Abstract
Nepal’s hilly and mountainous regions are highly susceptible to landslides triggered by extreme precipitations. The prevalence of such landslides has increased due to climate change-induced extreme hydro-meteorological conditions. These recurring landslides have significantly impacted the road transport infrastructure, which is the economic lifeline for cities and socio-economic mobility of rural communities in the hilly and mountainous regions of the country. This study modelled extreme rainfall scenarios for the current 1976–2005 baseline and future horizons of 2030, 2050, and 2080 to develop high-resolution 1 km × 1 km mean precipitation datasets under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5. Based on these extreme precipitation scenarios, we developed high-resolution landslide hazard models adopting integrated weighted index by combining the Frequency Ratio (FR) and Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) methods using multi-variate factors. The multi-variate factors included three terrain parameters—slope, aspect, and elevation; two soil parameters—lithology and soil type; two Euclidean distance parameters from the likely sources—distance from the lineaments and distance from the stream/river; an anthropogenic parameter—land use; and the climate parameter—the mean annual rainfall for four-time horizons and two RCPs. These parameters were spatially modelled and combined using the weighted overlay method to generate a landslide hazard model. As demonstration case studies, the landslide hazard models were developed for Bagmati and Madhesh provinces. The models were validated using the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (ROC) approach, which showed a satisfactory 81–86% accuracy in the study area. Spatial exposure analysis of the road network assets under the Strategic Road Network (SRN) was completed for seven landslide hazard scenarios. In both Bagmati and Madhesh provinces, the exposure analysis showed that the proportion of road sections exposed to landslide hazard significantly increases for the future climate change scenarios compared to the current baseline scenario.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
According to Thapa (2015), from 1971 to 2015, landslides killed approximately 200 people in Nepal each year, with one of the most severe landslide events in July 1993, killing 1336 people in central Nepal. The risk of slope failure has been further exacerbated due to the extreme rainfall events caused by climate change. We studied landslide hazards owing to extreme rainfall events in Bagmati and Madhesh provinces under several climate change scenarios. We developed high-resolution 1 km × 1 km downscaled extreme rainfall projections under selected extreme Global Climate Models (GCMs) from the Coupled Model Inter-comparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5), GCMs, with representative concentration pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) scenarios for 1976–2005 (baseline) as well as the 2030s, 2050s, and 2080s. Based on these extreme rainfall scenarios, we modelled and mapped rainfall-triggered regional landslide hazards by merging the Frequency Ratio (FR) and the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) techniques. The developed approach applies Geographic Information System (GIS) as a tool along with open data to develop the regional landslide hazard models. The study aims to understand better the spatial distribution of landslide hazard levels for current climate conditions and future time horizons and the potential exposure levels of the road transport infrastructure to the landslide hazard scenarios.
Exposure to climate-related extremes and hazards is the first step in assessing the vulnerability and risk of the system. In the context of a transport system, if an asset or system is located in a region directly affected by climate change and climate-induced hazards, it is referred to as “exposure” (Filosa et al. 2017).
2 Description of the Study Area
Bagmati and Madhesh Provinces are situated in the central region of Nepal, bordering Provinces 1 to the east, India to the south, Gandaki Province to the west, and China to the north. Bagmati and Madhesh Provinces are located in between latitudes of 27° 4′ and 28° 19′ N, and longitudes of 83° 56′ and 86° 59′ E (Fig. 1). Bagmati Province has thirteen districts and encompasses a total area of 20,300 km2. Madhesh Province has eight districts and covers an area of 9661 km2.
The road network in Nepal comprises the Strategic Road Network (SRN), which is maintained by the Department of Roads (DoR), and the Local Road Network (LRN), which is maintained by local governments (GoN/World Bank 2013). The spatial distribution of SRN is shown in Fig. 1. The total lengths of SRN roads in Bagmati and Madhesh Provinces are 2544 km and 1466 km, respectively (GoN/DoR 2018). The road density (km/100 km2) of SRN roads in Bagmati and Madhesh Provinces are 12.5 and 15.21, respectively (GoN/DoR 2018).
The study area is divided into five physiographic regions: the High Himalaya, High Mountain, Middle Mountain, Siwalik (Chure), and the Terai zones (Upreti and Dhital 1996). Land area in Bagmati Province spans from Siwalik region characterized by highly dissected sloping terrain, Middle Mountain with steep terrain, and High Mountain and High Himalayas with very steep mountainous terrain and very high prevalence of landslides. The majority of land in Madhesh Province is located in the flat Terai Region with northern areas in the Siwalik Hills, where the majority of landslides occur. Tectonically, those physiographical zones are separated by three thrust faults, viz. the Main Boundary, Main Central, and Main Frontal Thrust. The regional geology of the study area is divided into four tectonic zones, viz. Terai, Sub-Himalayan, Lesser Himalayan, and Higher Himalayan zones (Dhital 2015).
