module 5

Volcanoes and Landslides
Chapter 5 in Keller and DeVecchio discusses the physical processes that produce volcanoes, their environmental and societal impacts, and some of the societal responses to past volcanic eruptions. This chapter also provides a connection between last module’s hazard (earthquakes) and future geophysical hazards (such as tsunami and landslides), providing an opportunity for you to begin formulating a mental picture of how hazards and their physical processes relate to each other. Chapters 7 & 8 cover mass wastings, subsidence, and soils. These chapters will help you understand the physical process that produce these geohazards, and the case studies and discussions on human adjustments provide details on often overlooked impacts and responses. Pay particular attention to the role of water, and think about the connection between geohazards, floods, and other hazards covered throughout the course.

Chapters 5, 7, & 8, Keller, E. A., & DeVecchio, D. E. (2014). Natural hazards: Earth’s processes as hazards, disasters, and catastrophes, (4th ed.). Routledge.

Hicks and Few’s 2015 article will help ground your understanding of vulnerability by discussing social vulnerability during a volcanic eruption.

Hicks, A., & Few, R. (2015). Trajectories of social vulnerability during the soufrière hills volcanic crisis. Journal of Applied Volcanology, 4(1), 1-10. doi:10.1186/s13617-015-0029-7Links to an external site.

The article by van Western et al. (2006) provides a discussion on the limits and difficulties in assessing landslide hazards and risks. This article is more quantitative than most of the others you’ve read, but don’t let that put you off. Their discussion on data limitations, mapping difficulties, and other complications not only continues to be relevant, but is applicable to all of the hazards covered in this course.

van Westen, C. J., van Asch, T. W. J., & 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. doi:10.1007/s10064-005-0023-0Links to an external site..Download .

The articles below discuss how Iran and Turkey have used various modeling and assessments to measure susceptibility and provide information to population dense areas.

Shirani, Kourosh ; Pasandi, Mehrdad ; Arabameri, Alireza Landslide susceptibility assessment by Dempster–Shafer and Index of Entropy models, Sarkhoun basin, Southwestern IranLinks to an external site.. Natural hazards (Dordrecht), 2018-09, Vol.93 (3), p.1379-1418
Duman, Tamer Y. The largest landslide dam in Turkey: Tortum landslideLinks to an external site.. Engineering geology, 2009, Vol.104 (1), p.66-79
Ghobadi, M H ; Nouri, M ; Saedi, B ; Jalali, S H ; Pirouzinajad, N. The performance evaluation of information value, density area, LNRF, and frequency ratio methods for landslide zonation at Miandarband area, Kermanshah Province, IranLinks to an external site.. Arabian journal of geosciences, 2017-10, Vol.10 (19), p.1-15
Tasoglu, Ismail Kerem ; Keskin Citiroglu, Hulya ; Mekik, Cetin. GIS-based landslide susceptibility assessment: a case study in Kelemen Valley (Yenice—Karabuk, NW Turkey)Links to an external site.Environmental earth sciences, 2016-09, Vol.75 (18), p.1-15
Useful resources: to an external site. to an external site.

Questions –
Each student will contribute questions, issues, or comments pertaining to the readings each week. These questions will be used to aid in your engagement with your fellow students and instructor during the weekly synchronous sessions. You are required to submit one question, issue, or comment derived from the readings to the appropriate dropbox

Reaction Notes –
Your reaction notes should be 2 pages and will be submitted to the corresponding dropbox in Canvas. All submissions must be received before we discuss the readings in the synchronous session.
The reaction notes must be in paragraph form and complete sentences with proper capitalization and punctuation. The reaction notes are not a summary of the readings, but novel thoughts and questions on the readings. You need to include some aspect of each of the week’s readings in each reaction note. You must complete both the questions and reaction note to get credit for this assignment.
Some of the questions you should be asking yourself as you read the articles throughout the course:
• Did the authors find a relationship, show a trend, or demonstrate a new method?
• Did they synthesize literature around a topic in a review?
• Did they put forward a new conceptual framework?
• Did they make any unsubstantial claims or conclusions?
• Were the methods appropriate, or did they use flawed assumptions about data or approaches?
• Did the authors convince you of their interpretation of the results? Or do you disagree with their interpretation?
• Were the figures and tables easily understandable, or were they confusing or inappropriate for what they were trying to visualize?
• Do you agree with their implications, applications, and/or conclusions?
• What would you have done differently, if you were conducting the experiment?
• How do the week’s readings relate to each other? Do they differ on terminology, methodological approaches, or conclusions? Do they offer complimentary knowledge?
• Can you apply this to your prior education or career experiences (and vice versa)?
• Who are the authors, and what are their backgrounds? Are they well known in the field, do they work at an established and well-regarded institution (e.g., university), do they have many related publications?