# Earthquake-Induced Landslide Risk Assessment: An Example from Sakhalin Island, Russia

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

^{3}) were widely recorded (Figure 2) within the Nevelsk urban area (16–21 km from the epicenter). The 2007 Nevelsk earthquake occurred in a relatively dry period. There was a recorded 69 mm of rain precipitation, representing 45% of the mean annual value, for the two months before the mainshock [11]. Therefore, seismically-induced landslides remain a major natural hazard on Sakhalin Island that should be considered in the risk assessment strategy.

## 2. Materials and Methods

#### 2.1. Fully Probabilistic Risk Assessment Technique

#### 2.2. Causative Factors of Studied Area

#### 2.2.1. Geology

#### 2.2.2. Geomorphology

#### 2.2.3. Climatic Settings

#### 2.2.4. Soil Moisture Conditions

- Slightly wet—Shallow invasion of the water into the soil mass. Dry soil conditions are typical for drought periods and for periods with stable snow cover. The overall period duration is about five months;
- Moist—Invasion of the water into the soil mass to a 1 m depth. The overall period duration is three months;
- Water saturated—Soil mass is waterlogged to a ~2 m depth. This model is typical for the rain precipitation and rapid snow melting coincidence period and for cyclone/typhoon occurrences. The overall period duration is about four months.

#### 2.3. Materials

#### 2.3.1. Ground Motion Scenarios

_{S30}at the site is of the order of 300 m/s. It was used for site correction within the PSHA stage considering the site-correction term in the ground motion prediction equations.

#### 2.3.2. Probability of Landslide Triggering

#### 2.3.3. Geomechanical Slope Models and Logic Tree

#### 2.3.4. Vulnerability Assessment

^{3}. If a landslide becomes bigger, with a volume ranging from 1000 m

^{3}to 10,000 m

^{3}, the intensity follows the M-II class. For landslides with a volume greater than 10,000 m

^{3}, the intensity reaches the M-III class.

^{2}(Figure 3). Despite the fact that the given relationships have significant uncertainties, they help to constrain the landslide intensity class in the studied area.

## 3. Results and Discussion

_{c}= 0.005 plot in Figure 8) should be considered as the most probable scenario for the considered area. Generally, it makes the slope unstable, regardless of the triggering conditions.

_{c}= 0.023 g plot in Figure 8). This ground shaking value is closely related to the 475-year probability.

