Abstract
Early Warning Systems (EWSs) are considered one of the main mechanisms for disaster risk reduction (DRR). In this sense, several efforts have been made by the international science and technology community to support the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR), giving special attention to the seventh global target focused on increasing the availability and access to multi-hazard early warning systems. Considering that landslides are one of the natural and socio-natural hazards that affect society in various parts of the world, the International Consortium on Landslides (ICL) has taken on the task of establishing regional and global network initiatives that promote the establishment of landslides early warnings systems (LEWSs). Although studies have recognised the significance of LEWSs, research has yet to systematically investigate the degree of implementation around the world. Therefore, and building on previous work, this chapter aims to provide an overview concerning enforcement of LEWSs in Upper Middle-Income Countries (UMIs). Based on a systematic literature review, the overall structure of the study takes the form of five sections. An introduction to the significance of LEWSs is provided in the first part. The second section provides an overview of the common architecture of LEWSs. The third part is concerned with the methodology employed for this study. Results of the study are presented in the fourth section and the final part brings together the key findings. Of the total publications that met the specified criteria and were analysed, only 19, that is, 5%, focused on different dimensions of the actual implementation of the LEWS.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
Early Warning Systems (EWSs) are considered a fundamental mechanism for disaster risk reduction (DRR). In supporting the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) (UNISDR 2015), the scientific and technological community have made major efforts to build EWSs associated with different hazards. To this regard, the International Consortium for Landslides (ICL) have provided a sustained platform for international collaboration consisting of high-recognised experts and Centres of Excellence. Through research, capacity building, networking, and practice, ICL specialists have undertaken diverse projects around the world in benefit of society. Examples of this type of global strategies include the Sendai Landslide Partnerships 2015–2025 (Sassa 2015, 2016) and the Kyoto Landslide Commitment 2020 (KLC2020) (Alcántara-Ayala and Sassa 2021).
One of the main pillars of the KCL2020 is to promote greater awareness of the significance of people-centred early warning aiming at achieving high accuracy and reliable prediction technology for landslides in time and space, within a changing climate context (Sassa 2019, 2020). This endeavour goes hand in hand with the recognition of the need to implement the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) and particularly its seventh global target focused on “Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments to people by 2030.” (UNISDR 2015).
The design and implementation of landslide early warning systems (LEWSs) is central in all regions of the world. Building on previous research concerning the implementation of LEWSs in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LICs and MICs), the analysis presented here seeks to provide an overview concerning enforcement of LEWSs in Upper Middle-Income Countries (UMIs), from 1991 to 2021. In addition to the introduction, this chapter is composed of four sections: a brief account concerning the architecture of EWSs, the methodology, results, and a final reflection on the current insights and new perspectives.
2 Landslide Early Warning Systems (LEWSs): Common Architecture
Despite the definition of people-centred EWSs (ISDR-PPEW 2005), efforts have mostly been implemented from technical perspectives. EWSs are linked to a greater extent to the response to emergencies and humanitarian crises, while technological interventions are accepted as solutions to explicitly advance integrated analysis, instead of guiding practices in the formulation of policies that guarantee the reduction of disaster risk (Alcántara-Ayala and Oliver-Smith 2019).
Such experiences are neither articulated nor specifically oriented to the understanding of disaster risk (Alcántara-Ayala and Oliver-Smith 2017) and what is more, lack engagement of people into co-production of knowledge processes, and therefore in the appropriation of warnings.
Quite often the main architecture of LEWSs is made up of three basic ingredients: landslide instrumentation and monitoring, identification of thresholds and diverse data for the establishment of warnings and final alerts, and landslide communication and response (Fig. 1).
It would be understandable that many of the experts in charge of the technical aspects of the development of warning systems are not interested in preparedness strategies, risk communication processes and even less in disaster risk governance issues. However, because all such processes require the articulation of institutions, sectors, and actors, it should be a priority to focus on the participation of relevant stakeholders in disaster risk (Alcántara-Ayala 2021). Therefore, it also needs to be recognised that the organisation and functioning of transdisciplinary teams could lead to the implementation of LEWS in specific social contexts in a satisfactory and sustained manner.
3 Methodology
The study was conducted in the form of a systematic review of literature, with data being gathered via ISI Web of Science database. It comprised definition of the review scope, literature search, literature analysis and synthesis, along with current insights and new perspectives of LEWSs.
