Abstract Title: VULNERABILITY vs. PREDICTABILITY IN LANDSLIDE HAZARD ZONATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN “INCLUSIVE” STATISTICAL AND “EXCLUSIVE” TOPOGRAPHICAL APPROACHES
Author(s):
Jose Roa-Lobo - University Of Maryland - College Park
Abstract:
This paper explores a comparative analysis of two frameworks used to achieve landslide hazard mapping: the statistical and topographical approaches. Statistical approaches have been largely recognized as a way to output the geographical vulnerability that cause mass movements in a defined area while topographical approaches seek a more precise prediction capacity based in the slope process performance. These two methods are founded upon different conceptual models. In the statistical approach, the role of each factor causing slope instability is determined on the basis of the observed relations of the past/present landslide distribution to a full set of related geomorphic variables, creating an inclusive method. On the other hand, the topographic approach is an exclusive analysis that pinpoints the areas that have the lowest resistance to morphological decomposition caused by erosion and denudation via the Structure Process Inclination Response System procedure without any further information than a digital contour line model. For this research, the study area is located in a tropical mountain environment of the Venezuelan Andes, where landslide processes have been linked to the topographic background as well as to the geologic and landcover complexes. Finally some conclusions about the reproducibility and reliability of these approaches concerning the study area are offered as well as the importance of remote sensing data and GIS applications in the landslide hazard mapping.
