Advertisement

Landslide susceptibility mapping along national highway-1 in Jammu and Kashmir State (India)

  • Gulzar Hussain
  • Yudhbir Singh
  • Kanwarpreet SinghEmail author
  • G. M. Bhat
Technical papers
  • 10 Downloads

Abstract

A remote sensing and GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) has been carried out using frequency ratio (FR) and weight of evidence (WoE) methods to identify and delineate the potential failure zones along National Highway – 1. The thematic layers of various landslide causative factors have been generated for modeling in GIS. In addition, a landslide inventory along the road network was prepared using satellite imagery, Google earth, and extensive field visits. LSM classified the area into five susceptibility classes: very low, low, moderate, high, and very high classes. The validation result further substantiates the study and inferred that area under success rate curve shows a satisfactory relation between landslide affecting factors and landslide occurrences in case of FR and WoE models having an accuracy of 86.57% and 76.86%, respectively. A landslide density method has also been adopted for validation of LSM which showed acceptable results with decreasing trend of landslide density from very high to very low susceptible zone for both FR and WoE models. The LSM generated will be helpful for various stakeholders like planners, engineers, designers, and local public for future construction and maintenance in the study area.

Keywords

Remote sensing Arc GIS Ladakh Frequency ratio Weight of evidence 

Notes

Acknowledgements

One of the authors, Gulzar Hussain would like to thank for the financial support received from the CSIR UGC fellowship grant.

