PRESENT TRENDS IN LANDSLIDING CONTROL

I. Lungu, N. Boţi, A. Stanciu, O. Donciu

ABSTRACT
The efficient management of the natural disaster is a base concept for the long term
development of all societies. Once the present problems related to landslides are defined as
part of the natural disaster issue, new approaches and methods are needed that will
simultaneously allow: the improvement of prognosis related to the place, time and
characteristics of these natural phenomena, creating scenarios concerning the optimum
strategies to adopt when such a disaster is triggered, as well as the adoption of post-disaster
strategies in order to reduce the damages and re-install the normality within the community.
The paper presents elements that define such methods based on geo-sciences and bring to
attention a sum of experiences related to the field of landslide management with interventions
on reducing the effects on society at large.

Keywords: landslide management, natural disaster, prognosis, post-disaster strategies.

1. PATHS TO LANDSLIDES AS DISASTERS

Societies at large that experience disasters have gone through development processes which
have not taken into account hazards related to natural or social phenomena in a proper
manner. The increasing losses experienced by many developing countries in the last decades
reflect that the development in itself is not leading to sustainability. Thus, some disasters, as
the ones generated by landslides in a specific area are unaddressed problems within the
development projects currently in practice. This remark is all the more correct when the
followings issues are also worth mentioning [1], [2]:
 Continuous view that causes for landslides are mostly related to natural hazards that
generate such events and thus, the perception is that disasters occur externally and
independently from the undergoing development process.
 The preferred invisibility regarding risk and vulnerability until a natural event brings them
to attention, unlike underdevelopment that is now addressed in a more visible manner at the
local, regional, national and even international level.
 A dangerous attitude that nature can be controlled through engineering practices and thus
disaster may at some extent avoided.
In a general perspective, disasters are considered to reflect pre-existing conditions within all
components of society. Infrastructure, services, institutions and organizations are the most
vulnerable to be affected by a triggering event could be associated with a natural phenomenon
as landslide.
Thus, a disaster can be concluded to be derived from two predispositions:
 the possibility that the triggering event takes place, usually named a hazard at this
potential state;
 an existing vulnerability as the pre-disposition of people, processes, infrastructure,
services or systems generally to be damaged or ultimately destroyed by the event or the
incapacity of the society at large to cope with the event/disaster, once it takes place.
2. DYNAMICS OF VULNERABILITY AND RISK TO LANDSLIDES

The need to develop indicators to measure vulnerabilities and risks is a must issue for
developing countries which require a strategy to invest funds to maximize the results to risk
reduction.
The scientific community proposed in the context of the International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction (ISDR) and the former International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
(IDNDR), the concept of risk by the following definition: “risk is the probability of harmful
consequences, or expected losses (deaths, injuries, property, livelihoods, economic activity
disrupted or environmental damage) resulting from interactions between natural or human
induced hazards and vulnerable conditions”.
Vulnerability is generally perceived as the predisposition of societies to be affected and their
incapacity to cope with disasters.
From a dynamic point of view, vulnerability changes continually with time. Changes are
related to those factors which can increase it, reduce it or maintain it in that present state.
Bankoff, Frerks and Hilhorst (2004) concluded that vulnerability is generated through social
processes, general issues of developing countries such as class, gender, ethnicity, poverty can
lead to unequal levels or exposure to risk.
A very present issue in Romania related to risk generating factors is the development
aggression in terms of urban development on natural slopes in correlation with a low quality
performance of utility supplies in the area, especially water supply and sewage networks.
In terms of risk evolution, figure 1 reflects an evolution of risk to landslides of such areas
reflecting changes in society and the rate of development at large.