The literature search was conducted between January and February 2022. Analogously to the study carried out for low- and lower-middle-income countries (LICs and MICs) (Alcántara-Ayala and Garnica-Peña 2022) the analysis involved search criteria and keywords by considering the words “landslide”, “warning system”, and “early warning” in the title and abstract of the articles.
A total of 1762 articles were included as search outputs, and the publication period of 1991–2021 was chosen to elude the inclusion of work in progress in 2022 (Fig. 2).
After filtering process to exclude papers which did not have the full abstract available, search results were limited to 1691 papers. Furthermore, following the filtering of publications issued in other language than English, number of papers decreased to 1669.
Due to additional filtering, the number of publications was reduced to 1129 by removing articles that were not suitable for the scope of the review, as well as data papers, retracted publications, editorial material, and letters.
The final step of filtering comprised the classification of the articles according to the countries of publication. Low, Lower middle, Upper middle- and High-income categories were considered. The final selection concentrated on upper-middle income countries. Thus, the number of documents examined for this study was 384 (Fig. 2).
Considering the previous experience in this topic, the analysis and synthesis of the literature included geographical analysis, time, institutions, research areas, methodological typology, and approaches (Fig. 2).
After the final selection of publications, differences were reviewed and further discussed by two researchers to ensure relevance to the specified objective.
Data management and analysis was carried out using Excel and HistCite.
Current insights and new perspectives of LEWS in upper-middle income countries (UMICs) were built on the basis of the relevant insights included in the set of articles analysed and the practical knowledge of the authors.
4 Results
Publications considered in this analysis were carried out by researchers working in institutions situated in UMICs including Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Colombia, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mexico, Thailand, Turkey, Romania, and Russia.
While the first publication concerning LEWS included in ISI Web of Science was available in 1991, it was until 1998 that the first publication in UMICSs appeared. As such, the period of analysis included here is 1998–2021 (Fig. 3).
After the first publication on LEWSs in UMICs in 1998, there was a period of time in which this type of publication was irregular, and it was until 2012 that the number increased to 21 publications.
As of 2015, the number of publications increased to 32 and between this year and 2021, practically 75% of the total publications on this topic have been made.
Types of publications analysed included articles (N = 261), conference proceedings (N = 117), book chapters (N = 2) and reviews (N = 4). The publications focused on various fields of research in the diverse topic areas associated with landslides. Of the total publications, 40% was concentrated in the areas of geological engineering (N = 66), followed by engineering (N = 41), geology-water resources (N = 28) and geology (N = 20). Additional relevant areas included instrumentation (N = 12), computer science (N = 12), environmental science and ecology (N = 12), remote sensing (N = 12) and water resources (N = 11) (Fig. 4). The predominance of technical approaches associated with LEWS is clearly expressed in the scarcity of publications from the perspective of the social sciences. Not a single publication was issue from this field.
Most of the papers regarding these topics were published, in the Landslides Journal (N = 35), followed by Natural Hazards (N = 14), the Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment (N = 13), Remote Sensing (N = 12) and Sensors (N = 12). Further publications were included in publications such as Environmental Earth Sciences (N = 11), Engineering Geology (N = 10), Applied Sciences-Basel (N = 9) and the Journal of Mountain Science (N = 9) (Fig. 5).
Experts from 528 institutions participated as contributors of more than one publication, whereas those of 384 contributed to one publication. Main institutions regarding participation in the largest number of publications involved China University Geosciences (N = 50), Chinese Academy of Sciences (N = 39), Chengdu University of Technology (N = 29) and Changan University (N = 16) (Fig. 6).
Additional institutions included China University of Mining and Technology (N = 12), University Chinese Academy of Sci (N = 12), Wuhan University (N = 12), China Geological Survey (N = 11), Nanjing University (N = 11), Tongji University (N = 11), Saitama University (N = 10), Hohai University (N = 9), and China Three Gorges University (N = 8) (Fig. 6).
According to the results, the published investigations were focused on four main lines of work: hazard analysis for LEWSs, technical developments for potential LEWSs, models and prototypes for LEWSs, and actual implementation of LEWSs, including those concerning community-based approaches (Fig. 7).