References

  1. 1.
    Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. B Eng Geol Environ 58(1):21–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dai FC, Lee CF (2002) Landslide characteristics and slope instability modeling using GIS, Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology 42(3):213–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    GSI (2005) A review of Bureau of Indian Standard guidelines for preparation of landslide hazard zonation maps in mountainous terrains and suggested guidelines (Macrozonation)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Varnes DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. Spec Rep 176:11–33Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cruden DM, Varnes DJ (1996) Landslide types and processes. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation, special report, vol 247. National Research Council, Transportation Research Board, Washington, pp 36–75Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Naranjo JL, Westen CJV, Soeters R (1994) Evaluating the use of training areas in bivariate statistical landslide hazard analysis-a case study in Colombia. ITC J 3:292–300Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Das I, Sahoo S, Van Westen C, Stein A, Hack R (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment using logistic regression and its comparison with a rock mass classification system, along a road section in the northern Himalayas (India). Geomorphology 114(4):627–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Singh PK, Kainthola A, Singh TN (2015) Rock mass assessment along the right bank of river sutlej, Luhri, Himachal Pradesh, India. Geo Nat Haz R 6(3):212–223Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Singh K, Kumar V (2018) Hazard assessment of landslide disaster using information value method and analytical hierarchy process in highly tectonic chamba region in bosom of Himalaya. J Mt Sci 15(4):808–824.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-017-4634-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Siddle HJ, Jones DB, Payne HR (1991) Development of a methodology for landslip potential mapping in the Rhondda Valley. In: Slope stability engineering developments and applications: proceedings of the international conference on slope stability organized by the Institution of Civil Engineers and held on the Isle of Wight on 15–18 April 1991 (pp. 137-142). Thomas Telford PublishingGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wu W, Sidle RC (1995) A distributed slope stability model for steep forested basins. Water Resour Res 31(8):2097–2110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dai FC, Lee CF, Li J, Xu ZW (2001) Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the natural terrain of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Environ Geol 40(3):381–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko mountains central Japan. Geomorphology 65(1):15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Cardinali M, Galli M, Ardizzone F (2005) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale. Geomorphology 72(1):272–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carrara A, Cardinali M, Detti R, Guzzetti F, Pasqui V, Reichenbach P (1991) GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Earth Surf Proc Land 16(5):427–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brenning A (2005) Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation. Nat Hazard Earth Sys 5(6):853–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Westen CJ, Van Asch TW, Soeters R (2006) Landslide hazard and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult? B Eng Geol Environ 65(2):167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chang KT, Merghadi A, Yunus AP, Pham BT, Dou J (2019) Evaluating scale effects of topographic variables in landslide susceptibility models using GIS-based machine learning techniques. Scientific Reports 9, Article number: 12296Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bui DT, Moayedi H, Kalantar B, Osouli A, Gor M, Pradhan B, Nguyen H (2019) Rashid ASA (2019) Harris hawks optimization: a novel swarm intelligence technique for spatial assessment of landslide susceptibility. Sensors 19:3590.  https://doi.org/10.3390/s19163590 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Robiati C, Eyre M, Vanneschi C, Francioni M, Venn A, Coggan J (2019) Application of remote sensing data for evaluation of rockfall potential within a quarry slope. Int J Geo Inf 8:367.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8090367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Milevski I, Dragicevic S (2019) Landslide susceptibility zonation of the republic of Macedonia with analytical hierarchy process (AHP) approach. Sect Nat Math Biot Sci MASA.  https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19484.33923 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Van Westen CJ, Rengers N, Soeters R (2003) Use of geomorphological information in indirect landslide susceptibility assessment. Nat Hazards 30(3):399–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kumar A, Sharma RK, Bansal VK (2018) Landslide hazard zonation using analytical hierarchy process along national highway-3 in mid himalayas of Himachal Pradesh, India. Environ Earth Sci 77:719.