SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Coğrafya Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 44

Landslide Risk Assessment Using a Geomorphological Approach: A Case Study of the Kelkit River Valley Downstream

Jeomorfolojik Yaklaşıma Bağlı Heyelan Risk Değerlendirmesi: Kelkit Çayı Vadisi Aşağı Çığırı Örneği

Mehmet Emin Cihangir(Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Coğrafya Bölümü, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye)0000-0001-8881-5308
Pages
61–80
Publication Date
2022-07-08
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The risk elements and therefore the risk levels were high in the northwestern and southern parts of Koyulhisar and in the accumulation zone of the Sugozu, Gokdere, and Boyalı landslides.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Sharp lithological transitions, high topographic features, and climatic and tectonic features cause periodic landslides downstream of the Kelkit Creek Valley.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It was determined that 462 landslides in the study area were distributed according to certain topographic features and lithologies.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The risk elements and therefore the risk levels were high in the northwestern and southern parts of Koyulhisar and in the accumulation zone of the Sugozu, Gokdere, and Boyalı landslides.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2021 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Heyelan · Tehlike · Risk

Abstract

Sharp lithological transitions, high topographic features, and climatic and tectonic features cause periodic landslides downstream of the Kelkit Creek Valley. Thus, the hazards and risks of landslides in the area were evaluated using a geomorphological approach to reduce the losses that may occur therein. It was determined that 462 landslides in the study area were distributed according to certain topographic features and lithologies. The landslides were triggered by rapid snow melting in the upper parts of the valley in the north and by paleo-landslide topography and precipitation in the south. The morphological evolution and spatial persistence of areas with high landslide activity were interpreted from very-high-resolution to high-resolution satellite images (1and 5 m) and stereo aerial photos (1:16,000–1:35,000 scale) between 1958 and 2021. The landslide activities showed temporal and spatial differences with multitemporary landslide inventories determined using geographic information system and uncertainty analysis tools. Risks were evaluated according to the physical, social, systemic, and economic vulnerabilities in four regions with high activity and elements of risk. It was determined that the population and settlement densified during periods when landslide hazards increased. The risk elements and therefore the risk levels were high in the northwestern and southern parts of Koyulhisar and in the accumulation zone of the Sugozu, Gokdere, and Boyalı landslides.

Özet

Kelkit Çayı Vadisinin aşağı çığırını oluşturan çalışma alanında keskin litolojik geçişler, yüksek topografik özellikler, klimatik ve tektonik özellikler bölgede dönemsel heyelanlanmaya neden olmaktadır. Çalışma kapsamında dönemsel aktiviteye bağlı gelişen heyelanların tehlike ve riskleri jeomorfolojik bir yaklaşımla değerlendirilmiştir. Bu bakımdan heyelan gelişimi Türkiye ortalamasının üzerindeki çalışma alanı için oluşabilecek kayıpların azaltılması amaçlanmıştır. Çalışma alanında 462 heyelanın belirli topografik özelliklere ve litolojiye göre dağılım gösterdikleri belirlenmiştir. Heyelanların, vadi kuzeyinin üst kesimlerinde ve paleo-heyelan topoğrafyasında ani kar erimesiyle, güneyde ise yağışlarla tetiklendiği görülmüştür. Heyelan aktivitesi yüksek alanların, morfolojik evrimleri ve mekânsal sürekliliği 1958-2021 yılları arasında çok yüksek-yüksek çözünürlüklü uydu görüntülerinden (1 m ve 5 m) ve stereo hava fotolarından (1: 16,000-1: 35,000 ölçekli) yorumlanmıştır. CBS ve UA araçlarıyla belirlenen çok zamanlı heyelan envanteri ile aktivitenin zamansal ve mekânsal farklılık gösterdiği görülmüştür. Aktivitenin yüksek ve risk elemanlarının olduğu dört bölgede tehlike, fiziksel, sosyal, sistemik ve ekonomik zarar görebilirliğe göre riskler değerlendirilmiştir. Heyelan tehlikesinin arttığı dönemlerde nüfus ve yerleşmenin yoğunlaştığı tespit edilmiştir. Koyulhisarın paleo heyelanlarının kuzeybatısında ve güneyindeki kısımlarda, Sugözü, Gökdere ve Boyalı heyelanlarının ise birikim zonuna yakın yerlerde risk elemanlarının ve dolayısıyla risk seviyesinin yüksek olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca Gökdere ve Boyalı heyelanlarının yeni bir aktivitede Kelkit Çayı’na set oluşturacağı tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Cihangir, M. E. (2022). Landslide Risk Assessment Using a Geomorphological Approach: A Case Study of the Kelkit River Valley Downstream. Coğrafya Dergisi, Sayı: 44, 61–80. https://doi.org/10.26650/JGEOG2022-971673