According to Dahal (2015), small and large-scale landslides occur in Nepal. The majority of small-scale landslides are discovered to develop on large-scale landslides. In many cases, the shallow rotational and translational landslides merge into the mainstream valley, resulting in devastating debris flows at nearby highways or communities.
3 Analysis Input Data
Three important datasets were compiled to map and analyze the landslide hazard viz the landslide inventory data, landslide controlling factors dataset, and landslide triggering factor (rainfall) dataset.
3.1 Landslide Inventory Map
The landslide inventory data was generated by Durham University and the National Society for Earthquake Technology of Nepal (NSET) under a project funded by the Department for International Development of the United Kingdom (DFID) - DFID/NERC SHEAR project number: 201844, in collaboration with the Durable Solutions 2 project. In this study, the data is on polygon shapefile, and we used the post-monsoon data of 2020 as landslide datasets. The landslides in the landslide inventory were randomly divided into two subsets, i.e., the training set area (80%) and the test/validation set area (20%), as suggested by Getachew and Meten (2021). The landslide size in the study area varied from 0.01 to 1.3 km2.
3.2 Landslide Controlling Factors Map
Pawluszek and Borkowski (2017) mentioned that there are no specific rules for defining the number of controlling factors sufficient for the landslide hazard analysis. With the combination of the works of literature mentioned above and the nature of the study area, nine different thematic layers together with terrain slope (°), distance from lineaments (m), distance from streams (m), elevation (m), lithology, soil, rainfall, land use, and terrain aspect were taken into consideration. The landslide controlling factor maps were rasterized with 12.5 m × 12.5 m pixels, and each raster was reclassified into appropriate thematic classes.
3.3 Rainfall Datasets and Projected Scenarios
Climate projections are widely used to understand climate extremes and their probability of occurrence in the future. Development of climate change projections, including regional and national level projections for climate extremes, could be accessed from four sources such as the Global Climate Models (GCMs), the Regional Climate Models (RCMs), from an understanding of the regional and national climate influences, and from the historical climate change recently observed (Seneviratne et al. 2012; Knutti et al. 2010; Christensen et al. 2007). As illustrated in Fig. 2, the suggested climate impact modelling methodology for identifying extreme events in the study area comprises six methodological steps.
As the current study focuses on identifying future extreme occurrences to determine the maximum hazardous levels for the study area, it is essential to choose those GCMs that give extreme conditions in the targeted areas in the future. The future climate scenarios for 2030 (averaging 2016–2045), 2050 (averaging 2036–2065), and 2080 (averaging 2066–2095) are developed in the study area based on current climate (rainfall and mean temperature from 1976 to 2005) across the same study region during the wet season. Because landslides are more common during the rainy (monsoon) season, it is thought to be the best time period to choose suitable GCMs. Then a skills test is suggested for the identification of the models. The Skill Test entails calculating the change in annual mean temperature (∆T) and percent change in yearly precipitation (∆P%) from each of the models (CMIP5 models).
4 Analysis Methods
The integrated weighted index method was used in this study. The integrated weighted index method was applied by merging the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and the Frequency Ratio (FR) method. The integration between these two methods has been peer-reviewed by Yi et al. (2019), Mondal and Maiti (2013), and El Jazouli et al. (2019). There are four important processes in the integrated weighted index method. The first step is to determine the relative importance of landslide controlling and triggering parameters using the AHP technique (Fig. 3). The second step is to describe a mutual relationship between the location of landslides and the controlling & triggering parameters by using the FR method. In the third step, landslide hazard maps were created using the weighted overlay tool in a GIS environment. In the fourth and last step, the operating characteristics curve (ROC) technique was used to validate the results of landslide hazard model predictions (Fig. 3).
4.1 Frequency Ratio Method
Frequency ratio (FR) values represent the connection between the landslide occurrence and the classes of every single controlling and triggering parameter. In terms of landslide evaluation and prediction, the frequency ratio approach is one of the most widely used statistical methods (Mandal and Mondal 2019). The FR relates the likelihood of the presence to the absence of landslide occurrence (Lee and Pradhan 2007). The landslide hazard can be evaluated from the spatial relationship between the controlling factor and landslides occurrences. The greater the FR ratio is the stronger is the link among the landslide controlling and triggering parameters and the incidence of landslides (Lee and Pradhan 2007).
