A review of landslide risk acceptability practices in various countries

Oldrich Hungr,John Clague,N.R. Morgenstern,Doug VanDine,Darren Stadel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315375007-125

2018-04-17

Abstract:In course of a recent professional assignment, the authors have had the opportunity to review practices used in various parts of the world to manage landslide risks. The review was particularly, but not exclusively, focused on non-eruption volcanic landslides. The review revealed wide differences between the current scientific understanding of risk acceptance and actual applications in practical circumstances. There is also a fundamental difference between risk management connected with industrial and construction activities and that applied to natural landslide hazards. Landslide risk acceptability criteria are strongly influenced by utilitarian considerations. In many examples, surprisingly high levels of risk tolerance are applied for landslides. The process of setting the risk levels requires wide dialog and consensus between specialists, government decision makers and the public. To facilitate this consensus, clear and transparent communication between specialists and lay stakeholders is essential. High complexity of risk assessment methods often presents a hindrance to the required communication. This chapter presents a review of landslide risk acceptability practices in various countries. Landslide risk acceptability criteria are strongly influenced by utilitarian considerations. In many examples, surprisingly high levels of risk tolerance are applied for landslides. Rational methods of risk management have developed in industrial applications during the last half a century and are now routinely used to minimize losses from accidents in many industries. Study of landslide risk involves two distinct stages: hazard assessment, and risk assessment. Risk acceptance is based most often on setting acceptable maximum risk of death, due to a direct or indirect landslide impact, to a specific individual, usually the most exposed person in a given development. The Norwegian government also supports zoning of sensitive clay areas on the basis of risk, but a uniform benchmark for risk acceptability does not seem to be available. The United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive began to consider risk tolerance criteria for industrial accidents in 1974.