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (78)

  1. Adrianto, L., & Matsuda, Y. (2002). Developing economic vulnerability indices of environmental disasters in small island regions. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 22(4), 393-414. https:// doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(02)00012-4 google scholar
  2. AFAD. (2020). Afet Yönetimi Kapsamında 2019 Yılına Bakış ve Doğa Kaynaklı Olay İstatistikleri Raporu. google scholar
  3. Alcantara-Ayala, I. (2002). Geomorphology, natural hazards, vulnerability and prevention of natural disasters in developing countries. Geomorphology, 47(2), 107-124. https://doi.org/https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(02)00083-1 google scholar
  4. Atkinson, P. M., & Massari, R. (1998). Generalised linear modelling of susceptibility to landsliding in the central Apennines, Italy. Computers & Geosciences, 24(4), 373-385. https://doi.org/https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0098-3004(97)00117-9 google scholar
  5. Ayenew, T., & Barbieri, G. (2005). Inventory of landslides and susceptibility mapping in the Dessie area, northern Ethiopia. Engineering Geology, 77(1-2), 1-15. https://doi.Org/https://doi. org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.07.002 google scholar
  6. Brabb, E. E., & Pampeyan, E. H. (1972). Preliminary map of landslide deposits in San Mateo County, California. google scholar
  7. Cannon, S. H., & Ellen, S. (1985). Rainfall conditions for abundant debris avalanches, San Francisco Bay region, California. California geology, 38(12), 267-272. google scholar
  8. Cardinali, M., Galli, M., Ardizzone, F., Guzzetti, F., & Reichenbach, P. (2007). Comparing landslide rates in the northern and central Apennines, Italy. Geophysical Research Abstracts, google scholar
  9. Cardinali, M., Reichenbach, P., Guzzetti, F., Ardizzone, F., Antonini, G., Galli, M., Cacciano, M., Castellani, M., & Salvati, P. (2002). A geomorphological approach to the estimation of landslide hazards and risks in Umbria, Central Italy. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 2(1/2), 57-72. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2-57-2002 google scholar
  10. Carrara, A., Cardinali, M., Detti, R., Guzzetti, F., Pasqui, V., & Reichenbach, P. (1991). GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 16(5), 427-445. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/ esp.3290160505 google scholar
  11. Chau, K., Sze, Y., Fung, M., Wong, W., Fong, E., & Chan, L. (2004). Landslide hazard analysis for Hong Kong using landslide inventory and GIS. Computers & Geosciences, 30(4), 429- 443. https://doi. org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2003.08.013 google scholar
  12. Cihangir, M. E. (2018). Kelkit Çayı Vadisinde (Umurca-Koyulhisar Arası) Heyelan Riskinin Belirlenmesi (Publication Number 522001) [Unpublished PhD thesis, Istanbul University]. Istanbul. google scholar
  13. Cihangir, M. E., & Gorum, T. (2016). Kelkit Vadisinin Aşağı Çığrında Gelişmiş Heyelanların Dağılım Deseni ve Oluşumlarını Kontrol Eden Faktörler. Türk Cografya Dergisi, 0(66). https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.84731 google scholar
  14. Cihangir, M. E., & Görüm, T. (2016). Kelkit vadisinin aşağı çığırında gelişmiş heyelanların dağılım deseni ve oluşumlarını kontrol eden faktörler. Türk Cografya Dergisi, (66), 19-28. google scholar
  15. Cihangir, M. E., Görüm, T., & Nefeslioğlu, H. A. (2018). Heyelan tetikleyici faktörlerine bağlı mekânsal hassasiyet değerlendirmesi. Türk Cografya Dergisi, (70), 133-142. https://doi.org/https://doi. org/10.17211/tcd.410998 google scholar
  16. Cotecchia, F., Lollino, P., Santaloia, F., Vitone, C., & Mitaritonna, G. (2009). A research project for deterministic landslide risk assessment in Southern Italy: methodological approach and preliminary results. Geotechnical risk and safety. Taylor & Francis Group, London, 363-370. google scholar
  17. Crozier, M. J., & Glade, T. (2005). Landslide hazard and risk: issues, concepts and approach. Landslide hazard and risk, 1-40. google scholar
  18. Cruden, D., & Varnes, D. (1996). Landslide types and processes., In, Landslides: investigation and mitigation., Edited by, A. K. Turner and R. L. Schuster. Transportation Research Board, Special Report 247, pp. 36-75. google scholar