The frequency ratio value is computed as described in the following formula:
where, Ncell (Si) is the number of grid cells in class I that have been identified as landslides, and Ncell (Ni) is the total number of grid cells in class I in the entire area. The total number of grid cells that have been identified as landslides in the entire area is ∑Ncell (Si), while the total number of grid cells in the entire area is ∑Ncell (Ni).
4.2 Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Method
The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method was first proposed by Saaty (1982, 1991, 2000) and is widely applied in the decision-making paradigm. AHP avoids the difficulties associated with random weights and rating systems by allowing judgment to influence relative importance features or weights rather than randomly assigning those features (Yalcin 2008).
CR stands for the likelihood that the matrix judgments were created at random, as follows:
Based on the arrangement of Malczewski’s matrix (1999), RI is the average of the resultant consistency index, and CI is the consistency index and may be represented as:
where λmax is the matrix’s largest value, which may be easily computed from the matrix, and n is the matrix’s order. R is a value that ranges from 0 to 1. A consistency ratio near one implies that the matrix’s rating was most likely generated randomly. A decent level of consistency is one with a consistency ratio of 0.10 or less (Malczewski 1999).
4.3 Integrated Weighted Index Method
FR is a statistical model based on data that can determine the spatial correlation between landslide locations and the controlling and triggering parameters (Yi et al. 2019). The FR technique, on the other hand, does not take into account the interdependence of controlling and triggering parameters. The AHP technique is a critical multiple-criteria decision-making method to address this problem. To a certain degree, the integrated approach retains the benefits of the FR and AHP methods while reducing their limitations.
By combining the FR and AHP techniques, the integrated weighted model examined the connection among the controlling and triggering parameters as well as the effect of each landslide controlling and triggering parameters on landslide frequency. The following formula can be used to obtain the integrated weighted index:
where m is the number of controlling and triggering factors, Wi denotes the weight assigned to each controlling and triggering factor using the AHP method, and FRi denotes the FR value assigned to the ith controlling and triggering factor using the FR method.
4.4 Validation Method
Validation of the model predictions is critical for landslide hazard mapping. The receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC) technique (Brenning 2005) was used to assess the effectiveness of the integrated weighted index model. The ROC curve is a plot of the model prediction’s sensitivity (percent of true positives) against the complement of its specificity (proportion of false positives, Jaiswal 2011). The true positive rate (TPR) was plotted in contradiction of the false positive rate (FPR) on the ROC curve, with TPR on the y-axis and FPR on the x-axis.
Specificity is the probability that a mapping unit with no landslide is correctly classified 1-specificity is the false positive rate measured along the curve’s x-axis (Jaiswal 2011). The area under the curve (AUC) ranged between 0.5 and 1.0, where a value of 1.0 suggested that the model performed perfectly, but a value near 0.5 indicated that the model performed poorly.
4.5 Exposure Assessment Method
The exposure of roads under the SRN is assessed as the physical exposure which is spatially exposed to the landslide hazard areas. The physical exposure of the road network is assessed as “the ratio or the proportion of road section length potentially affected by landslides in the current climate scenario and future climate change scenarios to the total length of the road,” the landslide being represented by the landslide hazard and the severity represented by the hazard classes. The exposure index for a road segment is calculated as
and the road exposure index for entire region (province) is calculated as
where, Ei is the exposure index of road segment i with the total length of Li and landslide exposed length of Lr. E is the exposure index of the road in the entire geographic region calculated as the proportion of the total length.
The landslide exposed length Lr for each road section is calculated using spatial overlay analysis of the existing SRN road network data (GoN/DoR 2018) with landslide hazard scenario maps of the current baseline period (1976–2005) and future climate change scenarios (2030, 2050 and 2080) in a GIS environment.
5 Results
5.1 Regional Landslide Hazard Maps
The weight for each controlling & triggering parameter was assigned using the analytic hierarchy process approach. The larger the weight is, the more significant the impact on landslide occurrences may be. The comparison quality is described by the consistency ratio (CR). Some works of literature related to landslides hazard mapping were investigated to find the appropriate correlation between the controlling and triggering factors (Mandal and Mondal 2019; Sonker et al. 2021; Yi et al. 2019).