## 4. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Mohammad, E.; Babak, O.; Mahdi, M.; Mohammad, A.N.; Ali, A.A. Sensitivity analysis in seismic loss estimation of urban infrastructures. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk
**2018**, 9, 624–644. [Google Scholar] [Green Version] - Martino, S.; Battaglia, S.; Delgado, J.; Esposito, C.; Martini, G.; Missori, C. Probabilistic Approach to Provide Scenarios of Earthquake-Induced Slope Failures (PARSIFAL) Applied to the Alcoy Basin (South Spain). Geosciences
**2018**, 8, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Forte, G.; Fabbrocino, S.; de Magistris, F.S.; Silvestri, F.; Fabbrocino, G. Earthquake Triggered Landslides: The Case Study of a Roadway Network in Molise Region (Italy). In Engineering Geology for Society and Territory; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 2, pp. 765–768. [Google Scholar]
- Keefer, D.K. Statistical analysis of an earthquake-induced landslide distribution—The 1989 Loma Prieta, California event. Eng. Geol.
**2000**, 58, 231–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xu, C.; Xu, X.; Yao, X.; Dai, F. Three (nearly) complete inventories of landslides triggered by the May 12, 2008 Wenchuan Mw 7.9 earthquake of China and their spatial distribution statistical analysis. Landslides
**2014**, 11, 441–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Esposito, E.; Guerrieri, L.; Porfido, S.; Vittori, E.; Blumetti, A.M.; Comerci, V.; Michetti, A.M.; Serva, L. Landslides induced by historical and recent earthquakes in Central-Southern Apennines (Italy): A tool for intensity assessment and seismic hazard. Landslide Sci. Pract.
**2013**, 295–303. [Google Scholar] - Porfido, S.; Esposito, E.; Spiga, E.; Sacchi, M.; Molisso, F.; Mazzola, S. Impact of ground effects for an appropriate mitigation strategy in seismic area: The example of Guatemala 1976 earthquake. In Engineering Geology for Society and Territory; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 2, pp. 703–708. [Google Scholar]
- Lobkina, V.A.; Kazakova, E.N.; Zhiruev, S.P.; Kazakov, N.A. Methods of landslide risk assessment for territory of settlements of Sakhalin Region (Makarov city, Sakhalin). Russ. J. Pac. Geol.
**2013**, 32, 100–109. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] - Ulomov, V.I.; Bogdanov, M.I. Explanatory note on the GSZ-2016 maps set of general seismic zoning of the Russian Federation territory. Eng. Surv.
**2016**, 7, 49–122. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] - Konovalov, A.V.; Nagornykh, T.V.; Safonov, D.A.; Lomtev, V.L. Nevelsk earthquakes of August 2, 2007 and seismic setting in the southeastern margin of Sakhalin Island. Russ. J. Pac. Geol.
**2015**, 9, 451–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Reliable Prognosis. Available online: https://rp5.ru/%D0%90%D1%80%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%B2_%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D1%8B_%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5 (accessed on 10 April 2019).
- Jibson, R.W.; Harp, E.L.; Michael, J.A. A method for producing digital probabilistic seismic landslide hazard maps. Eng. Geol.
**2000**, 58, 271–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lee, C.T. Statistical seismic landslide hazard analysis: An example from Taiwan. Eng. Geol.
**2014**, 182, 201–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jibson, R.W. Mapping seismic landslide hazards in Anchorage, Alaska. In Proceedings of the 10th National Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Anchorage, AK, USA, 21–25 July 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Martino, S.; Battaglia, S.; D’Alessandro, F.; Della Seta, M.; Esposito, C.; Martini, G.; Pallone, F.; Troiani, F. Earthquake-induced landslide scenarios for seismic microzonation: Application to the Accumoli area (Rieti, Italy). Bull. Earthq. Eng.
**2019**, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Del Gaudio, V.; Wasowski, J.; Pierri, P. An Approach to Time-Probabilistic Evaluation of Seismically Induced Landslide Hazard. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am.
**2003**, 93, 557–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Galli, M.; Guzzetti, F. Landslide vulnerability criteria: A case study from Umbria, Central Italy. Environ. Manag.
**2007**, 40, 649–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Jaiswal, P.; van Westen, C.J.; Jetten, V. Quantitative estimation of landslide risk from rapid debris slides on natural slopes in the Nilgiri hills, India. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
**2011**, 11, 1723–1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Guillard-Gonçalves, C.; Zêzere, J.L.; Pereira, S.; Garcia, R.A.C. Assessment of physical vulnerability of buildings and analysis of landslide risk at the municipal scale: Application to the Loures municipality, Portugal. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
**2016**, 16, 311–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Golozubov, V.V.; Kasatkin, S.A.; Grannik, V.M.; Nechayuk, A.E. Deformation of the Upper Cretaceous and Cenozoic complexes of the West Sakhalin terrane. Geotectonics
**2012**, 46, 333–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Atlas of the Sakhalin Region; Komsomolskiy, G.V.; Siryk, I.M. (Eds.) GUGK Sovmin USSR: Moscow, Russia, 1967; 137p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Handbook of Climate of the USSR; Pilnikova, Z.N. (Ed.) Sakhalin Region, Gidrometeoizdat: Saint Petersburg, Russia, 1990; pp. 48–64. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Cornell, C.А. Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am.
**1968**, 58, 1583–1606. [Google Scholar] - Aguilar-Meléndez, A.; Ordaz Schroeder, M.G.; De la Puente, J.; Gonzalez Rocha, S.N.; Rodrigez Lozoya, H.E.; Cordova Ceballos, A.; Garcia Elias, A.; Calderon Ramon, C.M.; Escalante Martinez, J.E.; Laguna Camacho, J.R.; et al. Development and Validation of Software CRISIS to Perform Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment with Emphasis on the Recent CRISIS2015. Computacion y Sistemas
**2017**, 21, 67–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Konovalov, A.V.; Sychov, A.S.; Manaychev, K.A.; Stepnov, A.A.; Gavrilov, A.V. Testing of a New GMPE Model in Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for the Sakhalin Region. Seismic Instr.
**2019**, 55, 283–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Newmark, N.M. Effects of earthquakes on dams and embankments. Geotechnique
**1965**, 15, 139–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fabbrocino, S.; Paduano, P.; Lanzano, G.; Forte, G.; de Magistris, F.S.; Fabbrocino, G. Engineering Geology Model for Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Critical Infrastructures; Engineering Geology Special Publications; Geological Society: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Rossetto, T.; Elnashai, A. Derivation of vulnerability functions for European-type RC structures based on observational data. Eng. Struct.
**2003**, 25, 1241–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ciurean, R.L.; Schröter, D.; Glade, T. Conceptual Frameworks of Vulnerability Assessments for Natural Disasters Reduction. In Approaches to Disaster Management—Examining the Implications of Hazards, Emergencies and Disasters; Tiefenbacher, J., Ed.; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2013; pp. 3–32. [Google Scholar]
- Sorokin, A.A.; Makogonov, S.I.; Korolev, S.P. The Information Infrastructure for Collective Scientific Work in the Far East of Russia. Sci. Tech. Inf. Process.
**2017**, 44, 302–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**Contour map of peak ground acceleration (% g) for the 2 August 2007 Nevelsk earthquake (Mw = 6.2). Filled boxes indicate the settlements with MSK-64 felt reports. The mainshock (Mw = 6.2) is shown by the red filled circle, the largest aftershock (Mw = 5.9) by the blue filled circle.