Figure 1. A dynamical perspective of risk to landslides towards of time elapse for such events

In the most general perspective, factors that increase or reduce vulnerability to landslide in a
certain area can be grouped as in table 1.
Tab. 1. Potential factors that generate, increase or diminish vulnerabilities to landslides

Potential factors that can lead Potential factors that can Potential factors that can diminish
to generating vulnerabilities increase vulnerabilities vulnerabilities
 demographic differences  increasing population  more equal distribution of
 unequal level of  densification of vulnerable political and economic resources
development areas in particular geographic  urban planning
 inadequate organization regions  diversification, multiplication of
systems  trends in land occupancy resources
 city expansion,  city expansion, uncontrolled,  target marginal and micro-
uncontrolled, unplanned unplanned growth economic sectors during
growth due to migration in  previous disasters reconstruction phases after
urban areas  poor landslide management disasters
 development aggression  landslide management
 use of inappropriate implemented in vulnerable areas
technologies
 lack of specific codes for
land control

In the simplest way, vulnerability is regarded as incapacity to minimize the impacts of an

event leading to hazard and to cope with it. Lately, an emerging idea to consider regarding
intrinsic properties of vulnerability is the notion that the degree of vulnerability of an
infrastructure, a community, a society or process should be related to the magnitude of the
hazard in question [1]. This idea is presented graphically in figure 2 and can be perfectly
related to landslides. Although building codes are conservative in terms of failure in order to
provide satisfactory safety against disasters, landslides are triggering events where failure is
related to a volume of soil with buildings as overburdens in local areas.

Figure 2. Expected degree of damage versus magnitude of the hazard in question

Preparedness is the main solution to create resilient communities to disasters, landslides

included. Although resistance and resilience may look alike, they are different concepts and in
landslide control resilience is more important than resistance. Resistance is regarded to be
related to economical, psychological and physical health of systems of maintenance, as well
as the capacity of individuals or communities to withstand the impact of the event. Thus,
resistance is related to the capacity of the system to remain unchanged for an interval of time
after the event/landslide manifested itself. After that interval of time, the system usually
undergoes changes as the event happened.
Resilience is generally defined as the ability to cope with or adapt to the hazard in question
via preparedness and spontaneous adaptations once the event has manifested itself. Thus,
resilience, in contrast to resistance, is the related to the capacity of the system to recover to its
state prior to the disaster.
Consequently, vulnerability would continue to be defined as the combination of the damage
potential, resilience and resistance [2]. A very important issue is related to the fact that
different perceptions of vulnerabilities lead to different approaches on how to handle them.

3. SOLUTIONS AS TREATMENT OPTIONS WITHIN LANDSLIDE RISK

MANAGEMENT
Once landslide risk has been analyzed and evaluated, the treatment component is naturally the
following step to deal with the landslide event. In this respect, typical options would include:
 To accept the risk when risk is confined to acceptable domain;
 To avoid the risk when a new construction is in question in the potential area of a landslide risk,
abandoning the project and looking for alternative construction sites where risk is acceptable;
 To reduce the likelihood that would require consolidation/stabilization measures – figure 3 – to
control triggering aspects [3]; after implementation, the risk would fall within acceptable domain.
 To reduce consequences by setting defensive measures of stabilization;

Figure 3. Measures to consider in slope stabilization/consolidation

 To introduce monitoring and warning systems in the area of risk on a permanent or temporary basis
and can be regarded as measures to reduce consequences as well [4];
 To transfer, compensate, or share the risk, involving insurance companies;
All the above mentioned options should be regarded via their relative costs and benefits. Combinations
of options may also be appropriate to consider, especially since large reductions of risk may be
achieved.
A sound land control is also likely to include an emergency plan that will consist of a sequence of
steps to follow once warning signs indicate the beginning of a new instability phase [5]. In this case it
is relevant to establish the different warning levels and depending on them to set a hierarchy for
dealing with infrastructure and institutions that will remain in use during the event.

4. CONCLUSIONS

The landslide control is aimed to generate land value on a safe based system from a potential
disaster risk. The local/regional/national authorities need corresponding regulations to issue
land use decisions based on land control guides.
Emergency situations need coping capacities to deal with the event when is triggered.
Development of coping capacities is the task of policy makers to include them as investments
on the long term development of the society itself to develop resistance and resilience
capabilities.
The national guides to create risk and hazard zoning related to landslides represent
instruments that complete to a certain extent the necessary tools to implement the landslide
control in Romania. Extensive research is focused to contribute with new approaches related
to both landslide probability assessment as well as stabilization measures effective during and
post-event.