Four factors considered to be the most important landslide controlling and triggering factors were slope, lithology, rainfall, and distance from lineaments. Thus, in this study, those four factors were given a higher weight than the other controlling factors. Some studies found no significant influence of aspect on slope stability (Ayalew and Yamagishi 2005), while some others found its effect on landslide initiation (Dai and Lee 2002). Thus, low weight was given to the aspect factor.
As mentioned above, in the AHP analysis, the consistency ratio characterizes the comparison’s reliability. In this study, the consistency ratio (CR) of the matrix of paired comparisons between the nine controlling and triggering factors in the hazard map is 0.012. A consistency ratio of 0.10 or less is considered a satisfactory degree of consistency (Malczewski 1999). Even though the consistency ratio of this study is consistent (0.012), the pair-wise comparison is subjective, and the precision is heavily reliant on the expert’s perspective. In order to reduce the subjectivity, the integrated weighted index model by combining FR and AHP was applied.
Based on the pairwise comparison matrix of AHP, the weight of slope was the highest (0.205 suggesting that slope has the greatest effect on the frequency of landslides). The weight of distance from lineaments and rainfall were the second and third highest (0.198 and 0.174, respectively), followed by lithology (0.134), soil (0.067), and distance from streams (0.061). Finally, the weights of aspect, elevation, and land use were the lowest (0.054). This suggested that these three parameters had the lowest impact on the prevalence of the landslide. The application of the integrated weighted index model demonstrated that landslide hazard levels were essentially compatible with landslide occurrence.
A total of seven maps of landslide hazard were developed from two RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 for time horizons 2030s, 2050s, and 2080s and baseline (1976–2005). The landslide hazard maps were divided into five categories: very low, low, moderate, high, and very high (Fig. 7). The total area of landslide hazard was quantified by calculating the area geometry in the GIS environment.
Based on the acquired landslide hazard maps, the area for each hazard level in scenarios shows different values. In the RCP8.5 scenario, for time horizon 2030, 2050, and 2080s, the hazardous zones, including zones with extremely high and high hazard levels, cover about 24%, 25%, and 30% of the study area, respectively.
In the case of the RCP4.5 scenario for time horizon 2030, 2050, and 2080, the very high and high hazard level zones covered approximately 22%, 23%, and 24% of the study area, respectively. The highest area value (8994 km2) of the high to very high hazard level was reached by the hazard map of RCP8.5 for time horizon 2080, where most of the high-very high hazard area is located in Bagmati province (8862 km2) and a small part of Madhesh province (132 km2, Tables 1 and 2). Concerning the hazard maps of RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 for time horizon 2030, 2050, and 2080, most parts of high to very high-level hazard zones are mainly distributed in Bagmati Province, especially in Rasuwa, Niwakot, Sindhupalohok, Dolahak, Dhading, Nuwakot, Ramechhap, the southern part of Lalitpur, north and northwestern part of Chitawan, Makawanpur, and Sindhuli district (Fig. 7).
5.2 Validation of Landslide Hazard Maps
Validation of modelled outputs is critical to evaluate the landslide hazard map results. A sample dataset of 8813 landslides was used as a validation dataset from the total (43,519 landslides sample dataset) to validate the reliability of the landslide hazard model.
The AUC values for the landslide hazard map (current climate and future projected scenarios) varied from 81 to 86%, which showed that the integrated weighted index model used in this analysis has a high degree of predictability. Figure 4 showed the ROC of the landslide hazard map for time horizon 2080s with RCP8.5.
5.3 Exposure Assessment Results
Exposure assessments of SRN roads in the study provinces were done for seven landslide hazard scenarios. In Bagmati Province, the majority of roads have low (35.5%) and medium (40.9%) risk to landslides in the baseline period, with 16 and 2.5% lengths of the roads exposed to high and very high landslide hazards. The proportion of road length exposed to very low and low landslide hazards decreases in all the time horizons for RCP4.5 and RCP8.5. It consequently increases in moderate, high, and very high hazardous categories compared to the baseline years (Fig. 5). Exposure to moderate, high, and very high hazard increases significantly for the RCP8.5 scenario in 2080.
For Madhesh Province, the majority proportion (68%) of the road is exposed to very low landslide hazard, with 31% low and negligible 0.9% to moderate hazard in the baseline period. The very low hazard proportion of the roads decreases significantly in the future horizons, consequently with a significant increase in the proportion of road length exposed to low and moderate hazardous landslides (Figs. 6 and 7).