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7896-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lee S, Pradhan B (2006) Probabilistic landslide hazards and risk mapping on Penang Island, Malaysia. J Earth Syst Sci 115(6):661–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sarkar S, Kanungo DP (2004) An integrated approach for landslide susceptibility mapping using remote sensing and GIS. Photogramm Eng Rem S 70(5):617–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee S, Sambath T (2006) Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Damrei Romel area, Cambodia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Environ Geo 50(6):847–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vijith H, Madhu G (2008) Estimating potential landslide sites of an upland sub-watershed in Western Ghat’s of Kerala (India) through frequency ratio and GIS. Environ Geol 55(7):1397–1405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bai SB, Wang J, Lü GN, Zhou PG, Hou SS, Xu SN (2010) GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping of the Zhongxian segment in the Three Gorges area, China. Geomorphology 115(1):23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Erener A, Düzgün HSB (2010) Improvement of statistical landslide susceptibility mapping by using spatial and global regression methods in the case of more and romsdal (Norway). Landslides 7(1):55–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Poudyal CP, Chang C, Oh HJ, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility maps comparing frequency ratio and artificial neural networks: a case study from the Nepal Himalaya. Environ Earth Sci 61(5):1049–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yilmaz I (2010) The effect of the sampling strategies on the landslide susceptibility mapping by conditional probability and artificial neural networks. Environ Earth Sci 60(3):505–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Intarawichian N, Dasananda S (2011) Frequency ratio model based landslide susceptibility mapping in lower Mae Chaem watershed, Northern Thailand. Environ Earth Sci 64(8):2271–2285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mezughi TH, Akhir JM, Rafek AG, Abdullah I (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping using the statistical index method and factor effect analysis along the E–W highway (Gerik-Jeli), Malaysia. Australian J Basic Appl Sci 5(6):847–857Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Khai-Wern KL, Tien TL, Lateh H (2011, May) Landslide hazard mapping of Penang is land using probabilistic methods and logistic regression. In: 2011 IEEE international conference on imaging systems and techniques (IST), (pp. 273–278). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lepore C, Kamal SA, Shanahan P, Bras RL (2012) Rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility zonation of Puerto Rico. Environ Earth Sci 66(6):1667–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kannan M, Saranathan E, Anabalagan R (2013) Landslide vulnerability mapping using frequency ratio model: a geospatial approach in Bodi-Bodimettu Ghat section, Theni district, Tamil Nadu, India. Arab J Geosci 6(8):2901–2913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sujatha ER, Rajamanickam V, Kumaravel P, Saranathan E (2013) Landslide susceptibility analysis using probabilistic likelihood ratio model—a geospatial-based study. Arab J Geosci 6(2):429–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ramesh V, Anbazhagan S (2015) Landslide susceptibility mapping along Kolli hills Ghat road section (India) using frequency ratio, relative effect and fuzzy logic models. Environ Earth Sci 73(12):8009–8021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kumar A, Sharma RK, Bansal VK (2019) GIS-based comparative study of information value and frequency ratio method for landslide hazard zonation in a part of mid-Himalaya in Himachal Pradesh. Innov Infrastruct Solut 4:28.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-019-0215-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Khan H, Shafique M, Khan A, Bacha MA, Shah SU, Calligaris C (2019) Landslide susceptibility assessment using frequency ratio, a case study of northern Pakistan. Egypt J Remote Sens Space Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2018.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cerviet F, Berti M, Borgatti F, Manenti F, Corsini A (2010) Comparing predictive capability of statistical and deterministic methods for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study in the northern Apennines (Reggio Emilia Province, Italy). Landslides 7(4):433–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dahal RK, Hasegawa S, Nonomura S, Yamanaka M, Masuda T, Nishino K (2008) GIS-based weights-of-evidence modelling of rainfall-induced landslides in small catchments for landslide susceptibility mapping‖. Environ Geol 54(2):314–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lee S, Choi J (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and the weight of evidence model. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 18(8):789–814.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810410001702003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Regmi NR, Giardino JR, Vitek JD (2010) Modeling susceptibility to landslides using the weight of evidence approach: western Colorado, USA. Geomorphology 115(1–2):172–187.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Thiery YJP, Malet S, Sterlacchini A, Puissant Maquaire O (2007) Landslide susceptibility assessment by bivariate methods at large scales: application to complex mountainous environment. Geomorphology 92(1–2):38–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.02.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pamela Pamela, Sadisun Imam, Yukni Arifianti (2018) Weights of evidence method for landslide susceptibility mapping in Takengon, central aceh, Indonesia. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/118/1/012037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sifa SF, Mahmud T, Tarin MA, Haque DME (2019) Event-based landslide susceptibility mapping using weights of evidence (WoE) and modified frequency ratio (MFR) model: a case study of Rangamati district in Bangladesh. Geol Ecol Landsc.  https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2019.1619222 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ghildiyal B, Champati ray PK, Bisht MPS, Rawat GS (2019) Landslide susceptibility zonation using bivariate models, around tehri reservoir, Uttarakhand, India. J Remote Sens GIS 8:1.  