Hazard analysis for LEWSs was the area for which the highest percentage of publications was identified (N = 215, 56%). The second area concerned technological developments for potential LEWSs (N = 73, 19%), while the third, involved the design, development, calibration and validation of models and prototypes for LEWSs (N = 55, 14%). Publications regarding the actual implementation of LEWSs and community-based approaches for LEWSs were regarded as the fourth area of concern (N = 18, 5%).
Additional themes derived from the results of the analysis included socio-economic benefits of LEWSs, data collection concerning vulnerability factors, framework for ISO LEWSs, necessity to implement LEWSs, obstacles for implementation, landslide management programs, landslide policy making and scientific international collaborations (Fig. 7).
While there is every indication that there is a growing interest in the development of LEWSs in UMICs, number of publications in different countries was uneven.
The largest number of publications per country was concentrated in China (N = 326, 86.5%), followed by Malaysia (N = 16, 4.1%) and Brazil (N = 14, 3.5%) (Fig. 8). The number of study cases per country showed a similar pattern with the largest concentration in China (N = 200, 74%), Malaysia (N = 11, 4%) and Brazil (N = 10, 3.7%) (Fig. 9). Yet, results of the literature review suggested that there are only a limited number of publications concerning the actual implementation of LEWS.
4.1 Hazard Analysis for LEWSs
Of the total publications, 56% focused on different aspects related to the production of information about the dynamics of landslide hazards. Publications included topics as diverse as susceptibility and hazard maps, the use of Geographic Information Systems, Digital Terrain Models and LiDAR-derived DEMs, GPS technology, in situ monitoring, geological and geomorphological research, identification of rainfall intensity-duration thresholds, laboratory experiments and simulations, displacement prediction models, physics-based landslide forecasting models, numerical simulations and modelling, machine learning algorithms, ground based synthetic aperture radar interferometry, among others.
4.2 Technical Developments for Potential LEWSs
Wide interest in developing LEWSs was identified in the publications. These comprised and innovative diverse approaches. Among these are model tests on loess, creep models of rock slides, alert velocity thresholds for pre-alert, alert and emergency phases, wireless monitoring, 5G Internet of Things technology, WebGIS, black box models based on statistical analysis, sensor technologies, spatial information technologies, 3D visualization technologies, landslide-forecasting models, early warning indicator system of dump landslide in opencast mines, multi-parameter integrated monitoring systems, meteorological-geotechnical early warning systems, extreme learning machine, and artificial neural network methods.
4.3 Models and Prototypes for LEWSs
Numerous models and prototypes for the development of LEWSs have been documented in the analysed publications. These were the equivalent to 14.3% of the total publications.
Among the different technologies used for the creation and operation of LEWSs stand out 3D thresholds for alerting zones, micro electro mechanical systems, multivariate wireless monitoring sensor units, novel frameworks that employs Earth Observations technologies, coupling hydrological and geotechnical models, intelligent monitoring and early warning system based on microservice architecture, and transmission and display of key monitoring data by 5G communication and advanced data visualisation technologies.
In practice, this means that models and prototypes are developed according to the different technologies available particularly but not exclusively in countries such as China, which can be relevantly used in terms of the potential implementation of LEWSs.
4.4 Operational LEWSs from Publications in UMICs
In total, 14 publications referred to the implementation of LEWSs. Four of them concerned the enforcement of LEWSs in Brazil, and ten in China.
In Brazil, experiences derived from the implementation of a LEWS based on meteorological information, rainfall data and field observation to forecast the occurrence of landslides in Serra do Mar, State of São Paulo, were discussed by Macedo et al. (1998). Likewise, the Rio-Watch project, was set up to provide two hours in advance early warning for rainfall induced landslides in Rio de Janeiro (Ortigao et al. 2001), an area severely affected by landslides.
Kong et al. (2020) focused on a sustained effort around evaluating the performance over a 40-year period of the Landslip Warning System established by the Geotechnical Engineering Office of Hong Kong government, which has been considered the first territorial-wide early warning system for landslides of the world. Previous works have paid attention to improvements to this LEWS to provide guidance on slope design, landslide preparedness, and planning for rainfall-induced landslides (Chan et al. 2003; Pang 2003).