6 Discussion
Compared to the landslide-hazardous areas modelled for the current baseline climate conditions (1976–2005), the landslide-hazardous areas increase significantly in extreme rainfall conditions for the future climate change scenarios for both RCPs. Results revealed that the regions with very high landslide hazard increased to 312 km2 (for RCP4.5) and 961 km2 (for RCP8.5) in the 2080s. Thus, it is predicted that landslide hazards will increase in future time horizons (in the 2030s, 2050s, and 2080s). RCP8.5 scenario showed larger hazardous areas than RCP4.5 in future time horizons, as RCP8.5 models predicted heavier rainfall than RCP4.5. In future periods, the Bagmati Province and northern part of Madhesh Province are likely to have higher landslide hazard areas than the current condition. In particular, it is predicted that landslide hazards in Bagmati and the northern area of Madhesh Provinces would increase in the 2030s (2016–2045), 2050s (2036–2065), and 2080s (2066–2095) in both RCP scenarios. In both scenarios, the landslide-hazardous areas for the 2080s were predicted to expand significantly to the area adjacent to Rasuwa, Sindhupalchok, and Dolakha districts.
The hazard map for time horizon 2080 with RCP8.5 represents the worst-case scenario for landslides. Although the majority of the study area (31%) was predicted to be on moderately hazardous to future landslides, 30% was indeed in the high and very high hazardous categories. The unsafe areas mentioned in the previous section require immediate mitigation actions. Reactivation of existing landslide sites and new landslides may occur, particularly along lineaments. The findings revealed the dependability (indicated by the AUC value that showed a satisfactory result of 81–86% accuracy) and practicality of the integrated weighted index model in regional landslide hazard mapping.
In Bagmati Province, the proportion of road length hazardous to very low and low landslides decreases for RCP4.5 scenarios. Consequently, the proportion increases for moderate, high, and very high landslide hazards for 2030, 2050 and 2080 horizons. Similarly, in Madhesh Province, the proportion of road length in low hazardous areas decreases in the future horizons, consequently with a significant increase in low and moderate hazards.
7 Conclusions
The landslide hazard modelling and mapping spatially locate the regions hazardous to landslides due to multi-variate factors under the extreme rainfall conditions for the current and projected future time horizons. Seven maps of landslide hazard were created, representing scenarios for RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 for future time horizons 2030s, 2050s, and 2080s and the current (1976–2005) baseline period. The significant increase in very high landslide hazardous areas between the baseline period and the long-term horizon in 2080 (for RCP8.5 scenario) indicates that the extreme rainfall due to climate change will substantially increase landslides at Bagmati and Madhesh provinces. These landslide hazard models and maps enable decision-making in the planning of road infrastructure through relatively safer areas indicated by very low, low, and/or moderate hazardous areas. Planning, designing, and construction of road infrastructure in the moderate hazardous areas may require road design parameters to adapt and/or mitigate the impacts of landslide hazards. Moderate hazardous areas may also be managed through climate adaptive measures, including green-grey infrastructures such as the incorporation of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) along with engineering solutions. These landslide hazard maps will further support vulnerability assessment of strategic roads in the provinces and identify critical road segments for planning and implementing climate adaptation measures and activities to enhance the climate resilience of the road infrastructure in the provinces.
The exposure analysis showed that the exposure levels of the roads to landslides would significantly increase in the future due to climate change impacts. The identification and mapping of road sections exposed to higher levels of landslide hazard enable road sector authorities to prioritize adaptation actions in these stretches of the road. Further, the exposure assessment provides an opportunity to target a more detailed study to model and quantify the hazard risk to the road transport network due to specific landslides that could occur in hazardous areas.