https://doi.org/10.4172/2469-4134.1000254 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bookhagen B, Thiede RC, Strecker MR (2005) Late quaternary intensified monsoon phases control landscape evolution in the northwest Himalaya. Geology 33(2):149–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Chevuturi A, Dimri AP, Thayyen RJ (2018) Climate change over Leh (Ladakh), India. Theor Appl Climatol 131(1–2):531–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Guzzetti F, Carrara A, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999) Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, central Italy. Geomorphology 31(1):181–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C (2004) Use of fuzzy relations to produce landslide susceptibility map of a landslide prone area (West Black Sea Region, Turkey). Eng Geol 75(3):229–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Srikantia SV, Razdan ML (1980) Geology of part of central Ladakh Himalaya with particular reference to Indus tectonic zone. J Geol Soc India 21(11):523–545Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Yalcin A, Reis S, Aydinoglu AC, Yomralioglu T (2011) A GIS-based comparative study of frequency ratio, analytical hierarchy process, bivariate statistics and logistics regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping in Trabzon, NE Turkey. CATENA 85(3):274–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Guzzetti F, Mondini AC, Cardinali M, Fiorucci F, Santangelo M, Chang KT (2012) Landslide inventory maps: new tools for an old problem. Earth Sci Rev 112(1):42–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wieczorek GF (1984) Preparing a detailed landslide-inventory map for hazard evaluation and reduction. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 21(3):337–342Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Yilmaz I (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and their comparison: a case study from kat landslides (Tokat—Turkey). Comput Geosci 35(6):1125–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wieczorek GF, Mandrone G, DeCola L (1997) The influence of hillslope shape on debris-flow initiation. In: Debris-flow hazards mitigation: mechanics, prediction, and assessment (pp. 21–31). ASCEGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Merodo JF, Pastor M, Mira P, Tonni L, Herreros MI, Gonzalez E, Tamagnini R (2004) Modelling of diffuse failure mechanisms of catastrophic landslides. Comput Method Appl Mech 193(27):2911–2939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Yesilnacar E, Topal T (2005) Landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison of logistic regression and neural networks methods in a medium scale study, Hendek region (Turkey). Eng Geol 79(3):251–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gorsevski PV, Gessler PE, Foltz RB, Elliot WJ (2006) Spatial prediction of landslide hazard using logistic regression and ROC analysis. Trans GIS 10(3):395–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Sidle RC and Ochiai H (2006) Landslides: processes, prediction, and land use (Vol. 18). American Geophysical UnionGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Singh Y, Bhat GM (2010) Role of basin morphometric parameters in landslides along the national highway-1A between udhampur and batote, Jammu and Kashmir, India: a case study. Himal Geol 31(1):43–50Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Jenks GF (1967) The data model concept in statistical mapping. Int Year Book Cartogr 7:186–190Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gokceoglu C, Aksoy H (1996) Landslide susceptibility mapping of the slopes in the residual soils of the Mengen region (Turkey) by deterministic stability analyses and image processing techniques. Eng Geol 44(1–4):147–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Singh Y, Bhat GM (2011) Landslide investigations: morphometric and geotechnical approach-a case study from Northwest Himalaya, India. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH and Co.KG, Saarbrucken, pp 37–51Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Singh Y, Bhat GM, Sharma V, Pandita SK, Thakur KK (2012) Reservoir induced landslide at Assar, Jammu and Kashmir: a case study. J Geol Soc India 80(3):435–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Anbalagan R (1992) Landslide hazard evaluation and zonation mapping in mountainous terrain. Eng Geol 32(4):269–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Chung CJF, Fabbri AG (1999) Probabilistic prediction models for landslide hazard mapping. Photogrammeng rem s 65(12):1389–1399Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Lee S, Pradhan B (2007) Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Landslides 4(1):33–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Bonham-Carter GF (1994) Geographic Information Systems for Geoscientists; modelling with GIS, Comp, Pergamon, ISBN: 9781483144948Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Oh HJ, Lee S, Chotikasathien W, Kim CH, Kwon JH (2009) Predictive landslide susceptibility mapping using spatial information in the Pechabun area of Thailand. Environ Geol 57(3):641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Can T, Nefeslioglu HA, Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H, Duman TY (2005) Susceptibility assessments of shallow earthflows triggered by heavy rainfall at three catchments by logistic regression analyses. Geomorphology 72(1):250–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Duman TY, Can T, Gokceoglu C, Nefeslioglu HA, Sonmez H (2006) Application of logistic regression for landslide susceptibility zoning of Cekmece Area, Istanbul, Turkey. Environ Geol 51(2):241–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Kayastha P, Dhital MR, De Smedt F (2013) Application of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study from the Tinau watershed, west Nepal. Comput Geosci 52:398–408.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2012.11.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Sarkar S, Kanungo DP (2004) An integrated approach for landslide susceptibility mapping using remote sensing and GIS. Photogramm Eng Rem Sens 70(5):617–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gupta RP, Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Sarkar S (2008) Approaches for comparative evaluation of raster GIS-based landslide susceptibility zonation map. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 10:330–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gulzar Hussain
    • 1
  • Yudhbir Singh
    • 1
  • Kanwarpreet Singh
    • 2
    Email author
  • G. M. Bhat
    • 1
  1. 1.Postgraduate Department of GeologyUniversity of JammuJammuIndia
  2. 2.Civil Engineering DepartmentNational Institute of TechnologyHamirpurIndia

Personalised recommendations