Mechanism and Risk Management for Geo-hazards in
Wenchuan Earthquake Affected Area. Beijing: Science Publications (in Chinese).
Cui P, Hu KH, Zhang JQ, et al. (2011c) Prediction of the
debris flow danger area by combing hydrological and
541
inundation simulation methods. Journal of Mountain
Science 8: 19.
Cui P, Zhuang JQ, Chen XC, et al. (2010) Characteristics
and countermeasures of debris flow in Wenchuan area
after the earthquake. Journal of Sichuan University
(Engineering Science Edition) 42: 1019 (in Chinese).
David P (2001) MapScript: A map algebra programming
language incorporating neighborhood analysis.
GeoInformatica 5: 145163.
De Pippo T, Donadio C, Pennetta M, et al. (2008) Coastal
hazard assessment and mapping in Northern Campania,
Italy. Geomorphology 97: 451466.
Fuchs S, Heiss K, and Hubl J (2007). Towards an empirical
vulnerability function for use in debris flow risk
assessment. Natural Hazards and Earth System
Sciences 7: 495506.
Fuchs S, Ornetsmuller C, and Totschnig R (2012). Spatial
scan statistics in vulnerability assessment an application to mountain hazards. Natural Hazards 64:
21292151.
Gentile F, Bisantino T, and Liuzzi GT (2008) Debris flow
risk analysis in South Gargano watersheds (SouthernItaly). Natural Hazards 44: 117.
Granger K, Jones T, Leiba M, et al. (1999) Community Risk
in Cairns: A Multi-Hazards Risk Assessment. Canberra:
Australian Geological Survey Organisation (AGSO).
Gret-Regamey A and Straub D (2006) Spatially explicit
avalanche risk assessment linking Bayesian networks
to a GIS. Natural Hazards Earth System Science 6:
911926.
Hu KH, Cui P, Wang CC, et al. (2010) Characteristic
rainfall for warning of debris flows. Journal of Mountain Science 7: 207214.
Hu KH and Wei FQ (2005) Numerical-simulation-based
debris flow risk zoning. Journal of Natural Disasters
14: 1014 (in Chinese).
Hufschmidt G (2011) A comparative analysis of several
vulnerability concepts. Natural Hazards 58: 621643.
Huggel C, Kaab A, Haeberli W, et al. (2003) Regionalscale GIS-models for assessment of hazards from glacier lake outbursts: Evaluation and application in the
Swiss Alps. Natural Hazards and Earth System
Sciences 3: 647662.
Hurlimann M, Copons R, and Altimir J (2006) Detailed
debris flow hazard assessment in Andorra: a multidisciplinary approach. Geomorphology 78: 359372.
Jakob M and Hungr O (2005) Debris-Flow Hazards and
Related Phenomena. Berlin: Springer.
542
Kappes M, Keiler M, and Glade T (2010) From single- to
multi-hazard risk analyses: A concept addressing emerging challenges. In: Malet JP, Glade T, and Casagli N
(eds) Mountain Risks: Bringing Science to Society.
Strasbourg: CERG Editions, 351356.
Kienholz H (1999) Anmerkungen zur Beurteilung von
Naturgefahren in den Alpen. In: Fischer K (Hrsg.)
Massenbewegungen und Massentransporte in den
Alpen als Gefahrenpotential. Relief, Boden, Palaoklima 14: 165184.
Li W (2006) Handbook of Hydraulic Calculations. Beijing: China Water Power Press (in Chinese).
Liu JF, You Y, Chen XZ, et al. (2010) Identification of
potential sites of debris flows in the upper Min River
drainage, following environmental changes caused by
the Wenchuan earthquake. Journal of Mountain Science 7: 255263.
Liu XL and Mo DW (2003) Debris Flow Risk Assessment.
Chengdu: Sichuan Science and Technology Publications (in Chinese).
Mark RK and Ellen SD (1995) Statistical and simulation
models for mapping debris-flow hazard. In: Carrara A and
Guzzetti F (eds) Geographical Information Systems in
Assessing Natural Hazards. Amsterdam: Kluwer, 93106.
Marzocchi W, Garcia-Aristizabal A, Gasparini P, et al.
(2012) Basic principles of multi-risk assessment: A
case study in Italy. Natural Hazards 62: 551573.
Marzocchi W, Mastellone ML, and Di Ruocco A (2009)
PrinciplesofMulti-RiskAssessment:InteractionsAmongst
Natural and Man-Induced Risks. Brussels: European
Commission, Directorate for Research, Environment.
OBrien JS, Julien PY, and Fullerton WT (1993) Twodimensional water flood and mudflow simulation.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 119: 244261.
Papathoma-Kohle M, Kappes M, Keiler M, et al. (2011)
Physical vulnerability assessment for Alpine hazards
state of the art and future needs. Natural Hazards 58:
645680.
Papathoma-Kohle M, Keiler M, Totschnig R, et al. (2012)
Improvement of vulnerability curves using data from
extreme events: Debris flow event in South Tyrol.
Natural Hazards 64: 20832105.
Perles-Roselloy MJ and Cantarero Prados F (2010) Problems and challenges in analyzing multiple territorial
risks: Methodological proposals for multi-hazard mapping. Boletn de la Asociacion de Geografos Espanoles
52: 399404.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.