  19. Cruden, D., & Varnes, D. (1996). Landslides: investigation and mitigation. Chapter 3-Landslide types and processes. Transportation research board special report (247). google scholar
  20. Cruden, D. M., & Fell, R. (1997). Landslide risk assessment. AA Balkema Rotterdam. google scholar
  21. Cutter, S. L., Boruff, B. J., & Shirley, W. L. (2003). Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Social science quarterly, 84(2), 242-261. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1540- 6237.8402002 google scholar
  22. Dai, F., & Lee, C. (2002). Landslide characteristics and slope instability modeling using GIS, Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology, 42(3), 213-228. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(01)00087-3 google scholar
  23. Dai, F., Lee, C., & Ngai, Y. Y. (2002). Landslide risk assessment and management: an overview. Engineering Geology, 64(1), 65-87. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013- 7952(01)00093-X google scholar
  24. Demir, G. (2018). Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri ile Suşehri (Sivas) Heyelan Duyarlılık Analizi. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(1), 96-112. google scholar
  25. Demirel, M., Tatar, O., & Koçbulut, F. (2016). Kuzey Anadolu Fay Zonu Üzerinde Koyulhisar (Sivas) ve Yakın Çevresindeki Fayların Kinematik Özellikleri. Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni, 59(3), 357-370. google scholar
  26. Douglas, J. (2007). Physical vulnerability modelling in natural hazard risk assessment. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 7(2), 283-288. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-7-283-2007 google scholar
  27. Duman, T. Y., Can, T., Gokceoglu, C., Nefeslioglu, H. A., & Sonmez, H. (2006). Application of logistic regression for landslide susceptibility zoning of Cekmece Area, Istanbul, Turkey. Environmental Geology, 51(2), 241-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-006-0322-1 google scholar
  28. Dwyer, A., Zoppou, C., Nielsen, O., Day, S., & Roberts, S. (2004). Quantifying social vulnerability: a methodology for identifying those at risk to natural hazards. Geoscience Australia Canberra. google scholar
  29. Ercanoglu, M., & Gokceoglu, C. (2002). Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (north of Yenice, NW Turkey) by fuzzy approach. Environmental Geology, 41(6). https:// doi.org/DOI 10.1007/s00254-001-0454-2 google scholar
  30. Ercanoglu, M., & Gokceoglu, C. (2004). Use of fuzzy relations to produce landslide susceptibility map of a landslide prone area (West Black Sea Region, Turkey). Engineering Geology, 75(3-4), 229250. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.06.001 google scholar
  31. Erdem, F. (1987). Kelkit Havzasında Sediment Erozyon İlişkileri. Jeomorfoloji Dergisi,, 15, 65-73, Ankara. google scholar
  32. Galli, M., & Guzzetti, F. (2007). Landslide vulnerability criteria: a case study from Umbria, Central Italy. Environmental management, 40(4), 649-665. google scholar
  33. Glade, T., Anderson, M. G., & Crozier, M. J. (2006). Landslide hazard and risk. John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
  34. Gokceoglu, C., Sonmez, H., Nefeslioglu, H. A., Duman, T. Y., & Can, T. (2005). The 17 March 2005 Kuzulu landslide (Sivas, Turkey) and landslide-susceptibility map of its near vicinity. Engineering Geology, 81(1), 65-83. google scholar
  35. Gökceoglu, C., & Aksoy, H. (1996). Landslide susceptibility mapping of the slopes in the residual soils of the Mengen region (Turkey) by deterministic stability analyses and image processing techniques. Engineering Geology, 44(1-4), 147-161. https://doi.Org/https://doi. org/10.1016/S0013-7952(97)81260-4 google scholar
  36. Guzzetti, F. (2006). Landslide hazard and risk assessment Universitats-und Landesbibliothek Bonn]. google scholar
  37. Guzzetti, F., Ardizzone, F., Cardinali, M., Rossi, M., & Valigi, D. (2009). Landslide volumes and landslide mobilization rates in Umbria, central Italy. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 279(3), 222-229. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2009.01.005 google scholar
  38. Guzzetti, F., Carrara, A., Cardinali, M., & Reichenbach, P. (1999). Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology, 31(1), 181-216. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(99)00078-1 google scholar