Other notable publications included the implementation of LEWSs in diverse regions of China. For example, Ju et al. (2015) designed and applied a four-level LEWSs (zero, outlook, attention, and warning) in Guizhou Province. Hu (2005) provided an account of the background, configuration and major achievements of the Upper Yangtze Mudflow and Landslide Early Warning System (EWS) and shows how it has been operating through both a structural and non-structural approaches. Moreover, the reliability and efficiency of a LEWS in Sichuan Province, China has been intensively investigated based on the experience of the Panzhihua Airport landslide (Wang et al. 2013).
A well-known study that is often cited in LEWS research is that of Yin et al. (2010), who have been conducting real-time monitoring and early warning of landslides in the Three Gorges Reservoir since 1999. Additional efforts have been reinforced since 2003 in the relocated city of Wushan in the same region, in which four risk levels have been included as criteria for alerting critical situations.
To further examine the role of early warning and emergency response, Fan et al. (2019) documented the case of a successful early warning and timely evacuation well in advance of a large rockslide that occurred on 17 February 2019 in Guizhou Province, China.
Another recurring theme in the LEWS literature is the impact of landslides and debris flows on pipelines. In this sense, Jia (2010) carried out a spatial analysis with forecast rainfall data in a GIS platform to produce a hazard zoning as the basis for the implementation of a LEWS for the Lanzhou-Chengdu-Chongqing pipeline, and additionally measures of protection were also suggested.
4.4.1 Community-Based Approaches to LEWSs
A significant analysis and discussion on the implementation of LEWS for disaster risk reduction was presented by Yang et al. (2012). They recognized the importance of governance and risk management in the context of global climate change and the impact of rainfall-induced landslides in the Wenchuan earthquake region. Therefore, the participation of the government, a research centre and the local community for landslide prediction, monitoring and warning was encouraged. This trilateral cooperation, which included effective communication during the rainy season after the Wenchuan earthquake, led to successful hazard monitoring, forecasting, and warning.
In another important study, Liu et al. (2016) developed a government-led, community-based LEWS in the Wanzhou district of the Three Gorges Reservoir. They reported several strategies to improve community resilience to landslides. This included the establishment of a real-time landslide monitoring system in which community members carried out various monitoring activities, and the understanding of the early warning system and landslide response protocols were also considered in the strategy emergencies.
Building on the experience derived from the occurrence of the Boli landslide on the right bank of Taozi Gully, a branch of the Jiami River in Taozi town, Sichuan Province, China, Hu et al. (2019) proposed a community based LEWSs on the basis of real-time evacuation.
4.5 Additional Topics of Concern Related to LEWSs in UMICs
Further to the four main lines of work identified in the review, the publications focused on several notable contributions that represent new directions in the growing body of research on LEWS.
In order to identify priority areas related to vulnerable populations to be included in LEWS, de Assis Dias et al. (2020) developed an Operational Index for Vulnerability Analysis for 443 Brazilian municipalities. Obtained results indicated the feasibility of incorporating socioeconomic information in the context of the Brazilian Early Warning System.
Pun et al. (2020) provided an account of the development of the Geotechnical Engineering Office, which was originally established to manage Slope Safety System in Hong Kong, particularly from a technical perspective. Recent advances have given rise to multi-pronged risk management strategies aimed at improving emergency preparedness considering the occurrence of more frequent and intense events under the effect of climate change.
Yin et al. (2018) argued that, despite the importance of the direct effects of the occurrence of landslides along the shorelines of reservoirs, attention should be paid to the indirect consequences in terms of impacts on maritime transport or the coastal properties. In this sense, they also provided information on how to build alliances between geologists and administrative agencies within risk management frameworks.
Melo et al. (2017) used a survey to evaluate the various aspects related to the perception of community leaders about the LEWSs alert system in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. They analysed data from 71 interviews and concluded that there is low public adherence to the LEWS due to local violence preventing people from evacuating by staying home to protect one’s property. Additional problems with temporary shelters and routes also contributed to people’s lack of participation in the implementation of the LEWS.
Using a questionnaire in the Longmen Shan region of Southwest China, public responses to landslide risks were assessed with respect to various types of countermeasures, including structural engineering measures and early warning systems. In this helpful survey, Huang et al. (2021) were able to show that the public has a good general understanding of landslide risks with a high level of belief in the positive impact of countermeasures. Also, it was found that people are more likely to trust a LEWS than an engineering measure. Based on the various insights derived from the analysis, they also concluded that false alarm intolerance should be considered in LEWS.
