IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v120y2024i15d10.1007_s11069-024-06811-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk analysis and evaluation of emergency rescue in landslide disaster

Author

Listed:
  • Mengyao Wang

    (China University of Geosciences (Beijing))

  • Wenkun Wang

    (China University of Geosciences (Beijing))

  • Caiyan Dai

    (China University of Geosciences (Beijing))

  • Chenglong Ma

    (China University of Geosciences (Beijing))

  • Yun Luo

    (China University of Geosciences (Beijing))

  • Ming Xu

    (China University of Geosciences (Beijing))

Abstract

Landslides caused by heavy rainfall are among the most frequent geological hazards. The steep slope of the landslide, the poor stability of the slippery soil and rock, and the continuous increase in the water content by heavy rainfall make it considerably easy for secondary derivative disasters to occur during emergency rescue operations, seriously threatening the lives of rescue teams and affected people. Therefore, studying the risk of landslide disaster emergency rescue is vital to ensuring the survival of rescuers and disaster victims. Risk factors of emergency rescue risk are analyzed by a typical landslide rescue case. Then, a comprehensive quantitative method for assessing emergency rescue risks of landslide disasters is constructed. The three dimensions of quantitative methods are the possibility of landslides, the severity of the consequences, and the temporal and spatial sensitivity. The cloud model method is used to evaluate the importance of the evaluation structure of 55 factors by 20 experts. The analytic hierarchy method is used to calculate the weight of each index, and the as low as reasonably practicable principle is used to divide the risk value and risk level. Twenty-four key factors are finally screened based on each factor’s mean, entropy, and over entropy, which are used as quantitative risk indicators for landslide disaster emergency rescue. The four levels of emergency rescue risk are divided. Verification is conducted using a landslide disaster rescue case as an example to demonstrate the feasibility of the quantitative risk method. This study confirms that the possibility, severity, and sensitivity of the three risk quantification dimensions of emergency rescue in landslide disasters can more comprehensively summarize the various risk factors in the disposal process.

Suggested Citation

  • Mengyao Wang & Wenkun Wang & Caiyan Dai & Chenglong Ma & Yun Luo & Ming Xu, 2024. "Risk analysis and evaluation of emergency rescue in landslide disaster," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 120(15), pages 14809-14835, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:120:y:2024:i:15:d:10.1007_s11069-024-06811-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-024-06811-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-024-06811-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-024-06811-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Di Wang & Mengmeng Hao & Shuai Chen & Ze Meng & Dong Jiang & Fangyu Ding, 2021. "Assessment of landslide susceptibility and risk factors in China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 108(3), pages 3045-3059, September.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L. & Vargas, Luis G., 1987. "Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 107-117, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    2. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    3. Ji-Hee Lee & Woo-Young Chun & Jun-Ho Choi, 2021. "Weighting the Attributes of Human-Related Activities for Fire Safety Measures in Historic Villages," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-12, March.
    4. Zeshui Xu, 2013. "Compatibility Analysis of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relations in Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 463-482, May.
    5. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    6. Stefanos Dosis & George P. Petropoulos & Kleomenis Kalogeropoulos, 2023. "A Geospatial Approach to Identify and Evaluate Ecological Restoration Sites in Post-Fire Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, December.
    7. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Stochastic preference analysis in numerical preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 628-633.
    8. Jodlbauer, Herbert & Tripathi, Shailesh & Brunner, Manuel & Bachmann, Nadine, 2022. "Stability of cross impact matrices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    9. Lucas, Rochelle Irene & Promentilla, Michael Angelo & Ubando, Aristotle & Tan, Raymond Girard & Aviso, Kathleen & Yu, Krista Danielle, 2017. "An AHP-based evaluation method for teacher training workshop on information and communication technology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 93-100.
    10. Hahn, Eugene D., 2006. "Link function selection in stochastic multicriteria decision making models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(1), pages 86-100, July.
    11. Cecilia Njoroge & Anja Smith & Marisa von Fintel, 2024. "Inequalities in Water Insecurity in Kenya: A Multidimensional Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 171-193, October.
    12. Huimin Zhang & Meng Li & Wen Chen, 2023. "Assessing Competitiveness in New Energy Vehicle Enterprises: A Group Decision Model with Interval Multiplicative Preference Relations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    13. Kim, Soung Hie & Han, Chang Hee, 2000. "Establishing dominance between alternatives with incomplete information in a hierarchically structured attribute tree," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 79-90, April.
    14. Kim, Deok-Hwan & Kim, Kwang-Jae & Sam Park, K., 2010. "Compromising prioritization from pairwise comparisons considering type I and II errors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 204(2), pages 285-293, July.
    15. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mar Arenas-Parra & Raquel Quiroga-García & Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2022. "An extended best–worst multiple reference point method: application in the assessment of non-life insurance companies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 5323-5362, November.
    16. Liu Fang & Peng Yanan & Zhang Weiguo & Pedrycz Witold, 2017. "On Consistency in AHP and Fuzzy AHP," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 128-147, April.
    17. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2015. "Generalized analytic network process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(1), pages 277-288.
    18. Haines, Linda M., 1998. "A statistical approach to the analytic hierarchy process with interval judgements. (I). Distributions on feasible regions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 112-125, October.
    19. Finan, J. S. & Hurley, W. J., 1999. "Transitive calibration of the AHP verbal scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 367-372, January.
    20. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:120:y:2024:i:15:d:10.1007_s11069-024-06811-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.