References
Ayalew L, Yamagishi, H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphology 65:15–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.06.010
Brenning A (2005) Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:853–862
Christensen JH, Hewitson B, Busuioc A, Chen A, Gau X, Held I, Jones R, Kolli R, Kwon W, Laprise R, Magaña Rueda V, Mearns L, Menéndez C, Räisänen J, Rinke A, Sarr A, Whetton P (2007) Regional climate projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 847–940
Dahal RK (2015) Earthquake-induced slope failure susceptibility in east Nepal. J Nepal Geol Soc 49:49–56
Dai FC, Lee CF (2002) Landslide characteristics and slope instability modelling using GIS, Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology 42:213–228
Dhital M (2015) Geology of the Nepal Himalaya: regional perspective of the classic collided orogen. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02496-7
El Jazouli A, Barakat A, Khellouk R (2019) GIS-multicriteria evaluation using AHP for landslide susceptibility mapping in Oum Er Rbia high basin (Morocco). Geoenviron Disast 6:3
Filosa G, Plovnick A, Stahl L, Miller R, Pickrell D (2017) Vulnerability assessment and adaptation framework, 3rd edn. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Federal Highway Administration, Cambridge, MA. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sustainability/resilience/adaptation_framework/
Getachew N, Meten M (2021) Weights of evidence modeling for landslide susceptibility mapping of Kabi-Gebro locality, Gundomeskel area, Central Ethiopia. Geoenviron Disast 8:6
GoN/DoR (2018) Statistics of strategic road network SSRN 2017/2018. HMIS-ICT Unit, Department of Roads
GoN/World Bank (2013) Nepal Road Sector Assessment Study. World Bank
Jaiswal P (2011) Landslide risk quantification along transportation corridors based on historical information. University of Twente, Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC)
Knutti R, Abramowitz G, Collins M, Eyring V, Glecker PJ, Hewitson B, Mearns L (2010) Good practice guidance paper on assessing and combining multi model climate projections. In: Stocker TF, Dahe Q, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Meeting report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change expert meeting on assessing and combining multimodel climate projections. IPCC Working Group I Technical Support Unit, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland, pp 1–13
Lee S, Pradhan B (2007) Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using frequency neural network model at Cameron Highland, Malaysia. Landslides 7:13–30
Malczewski J (1999) GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Wiley, New York
Mandal S, Mondal S (2019) Probabilistic approaches and landslide susceptibility. Geoinformatics and modelling of landslide susceptibility and risk. environmental science and engineering. Springer book series (ESE), pp 145–163
Mondal S, Maiti R (2013) Integrating the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and the frequency ratio (FR) model in landslide susceptibility mapping of Shiv-khola watershed, Darjeeling Himalaya. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 4:200–212
Pawluszek K, Borkowski A (2017) Impact of DEM-derived factors and analytical hierarchy process on landslide susceptibility mapping in the region of Rożnów Lake, Poland. Nat Hazards 86:919–952
Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1982) The logic of priorities; applications in business, energy, health, and transportation. Kluwer-Nijhoff. Reprinted in Paperback, Boston (1991), RWS Publications, Pittsburgh
Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1991) Prediction. Kluwer Academic, Projection and Forecasting, Boston
Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2000) Models. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Methods, Concepts and Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Boston
Seneviratne SI, Nicholls N, Easterling D, Goodess CM, Kanae S, Kossin J, Luo Y, Marengo J, McInnes K, Rahimi M, Reichstein M, Sorteberg A, Vera C, Zhang X (2012) Changes in climate extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment. In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken DJ, Ebi KL, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner GK, Allen SK, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp 109–230
Sonker I, Tripathi J, Singh, AK (2021) Landslide susceptibility zonation using geospatial technique and analytical hierarchy process in Sikkim Himalaya. Quat Sci Adv 4:100039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qsa.2021.100039
Thapa PB (2015) Occurrence of landslides in Nepal and their mitigation options. J Nepal Geol Soc 49(1):17–28
Upreti BN, Dhital MR (1996) Landslide studies and management in Nepal. ICIMOD, Nepal, p 87
Yalcin A (2008) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using analytical hierarchy process and bivariate statistics in Ardesen (Turkey): comparisons of results and confirmations, Catena, p 72
Yi Y, Zhang Z, Zhang W, Xu Q, Deng C, Li Q () GIS-based earthquake-triggered-landslide susceptibility mapping with an integrated weighted index model in Jiuzhaigou region of Sichuan Province, China. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 19. https://www.nepal2015eq.webspace.durham.ac.uk/
Acknowledgements
This study was made possible by the Climate Adaptation and Resilience (CARE) for South Asia Project, implemented by Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) with the support of World Bank. The landslide inventory data was developed under UKRI-DFID SHEAR program (201844-112) and obtained from National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority (NDRRMA) of Nepal for the study. We advise that the political/administrative boundary representation on the maps is not necessarily authoritative.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wijaya, I.P.K., Towashiraporn, P., Joshi, A., Jayasinghe, S., Dewi, A., Alam, M.N. (2023). Climate Change-Induced Regional Landslide Hazard and Exposure Assessment for Aiding Climate Resilient Road Infrastructure Planning: A Case Study in Bagmati and Madhesh Provinces, Nepal. In: Sassa, K., Konagai, K., Tiwari, B., Arbanas, Ž., Sassa, S. (eds) Progress in Landslide Research and Technology, Volume 1 Issue 1, 2022. Progress in Landslide Research and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16898-7_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16898-7_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-16897-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-16898-7
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)