From another angle, a free and open-source toolbox for landslide risk analysis and a disaster warning system was designed in accordance with international standards to support Turkey’s Provincial Disaster Management Centres (Aydinoglu and Bilgin 2015).
To determine the economic benefit of geo-hazard monitoring and warning engineering in the Three Gorges Reservoir, Yu et al. (2015) analysed the case of the Zhangjiawan landslide in Guojiaba Town, Zigui County. This study suggested the effectiveness of these measures as land has the greatest benefit in direct reduction loss, while the largest indirect reduction losses are in agricultural production and the ecological environment.
4.6 Scientific International Collaborations
The successful implementation of the SFDRR relies on the significant role of scientific collaborations at different scales and across regions (UNISDR 2015). As recently stated in the Global Assessment Report 2022, mutual communication and cross-boundary and cross-disciplinary collaborations are needed to be able to share and apply in the best possible way expertise, multiple perspectives, strategic vision, and creativity (UNDRR 2022).
Although from the literature review presented here it is difficult to identify all collaborations on LEWSs between countries, results indicate more than hundred partnerships. Accordingly, China has built 86 reported collaborations with diverse countries, in particular Italy, United Kingdom, Canada, United States of America, Australia, Hungary, Qatar, New Zealand, France, Norway, Austria, Spain, Japan, Netherlands, Taiwan, Germany and Czechia (Fig. 10).
Likewise, Brazil strengthened scientific ties with Canada, China, Switzerland, Colombia and Italy, while Colombia set-up partnerships with Canada, Switzerland, Austria and Italy, and Russia with Germany, China, Italy and Japan (Fig. 10).
A fruitful collaboration worth to mention is that between Brazil and Italy led to the implementation of both Alerta-Rio LEWSs (Calvello et al. 2015a) and community-based alert and alarm system for rainfall induced landslides in Rio de Janeiro (Calvello et al. 2015b).
Other examples of collaboration have been mirrored in the interactions among ICL regional and thematic networks. For example, Guo et al. (2013) enhanced partnerships to study landslides in the permafrost regions and regions with extreme weather conditions.
5 Discussion
Despite the existence of a series of international, regional, and national initiatives to promote the establishment of EWSs associated with diverse type of hazards, efforts have not been encouraged from integrated perspectives yet.
The significance of the development of LEWSs has been clearly recognised and this has promoted the design of diverse architectures on which the ingredients of landslide disaster risk assessments have been considered. Nonetheless, according to results presented here, the pace of implementation of such efforts is not as dynamic as reality requires.
Several topics concerning LEWSs were identified through the literature review. They were as diverse as operational LEWSs from publications in UMICs and community-based approaches to LEWSs, hazard analysis, technical developments for potential LEWSs, models and prototypes, socio-economic benefits of LEWSs, data collection concerning vulnerability factors, framework for ISO LEWSs, necessity to implement LEWSs, obstacles for implementation, landslide management programs, landslide policy making and scientific international collaborations. However, there is still a clear trend toward concentration of hazards and technical related issues.
Scientific networks and alliances developed in the recent years have provided strong support for the design of LEWS through research collaborations. Although the science behind LEWSs does not seem to be an obstacle for implementation, one of the arguments involved in explaining the poor implementation of LEWSs in different countries is the lack of integrated efforts and communication among the relevant stakeholders, particularly the communities at risk.
6 Concluding Remarks
This systematic literature review has provided additional evidence with respect to the implementation of actual LEWSs in UMICs.
More generally, research is also needed to determine whether, in addition to the analysis of scientific literature, it is possible to systematically identify the implementation of LEWSs derived from information associated with policy and practice.
New collaborations and partnerships to manage disaster risk demand solid partnerships between institutions responsible for disaster risk reduction and related topics such as environmental management, climate change action, planning and finance (UNDRR 2022). In this vein, it can be noted that future progress in landslide disaster research should consider advances in the largest possible number of countries, inclusive of UMICs.
The creation of a successful LEWS require a sustained effort and commitment from different stakeholders, from the authorities to the communities at risk, where scientists can play a significant role bringing together insights and diverse approaches.
