Geographical and Multi-criteria Approach for Hydro-geological Risk Evaluation in Decision Making Processes

  • Francesco Selicato
  • Grazia Maggio
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 4)


The catastrophes occurring in recent years and a changed awareness not only among “experts” but in the whole society of the reasons for hydro-geological calamities are in fact pointing out the urgency of a correct policy for the prevention of hydro-geological risk and the development of more adequate systems for forecasting disasters. In the light of a problem of this entity, it is necessary to act on two fronts: careful planning and programming of the use of territorial resources, as well as setting up decision making support systems that can improve the efficiency of the actions taken. In this paper the topic of planning in areas with hydro - geological risk is deal with, through the implementation of two different methodologies: the former is a probabilistic - quantitative one for the definition of the hydraulic dangerousness; the latter is a qualitative one (able to consider also social, economic, cultural and political aspects) for the definition of vulnerability considered as the ability of a territorial system to answer to the calamitous events.


Information technologies qualitative and quantitative methodologies risk evaluation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barredo, J.I., Lavalle, De Roo, C.A.: European flood risk mapping. European Commission, DG-Joint Research Centre, S.P.I.05.151.EN, Ispra (2005)Google Scholar
  2. Beck, U.: Risikogesellschaft. Frankfurt a. M., Suhrkamp (1986)Google Scholar
  3. Bouchon, S.: State of art of vulnerability assessment. EC-JRC technical note, Ispra (2005)Google Scholar
  4. Basta, C., Neuvel, J., Zlatanova, S.: Bridging the gap between professionals involved in risk prevention using GIS as a shared decision support system. A comparative study on UK and Dutch practices. In: 1st ARMONIA Conference, Proceedings, Torino (2005)Google Scholar
  5. Cremonini, I.: Rischio sismico e pianificazione nei centri storici. Alinea Editrice, Firenze (1994)Google Scholar
  6. Di Mauro, C.: Regional vulnerability map for supporting policy definitions and implementations. In: 1st ARMONIA Conference, Proceedings, Torino (2005)Google Scholar
  7. Geertman, S., Stillwell, J.: Planning Support Systems Best Practices and New Methods. Springer, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S.: Panarchy: Understanding Transformations. In: Human and Natural systems, DC Island Press, Washington (2002)Google Scholar
  9. Lombardi, M.: Rischio ambientale e comunicazione. Franco Angeli, Milano (1997)Google Scholar
  10. Maciocco, G.: Modelli, tecniche e poetiche del computer. In: Cecchini, A., Plaisant, A. (eds.) Analisi e modelli per la Pianificazione. Teoria e pratica: lo stato dell’arte. Franco Angeli, Milano, 11–17 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. Malczewski, J.: GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. Wiley, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  12. Menoni, S.: Pianificazione e incertezza. Elementi per la valutazione e la gestione dei rischi territoriali. Franco Angeli, Milano (1996)Google Scholar
  13. Menoni, S.: Costruire la prevenzione. Strategie di riduzione e mitigazione dei rischi territoriali. Pitagora ed., Bologna (2005)Google Scholar
  14. Pinna, S.: Rischi ambientali e difesa del territorio. Franco Angeli, Milano (2002)Google Scholar
  15. Rosso, R.: Il rischio idrogeologico. In: Convegno Internazionale – Protezione civile e sicurezza territoriale:Tecnologie e sistemi avanzati di gestione del rischio, Proceedings, Milano (2006)Google Scholar
  16. Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Wiley, New York (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Santoianni, F.: Rischio e vulnerabilità, disastri e territorio. CUEN, Napoli (1996)Google Scholar
  18. Sarlo, A.: Mitigazione del rischio sismico in aree urbane. Un’esperienza su Reggio Calabria. Reggio Calabria, Iiriti editore (2004)Google Scholar
  19. Van der Sande, C.: River flood damage assessment using Ikonos imagery. Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, S.P.I. 01.147, Ispra (2001)Google Scholar
  20. Wiren, E.: Reflective Rationality. In: Planning for Unexpected. Risk Assessment and Management, Proceedings, XXXIII Congress Isocarp, Ogaki (1997)Google Scholar
  21. Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I.: At Risk. In: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Routledge, London (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesco Selicato
    • 1
  • Grazia Maggio
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Architecture and Town PlanningPolytechnic of Bari UniversityBariItaly

Personalised recommendations