RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Name Rajat Abhay Sirsikar

Application Sequence Number PHDS202202876

Department Application Number DMC02876

Proposed Research Topic: A holistic approach to Landslide risk management

1. Literature Review

In the past, several landslides have occurred ranging from mild to high mobility. The highly
mobile 2014 Oso landslide incurred an economic loss of over USD 172.5 million resulting
due to six months highway closure. Landslide risk detection helps to monitor and mitigate
landslides. The most common method to detect landslide risk is terrain stability mapping.
Landslide risk reduction depends primarily on the hazard itself, exposure of life and property
to the landslide and its susceptibility to damage. Prior to technological advances, landslide
detection was performed through visual inspection of photographs or field surveys. It was
indeed a time-consuming method. Today, Airborne Lidar scan (ALS) data collection help to
detect geological change in slopes due to landslides and thus help in assessing risk. With the
help of ALS, Lato M. J. et.al [1], concluded that geological change occurs at many levels and
the failure of slope is governed by several landslides of varying magnitudes and not by just
single major landslide. Sultana N. [2] conducted analytical study on landslide-induced
damages in Bangladesh from 2000-2008. However, study had limitations due to data
unavailability and inconsistency. In recent times, Landslide Researchers are implementing
Machine Learning algorithms in Landslide detection and forecasting, matching with the
advancement in the ML community [3].

Several attempts were made towards landslide risk assessment. Pollock and Wartman [4]
developed a data‐driven tool to estimate an individual's probability of death based on
landslide intensity, which can be used directly in landslide risk assessment. An attempt was
made to identify the various factors contributing towards landslide risk reduction [5].
However, it didn’t consider the location, type and magnitude of landslides due to lack of data.
Regmi A. D. and Agrawal N. proposed a simplified landslide risk assessment method but it
didn’t consider frequency and severity of landslide [6]. Vadivel S. and Sennimalai C. S. [7],
investigated the failure mechanism of the rainfall-induced landslide but the methodology
adopted were not site-specific. Nature-based solutions is a complex field to reduce shallow
landslide risk despite its promotion in international policies [8]. Kuhnl et.al [9] proposed a
setup that allows for social vulnerability over long time spans at a fine spatial resolution,
allows to bring inequality into the spotlight, and provides decision-makers with better
information to develop socially responsible policies. But this assessment is influenced by
errors in the population estimation. Sui et.al [10] analyzed the landslide losses in China but
the study was based on Shiyantan landslide to quantitatively characterize the landslide
disaster risk. The study suggested that vulnerability analysis must be systematic and
extensive considering age structure of personnel and building infrastructure. Another attempt
was made to highlight the uses of data on risk in different landslide risk reduction strategies

1
in Nilgiri, India [11]. An effective methodology adopted for Landslide risk assessment is
preparation of the Landslide damage geotechnical chart as suggested by Palmisano et.al [12].

Bansal B. K. et.al [13] highlighted details of the major initiatives, significant achievements,
and priorities to help in better mitigation of earthquake and landslide hazards in the eastern
Himalayan region. Nsengiyumva and Valentino [14] used GIS-based machine learning
simulations to predict vulnerability and risk associated with landslides. But the results were
suitable for landslide mitigation in Rwanda and locations with similar topography. Anderson
M. G. et.al, [15] utilized their experience in mitigating community-based landslide risk. In the
regions of reactivated landslides, real-time monitoring technique is better than manual
method of disaster mitigation [16]. An effective landslide mitigation strategy should include a
better understanding of institutional barriers to mitigate landslides, the social aspects of
landslide, extensive research on various case studies and well-planned skill training for all
stakeholders [17]. Irasema Alcántara-Ayala [18] stressed on the need to adopt integrated-
landslide-disaster risk management to reduce risk but also alerted about the challenges faced
related to its implementation. Thus, a complete analysis of landslide vulnerability and
mitigation strategies including economic, environmental, social and cultural factors is
necessary.

2. Objectives
The primary objective of the research is to characterize the landslide risk and accordingly put
forward a suitable landslide risk management framework. A holistic landslide risk
management approach includes landslide forecasting, detection and characterisation of
hidden faults. The following sub-objectives of the research addresses the gaps found from
literature review-
1. To develop Machine Learning (ML) algorithm for Landslide spatial forecasting.
2. To conduct a systematic landslide vulnerability assessment based on the age structure
of personnel and building infrastructure.
3. To identify and characterize hidden faults and their depth traverses.
4. To propose a suitable landslide mitigation strategy
The results of this research will help in better mitigation and preparedness for landslides.