  39. Guzzetti, F., Reichenbach, P., Cardinali, M., Galli, M., & Ardizzone, F. (2005). Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale. Geomorphology, 72(1-4), 272-299. google scholar
  40. Gürsoy, H., Tatar, O., Koçbulut, F., Mesci, B. L., Akpınar, Z., Tunçer D, & Yaman, S. (2006). “Kuzulu (Sugözü-KoyulhiSAR, Sivas) heyelan bölgesinin temel jeolojik özellikleri: heyelan sahasında gözlenen tektonik yapıların heyelanın gelişiminde rolü var mı? ATAG10 -Aktif Tektonik Araştırma Grubu 10. Toplantısı, google scholar
  41. Hastaoğlu, K., Poyraz, F., Türk, T., Koçbulut, F., Şanlı, D., Yılmaz, I., Balık Şanlı, F., Kuçak, R., Demirel, M., & Gürsoy, Ö. (2014). GPS ve Ps-Insar Yöntemleri Kullanılarak Koyulhisar (Sivas) Heyelanlarının İzlenmesi: İlk Sonuçlar. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4(2). google scholar
  42. Hellström, T. (2007). Critical infrastructure and systemic vulnerability: Towards a planning framework. Safety science, 45(3), 415-430. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2006.07.007 google scholar
  43. Howe, E. (1909). Landslides in the San Juan Mountains, Colorado: including a consideration of their causes and their classification. US Government Printing Office. google scholar
  44. Iverson, R. M., Schilling, S. P., & Vallance, J. W. (1998). Objective delineation of lahar-inundation hazard zones. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 110(8), 972-984. https://doi.org/https://doi. org/10.1130/0016-7606(1998)110%3C0972:ODOLIH%3E2.3.CO;2 google scholar
  45. Jones, F. O. (1961). Landslides along the Columbia river valley, Northeastern Washington. US Government Printing Office. google scholar
  46. Juang, C., Lee, D., & Sheu, C. (1992). Mapping slope failure potential using fuzzy sets. Journal of geotechnical engineering, 118(3), 475-494. google scholar
  47. Kanungo, D., Arora, M., Sarkar, S., & Gupta, R. (2006). A comparative study of conventional, ANN black box, fuzzy and combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedures for landslide susceptibility zonation in Darjeeling Himalayas. Engineering Geology, 85(3), 347-366. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.03.004 google scholar
  48. Kappes, M. S., Papathoma-Koehle, M., & Keiler, M. (2012). Assessing physical vulnerability for multi-hazards using an indicator-based methodology. Applied Geography, 32(2), 577-590. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.07.002 google scholar
  49. Keçer, M. v. T., K. (1986). Kuzey Anadolu Fayına Bağlı Olarak Neotektonik Dönemde Oluşan Suşehri Havzası’nın Evrimi. Jeomorfoloji Dergisi, 14, 57-63, Ankara. google scholar
  50. Malamud, B. D., Turcotte, D. L., Guzzetti, F., & Reichenbach, P. (2004). Landslide inventories and their statistical properties. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 29(6), 687-711. https://doi.org/https:// doi.org/10.1002/esp.1064 google scholar
  51. Menoni, S., Molinari, D., Parker, D., Ballio, F., & Tapsell, S. (2012). Assessing multifaceted vulnerability and resilience in order to design risk-mitigation strategies. Natural hazards, 64(3), 2057-2082. google scholar
  52. Menoni, S., Pergalani, F., Boni, M., & Petrini, V. (2002). Lifelines earthquake vulnerability assessment: a systemic approach. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 22(9), 1199- 1208. https:// doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00148-3 google scholar
  53. MTA. (2005). Kuzulu (Sivas-Koyulhisar) Heyelanı. google scholar
  54. Nandi, A., & Shakoor, A. (2010). A GIS-based landslide susceptibility evaluation using bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses. Engineering Geology, 110(1), 11-20. https://doi.org/https://doi. org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.10.001 google scholar
  55. Okay, A. I. (2008). Geology of Turkey: a synopsis. Anschnitt, 21, 1942. google scholar
  56. Pachauri, A., Gupta, P., & Chander, R. (1998). Landslide zoning in a part of the Garhwal Himalayas. Environmental Geology, 36(3), 325-334. google scholar
  57. Pachauri, A., & Pant, M. (1992). Landslide hazard mapping based on geological attributes. Engineering Geology, 32(1-2), 81-100. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0013- 7952(92)90020-Y google scholar