Therefore, scientific collaborations are compelled to recognise that indigenous and traditional knowledge are equally valuable for shaping alliances and transdisciplinary efforts oriented to the co-production of knowledge.
Essential efforts must encompass the design and implementation of LEWS at different scales, but particularly in and with the sustained active engagement of local communities.
References
Alcántara-Ayala I (2021) Integrated Landslide Disaster Risk Management (ILDRiM): the challenge to avoid the construction of new disaster risk. Environ Hazards 20(3):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2020.1810609
Alcántara-Ayala I, Garnica-Peña RJ (2022) Landslide warning systems in low- and lower-middle-income countries: future challenges and societal impact. In: Progress in landslide research and technology, vol 1, no 1. Book series of the international consortium on landslides. Springer Nature, Switzerland
Alcántara-Ayala I, Oliver-Smith A (2017) The necessity of early warning articulated systems (EWASs): critical issues beyond response. In: Sudmeier-Rieux K, Fernández M, Penna IM, Jaboyedoff M, Gaillard JC (eds) Identifying emerging issues in disaster risk reduction, migration, climate change and sustainable development. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp 101−124. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33880-4_7
Alcántara-Ayala I, Oliver-Smith A (2019) Early warning systems: lost in translation or late by definition? A FORIN approach. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 10:317–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-019-00231-3
Alcántara-Ayala I, Sassa K (2021) Contribution of the international consortium on landslides to the implementation of the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction: engraining to the science and technology roadmap. Landslides 18:21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01539-8
Aydinoglu AC, Bilgin MS (2015) Developing an open geographic data model and analysis tools for disaster management: landslide case. Nat Hazard 15(2):335–347. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-335-2015
Calvello M, d’Orsi RN, Piciullo L, Paes N, Magalhaes M, Lacerda WA (2015a) The Rio de Janeiro early warning system for rainfall-induced landslides: analysis of performance for the years 2010–2013. Int J Disaster Risk Reduction 12:3–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.10.005
Calvello M, D’Orsi RN, Piciullo L, Paes NM, Magalhaes MA, Coelho R, Lacerda WA (2015b) The community-based alert and alarm system for rainfall induced landslides in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. In: Engineering geology for society and territory, vol 2. Springer, Cham, pp 653–657. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09057-3_109
Chan RKS, Pang PLR, Pun WK (2003) Recent developments in the landslip warning system in Hong Kong. In: Proceedings of the 14th Southeast Asian geotechnical conference, Balkema, Lisse, The Netherlands, pp 137–151
de Assis Dias MC, Saito SM, dos Santos Alvalá RC, Seluchi ME, Bernardes T, Camarinha PIM, Nobre CA (2020) Vulnerability index related to populations at-risk for landslides in the Brazilian Early Warning System (BEWS). Int J Disaster Risk Reduction 49:101742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101742
Fan X, Xu Q, Liu J, Subramanian SS, He C, Zhu X, Zhou L (2019) Successful early warning and emergency response of a disastrous rockslide in Guizhou province, China. Landslides 16(12):2445–2457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01269-6
Guo Y, Canuti P, Strom A, Hideaki M, Shan W (2013) The first meeting of ICL landslides in cold regions network, Harbin, 2012. Landslides 10(1):99–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-012-0369-x
Hu D (2005) The Upper Yangtze landslide and mudflow early-warning system (EWS). In: Shang H (ed) Proceedings of the 2nd international yellow river forum on keeping healthy life of the river, vol II, pp 445–454
Hu G, Liu M, Chen N, Zhang X, Wu K, Raj Khanal B, Han D (2019) Real-time evacuation and failure mechanism of a giant soil landslide on 19 July 2018 in Yanyuan County, Sichuan Province, China. Landslides 16(6):1177–1187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01175-x
Huang H, Huang J, Liu D, He Z (2021) Understanding the public responses to landslide countermeasures in southwest China. Int J Disaster Risk Reduction 64:102500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102500
ISDR-PPEW (2005) International Early Warning Programme (IEWP). Brochure, 4 p. ISDR Platform for the Promotion of Early Warning (PPEW), Bonn
Jia S (2010) Pipeline geo-hazard prediction and early warning during summer monsoon based on GIS technology. In: International pipeline conference, vol 44205, pp 59–67