3. Methodology
The different phases of the research in chronological order are as follows-
Phase 1 (12 months): An extensive literature review of various ML algorithms available with
AI/ML community in Landslide spatial and temporal forecasting, Landslide detection,
available Landslide risk assessment methods, monitoring techniques and evaluation of
various Landslide mitigation strategies.
Phase 2 (3 months): Developing appropriate algorithm with the help of python addressing
past limitations in Landslide forecasting.
Phase 3 (6 months): Based on the results of landslide forecasting, conceptual modelling of
landslide processes will be conducted.
Phase 4 (6 months): In this phase, mapping of hidden faults and their characterization will be
carried to finally propose a suitable mitigation strategy. This phase will require the use of
Airborne Lidar scan (ALS).
Phase 5 (9 months): Conclusions/recommendations and Thesis writing.

2
The research will be conducted from January 2023 to December 2025.

References
1. Latol M. J., Anderson S. and Porter M. J. (2019), “Reducing Landslide Risk Using
Airborne Lidar Scanning Data” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 145(9): 06019004.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002073.
2. Sultana N. (2020), “Analysis of landslide-induced fatalities and injuries in
Bangladesh: 2000-2018” Cogent Social Sciences, 6:1, 1737402.
DOI:10.1080/23311886.2020.1737402.
3. Tehrani F. S., Calvello M., Liu Z., Zhang L., Lacasse S. (2022), “Machine learning
and landslide studies: recent advances and applications” Natural Hazards, 114:1197–
1245. DOI:10.1007/s11069-022-05423-7.
4. Pollock W. and Wartman J. (2020), “Human Vulnerability to Landslides” GeoHealth,
4, e2020GH000287. DOI:10.1029/2020GH000287.
5. Shinohara Y., Kume T. (2022), “Changes in the factors contributing to the reduction
of landslide fatalities between 1945 and 2019 in Japan” Science of the Total
Environment, 827-154392. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154392.
6. Regmi A. D., Agrawal N. (2022), “A simple method for landslide risk assessment in
the Rivi`ere Aux Vases basin, Quebec, Canada” Progress in Disaster Science, 16-
100247. DOI:10.1016/j.pdisas.2022.100247.
7. Vadivel S. and Sennimalai C. S. (2019), “Failure Mechanism of Long-Runout
Landslide Triggered by Heavy Rainfall in Achanakkal, Nilgiris, India” J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng., 145(9): 04019047. DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002099.
8. Arce-Mojica T. D. J., Nehren U., Sudmeier-Rieux K., Miranda P. J., Anhuf D. (2019),
“Nature-based solutions (NbS) for reducing the risk of shallow landslides: Where do
we stand?” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 41-101293.
DOI:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101293.
9. Kühnl M., Sapena M., Wurm M., Geiß C., Taubenböck H. (2022), “Multitemporal
landslide exposure and vulnerability assessment in Medellín, Colombia” Natural
Hazards. DOI:10.1007/s11069-022-05679-z.
10. Sui H., Hu R., Gao W., Wenwei Gao & Luo G. (2020), “Risk assessment of
individual landslide based on the risk acceptable model: a case study of the Shiyantan
landslide in Mayang County, China” Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An
International Journal. DOI:10.1080/10807039.2019.1710461.
11. Jaiswal P., Westen C. J. V. (2013), “Use of quantitative landslide hazard and risk
information for local disaster risk reduction along a transportation corridor: a case
study from Nilgiri district, India” Natural Hazards, 65:887–913.
DOI:10.1007/s11069-012-0404-1.
12. Palmisano F., Vitone C. and Cotecchia F. (2018), “Assessment of Landslide Damage
to Buildings at the Urban Scale” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 32(4): 04018055.
DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001201.
13. Bansal B. K., Verma M., Gupta A. K., Prasath R. A.(2022), “On mitigation of
earthquake and landslide hazards in the eastern Himalayan region” Natural Hazards,
114:1079–1102. DOI:10.1007/s11069-022-05448-y.
14. Nsengiyumva J. B. & Valentino R. (2020), “Predicting landslide susceptibility and
risks using GIS-based machine learning simulations, case of upper Nyabarongo

3
 catchment” Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 11:1, 1250-1277.
DOI:10.1080/19475705.2020.1785555.
15. Anderson M. G., Holcombe E., Holm-Nielsen N., Monica R. D. (2013), “What are the
emerging challenges for community-based landslide risk reduction in developing
countries?” Natural Hazards Review. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000125.
16. Huang H., Yi W., Lu S., Yi Q., and Zhang G. (2014), “Use of Monitoring Data to
Interpret Active Landslide Movements and Hydrological Triggers in Three Gorges
Reservoir” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., C4014005. DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-
5509.0000682.
17. Sultana N., Tan S. (2021), “Landslide mitigation strategies in southeast Bangladesh:
Lessons learned from the institutional responses” International Journal of Disaster
Risk Reduction, 62-102402. DOI:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102402.
18. Alcántara-Ayala I. (2020), “Integrated landslide disaster risk management (ILDRiM):
the challenge to avoid the construction of new disaster risk” Environmental Hazards.
DOI:10.1080/17477891.2020.1810609.