  58. Papathoma, M., Kappes, M., Keiler, M., & Glade, T. (2011). Physical vulnerability assessment for alpine hazards: state of the art and future needs. Natural hazards, 58(2), 645-680. google scholar
  59. Pascale, S., Sdao, F., & Sole, A. (2010). A model for assessing the systemic vulnerability in landslide prone areas. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 10(7), 1575-1590. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-10-1575-2010 google scholar
  60. Pelling, M. (2003). The vulnerability of cities: natural disasters and social resilience. Earthscan. google scholar
  61. Raddatz, C. E. (2009). The wrath of God: macroeconomic costs of natural disasters. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5039, 30. google scholar
  62. Ruff, M., & Czurda, K. (2008). Landslide susceptibility analysis with a heuristic approach in the Eastern Alps (Vorarlberg, Austria). Geomorphology, 94(3), 314-324. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.10.032 google scholar
  63. Seymen, İ. (1975). Kelkit vadisi kesiminde Kuzey Anadolu Fay zonunun tektonik özelliği İTÜ]. google scholar
  64. Tatar, O., Poyraz, F., Gursoy, H., Cakir, Z., Ergintav, S., Akpınar, Z., Kocbulut, F., Sezen, F., Turk, T., & Hastaoglu, K. Ö. (2012). Crustal deformation and kinematics of the Eastern Part of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (Turkey) from GPS measurements. Tectonophysics, 518. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tecto.2011.11.010 google scholar
  65. Toprak, V. (1989). Tectonic and stratigraphic characteristics of the Koyulhisar segment of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (Sivas, Turkey) PhD thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara]. google scholar
  66. Van Westen. (2017). Multi-hazard risk assessment and decision making. In N. Dalezios (Ed.), Environmental Hazards Methodologies for Risk Assessment and Management (pp. 31-91). IWA Publishing. google scholar
  67. Van Westen, Van Asch, & Soeters, R. (2006). Landslide hazard and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult? Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 65(2), 167-184. google scholar
  68. Van Westen, C., Van Asch, T. W., & Soeters, R. (2006). Landslide hazard and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult? Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 65(2), 167-184. google scholar
  69. Varnes, D. J. (1958). Landslide types and processes. Landslides and engineering practice, 24, 20-47. google scholar
  70. Varnes, D. J. (1978). Slope movement types and processes. Special report, 176, 11-33. google scholar
  71. Wachal, D. J., & Hudak, P. F. (2000). Mapping landslide susceptibility in Travis County, Texas, USA. GeoJournal, 51(3), 245-253. google scholar
  72. Van Westen, C. v., & Terlien, M. (1996). An approach towards deterministic landslide hazard analysis in GIS. A case study from Manizales (Colombia). Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 21(9), 853-868. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9837(199609)21:9%3C853::AID-ESP676%3E3.0.CO;2-C google scholar
  73. Wieczorek, G. F. (1984). Preparing a detailed landslide-inventory map for hazard evaluation and reduction. Bull Assoc Eng Geol, 21(3), 337-342. google scholar
  74. Wieczorek, G. F., Wilson, R. C., & Harp, E. L. (1985). Map showing slope stability during earthquakes in San Mateo County, California. google scholar
  75. Yesilnacar, E., & Topal, T. (2005). Landslide susceptibility mapping: A comparison of logistic regression and neural networks methods in a medium scale study, Hendek region (Turkey). Engineering Geology, 79(3-4), 251-266. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.02.002 google scholar
  76. Yıldırım, A. (2006). Koyulhisar-Kuzulu (Sivas) Heyelanının Jeomorfolojik Etüdü. Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 11(15). google scholar
  77. Yilmaz, A., Oral, A., & Bilgic, T. (1985). Yukarı Kelkit Çayı yöresi ve güneyinin temel jeoloji özellikleri ve sonuçları (MTA raporu, Issue. google scholar
  78. Yilmaz, I. (2009). A case study from Koyulhisar (Sivas-Turkey) for landslide susceptibility mapping by artificial neural networks. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 68(3), 297306. google scholar