TENDINŢE ACTUALE ÎN COMBATEREA ALUNECĂRILOR DE TEREN

Managementul eficient al dezastrelor naturale este un concept care stă la baza dezvoltării pe
termen lung a oricărei societăţi. Odată definită problematica actuală a alunecărilor de teren ca
parte componentă a dezastrelor naturale, se impune identificarea unor metode care să permită
simultan: îmbunătăţirea prognozelor privind locul, momentul şi caracteristicile acestor
fenomene naturale, realizarea de scenarii privind strategiile de adoptat în momentul
declanşării dezastrului, precum şi adoptarea unor strategii aplicabile după dezastru, în vederea
diminuării pagubelor şi revenirii la starea normală. Lucrarea prezintă elemente care definesc
aceste metode prin prisma geo-ştiinţelor şi aduc în atenţie experienţe acumulate în domeniul
managementului alunecărilor de teren cu intervenţii asupra reducerii efectelor acestora asupra
societăţii în ansamblu.

REFERENCES

1. Cardona, O.C. et al, The need for rethinking the concepts of vulnerability and risk from a
holistic perspective: A necessary review and criticism for effective risk management. In:
Bankoff, G., Frerks, G., Hilhorst, D. (Eds.) Maping vulnerability, disasters, development and
people. Earthscann Publications, London, 2004
2. Villagran de Leon, J.C., Vulnerability – A conceptual and methodological review,
SOURCE, Publications Series of UNU-EHS, nr.4/2006
3. Stanciu, A., Lungu, I., Fundatii I: Fizica si mecanica pamanturilor, Editura Tehnica,
Bucuresti, 2006
4. Manea, S., Evaluarea riscului de alunecare a versantilor, Editura Conspress, Bucuresti,
1998
5. GT 019-1998, Ghid de redactare a hărţilor de risc la alunecare a versanţilor pentru
asigurarea stabilităţii construcţiilor. Buletinul Constructiilor. nr.6/2000.

AUTHORS INFORMATION

Assoc.prof.dr.eng. Irina Lungu (irina_lungu2003@yahoo.com), graduate of the Technical

University of Iasi, Civil Engineering Faculty, her primary research interests are soil-structure
interaction for pile foundations, soil improvement by surface and deep compaction, slope
management. She is a member of the International Society for Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering, (ISSMGE) -1991, International Tunneling Association (ITA) –
1993, Romanian Association for Underground Structures (ART) - 1993, Romanian Society
for Geotechnics and Foundations (SRGF) – 1996 – board member.

Prof.univ.dr.eng. Nicolae Boti (ioanboti@yahoo.com) is consultant professor of geotechnical

and foundation engineering at the Technical University “Gh. Asachi” Iasi, Faculty of Civil
Engineering. His interests are: behavior of structures on active clays and collapsible soils, soil
improvement by surface compaction, design methods for underground structures. He is
member of the International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering,
ISSMGE (1991), International Tunneling Association (ITA) – 1993, Romanian Association
for Underground Structures (ART) - 1993 - board member and former president, Romanian
Society for Geotechnics and Foundations (SRGF) – 1996 – board member; titular member of
the Romanian Association of Scientists (AOS) – 1985.

Prof.univ.dr.eng. Anghel Stanciu (anghel.stanciu@yahoo.com) is professor of geotechnical

engineering and foundation at the Technical University „Gh. Asachi” of Iaşi, Civil
Engineering Faculty. His primary research interests are: reinforced soil solutions for
transportation infrastructure, new approaches in slope stability analysis, design methods for
underground structures. He is member of the International Society for Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE) - 1991, International Tunneling Association (ITA) –
1993, Romanian Association for Underground Structures (ART) - 1993 - board member,
Romanian Society for Geotechnics and Foundations (SRGF) – 1996 – board member; titular
member of the Romanian Association of Scientists (AOS) - 1985; full member of the
Romanian Academy of Agricultural and Forest Sciences “Gh. I. Sisesti” – 2002.

Drd.eng. Oana Donciu (odonciu@yahoo.com) is a phD student, graduate of the Technical

University „Gh. Asachi” of Iaşi, Civil Engineering Faculty, her studies concern reinforced
soil structures. She is member of the International Society for Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE), International Tunneling Association (ITA), Romanian
Society for Geotechnics and Foundations (SRGF), Romanian Association for Underground
Structures (ART).