**Figure 4.**Side view of the location of the natural slope and school considered in this study. The red line indicates the expected landslide breakout wall. The red arrow shows the path direction of the expected landslide.

**Figure 5.**Geological structural map of studied area compiled according to [20]: 1—Upper Miocene Kurasiiskay formation: lower subformation (kr1)—siliceous claystones and upper subformation (kr2)—alternation of sandstones and siltstones; 2—Middle Miocene Verhneduiskaya formation (vd)—alternation of sandstones and siltstones and claystones, hards coal; 3—Lower Miocene Nevenlskaya formation: lower subformation (nv1)—alternation of sandstones and siltstones and upper subformation (nv2)—alternation of sandstones and siltstones; 4—synclineaxis (a) anticlineaxis (b); 5—fault zone; 6—studied area.

**Figure 6.**The probability of exceeding the given peak ground acceleration. Red dotted line indicates the 10% probability level.

**Figure 7.**Logic tree for handling the epistemic uncertainties in the considered models and parameters. The weights of the branches are given in circles.

**Figure 8.**Average weighted (1) and unweighted (2–8) curves of probability of slope failure in the next 50 years as a function of peak ground acceleration: 2—a

_{c}= 0.695 g; 3—a

_{c}= 0.533 g; 4—a

_{c}= 0.247 g; 5—a

_{c}= 0.166 g; 6—a

_{c}= 0.086 g; 7—a

_{c}= 0.023 g; 8—a

_{c}= 0.005 g.

Soil Type | ${\mathit{c}}^{\prime}$, Kpa | $\mathit{\alpha}$, deg. | $\mathit{\gamma}$, kN/m^{3} | ${\mathit{\gamma}}_{\mathit{w}}$, kN/m^{3} | ${\mathit{\phi}}^{\prime}$, deg. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

Tuffaceous sandstone | 24 | 40 | 26.8 | 9.8 | 30 |

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Konovalov, A.; Gensiorovskiy, Y.; Lobkina, V.; Muzychenko, A.; Stepnova, Y.; Muzychenko, L.; Stepnov, A.; Mikhalyov, M.
Earthquake-Induced Landslide Risk Assessment: An Example from Sakhalin Island, Russia. *Geosciences* **2019**, *9*, 305.
https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9070305

**AMA Style**

Konovalov A, Gensiorovskiy Y, Lobkina V, Muzychenko A, Stepnova Y, Muzychenko L, Stepnov A, Mikhalyov M.
Earthquake-Induced Landslide Risk Assessment: An Example from Sakhalin Island, Russia. *Geosciences*. 2019; 9(7):305.
https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9070305

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Konovalov, Alexey, Yuriy Gensiorovskiy, Valentina Lobkina, Alexandra Muzychenko, Yuliya Stepnova, Leonid Muzychenko, Andrey Stepnov, and Mikhail Mikhalyov.
2019. "Earthquake-Induced Landslide Risk Assessment: An Example from Sakhalin Island, Russia" *Geosciences* 9, no. 7: 305.
https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9070305