Debris-flow impact, vulnerability, and response

P. Santi (), K. Hewitt, D. VanDine and E. Barillas Cruz

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, 2011, vol. 56, issue 1, 402 pages

Abstract: This paper calls attention to vulnerable groups that are disproportionately affected by smaller, less-publicized debris flow events and do not always receive the advantages of recent technical advances. The most vulnerable groups tend to be economically restricted to live in relatively inexpensive and more dangerous locations, are often forced to live in topographically cramped areas due to expansion and development, and have limited influence and power needed to bring about mitigative efforts. Technical issues have long been the focus for debris-flow hazard reduction, but the collective judgment of many of those working toward natural hazards reduction, especially in developing countries, is that socio-cultural issues are at least as important as technical choices on the effectiveness of hazard and risk-reduction efforts. This awareness may result in (1) selecting simple designs that use local materials, local construction techniques and skills, and that recognize limited financial means; (2) selecting mitigative methods that require minimal maintenance, can withstand exposure to vandalism and scavenging, and will minimize misappropriation of resources; and (3) capitalizing on local techniques of dealing with other hazards, such as flooding, earthquakes, and landslides. Because of the difficulty in predicting and controlling debris flows, it is useful if mitigative systems can employ multiple elements to enhance the chance of success. These can include: education of the local populace, avoidance and warning to the degree possible, and some combination of channelization and interception of debris. For watersheds disturbed by fire, logging, mining, or construction, hillside treatment can be added to the mitigative methods to reduce water flow and sediment transport. Examples provided in this paper show that these mitigative systems can be tailored to fit widely varying socio-cultural settings, with different geological characteristics and different debris flow–triggering events. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Keywords: Debris flow; Socio-cultural; Mitigation; Vulnerability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-010-9576-8 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:56:y:2011:i:1:p:371-402

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11069

DOI: 10.1007/s11069-010-9576-8

Access Statistics for this article

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards is currently edited by Thomas Glade, Tad S. Murty and Vladimír Schenk

More articles in Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards from Springer, International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().