Ju NP, Huang J, Huang RQ, He CY, Li YR (2015) A real-time monitoring and early warning system for landslides in Southwest China. J Mt Sci 12(5):1219–1228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-014-3307-7
Kong VWW, Kwan JSH, Pun WK (2020) Hong Kong’s landslip warning system 40 years of progress. Landslides 17(6):1453–1463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01379-6
Liu Y, Yin K, Chen L, Wang W, Liu Y (2016) A community-based disaster risk reduction system in Wanzhou, China. Int J Disaster Risk Reduction 19:379–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.09.009
Macedo ES, Ogura AT, Santoro J (1998) Landslide warning system in Serra do Mar slopes, São Paulo, Brazil. In: Engineering geology: a global view from the Pacific Rim, pp 1967–1971
Melo PDO, de Britto RM, Fontainha TC, Leiras A, Bandeira RADM (2017) Evaluation of community leaders’ perception regarding Alerta Rio, the warning system for landslides caused by heavy rains in Rio de Janeiro. Nat Hazards 89(3):1343–1368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-3023-z
Ortigao JAR, Justi MG, d’Orsi R, Brito H (2001) Rio-Watch 2001: the Rio de Janeiro landslide alarm system. In: Ho, Li (eds) Proceedings of 14th Southeast Asian geotechnical conference, Hong Kong, Balkema, vol 3, pp 237–241
Pang PLR (2003) Selected studies related to rain-induced landslides in Hong Kong. In: Proceedings of the twelfth Asian regional conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, vol 1 and 2, pp 1403–1412
Pun WK, Chung PWK, Wong TKC, Lam HWK, Wong LA (2020) Landslide risk management in Hong Kong—experience in the past and planning for the future. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01291-8
Sassa K (2015) ISDR-ICL Sendai partnerships 2015–2025 for global promotion of understanding and reducing landslide. Landslides 12(4):631–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0586-1
Sassa K (2016) Implementation of the ISDR-ICL Sendai partnerships 2015–2025 for global promotion of understanding and reducing landslide disaster risk. Landslides 13(2):211–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-016-0690-x
Sassa K (2019) The fifth world landslide forum and the final draft of the Kyoto 2020 commitment. Landslides 16(2):201–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-01133-z
Sassa K (2020) Launching session of the Kyoto landslide commitment 2020. Landslides 17(8):1743–1744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01467-7
UNDRR [United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction] (2022) Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction. UNDRR, Geneva, Switzerland
UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction) (2015) Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030. UNISDR, Geneva
Wang HH, Tuo XG, Zhang GY, Peng FL (2013) Panzhihua airport landslide (Oct. 3rd 2009) and an emergency monitoring and warning system based on the internet of things. J Mt Sci 10(5):873–884. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-013-2368-3
Yang ZJ, Qiao JP, Shi LL (2012) Application of stakeholder engagement based risk management system on geological hazards: a case study in Wenchuan earthquake hit region. In: Conference on information systems for crisis response and management Asia 2012, pp 8–12
Yin Y, Wang H, Gao Y, Li X (2010) Real-time monitoring and early warning of landslides at relocated Wushan Town, the Three Gorges Reservoir, China. Landslides 7(3):339–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-010-0220-1
Yin K, Chen L, Ma F, Cheng W (2018) Practice and thinking of landslide risk management considering their secondary consequences in the Three-Gorges Reservoir, China. In: Landslides and engineered slopes. Experience, theory and practice. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 2097–2105
Yu S, Hou J, Lv J, Ba G (2015) Economic benefit assessment of the geo-hazard monitoring and warning engineering system in the Three Gorges Reservoir area: a case study of the landslide in Zigui. Nat Hazards 75(2):219–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1112-9
Acknowledgements
Our sincere gratitude to DGAPA-UNAM, who kindly provided financial support to carry out landslide risk research through Project PAPIIT IN300823. Thanks, are also due to Prof. Veronica Tofani from the University of Florence for her valuable review of this manuscript.
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
Alcántara-Ayala, I., Garnica-Peña, R.J. (2023). Landslide Warning Systems in Upper Middle-Income Countries: Current Insights and New Perspectives. In: Alcántara-Ayala, I., et al. Progress in Landslide Research and Technology, Volume 1 Issue 2, 2022. Progress in Landslide Research and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18471-0_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18471-0_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-18470-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-18471-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)