This document describes a study that mapped vulnerability for areas impacted by lahars from Kelud Volcano in Indonesia. The study used spatial multi-criteria evaluation to analyze physical, social, economic, and equal vulnerability scenarios. The physical scenario showed areas with low cliff walls and rapid building development were most vulnerable. The social scenario identified areas with high population and density as most vulnerable. The economic scenario indicated areas with productive agriculture land and poor families as most vulnerable. The study concluded distribution of vulnerable areas is based more on the distribution of elements at risk and their potential vulnerabilities, rather than just hazard existence.
3. Measuring Vulnerability
• Different types of vulnerability
• Different level of scales
• Different hazard types
• Different hazard intensity
Vulnerability
Indices
Vulnerability
table
Vulnerability
curves
Tools:
Remote sensing
Rapid monitoring
Participatory approach
Existing data base
Expert opinion
5. Vulnerability Index in a Curve
• Fragility curve of
building.
• Social vulnerability
curve of potential
injuries or death
• Economic
vulnerability curve
of potential losses
in particular sector
9. Faktor Pengaruh Kerentanan Lingkungan
Social
Physical
Environment
PARAMETER KERENTANAN
LINGKUNGAN:
1. Kondisi Sosial
2. Kondisi Fisik
INDIKATOR KERENTANAN
LINGKUNGAN:
1. Demografi
2. Ekonomi
3. Pendidikan
4. Kesehatan
5. Kualitas bangunan
6. Kualitas lingkungan
7. Distribusi bahaya
8. dll
10. Dr. Dyah Rahmawati Hizbaron, M.T, M.Sc
Dr. Danang Sri Hadmoko, M.Sc
Universitas Gadjah Mada
Yogyakarta
Case 1. Mapping Vulnerability for Kelud Volcano,
Indonesia – Approach towards Disaster Resilience
11. RESEARCH RATIONALE
GLOSSARY
• HAZARD:
• Any environmental problem that
has possibility to impinge
human existence. any
environmental problem that has
possibility to impinge human
existence.
• Primary event: Volcanic Eruption
• Collateral event: Lahar flow
• VULNERABILITY:
• the degree of potential of losses
and damage towards certain
degree of hazard severity and it
involves adverse reaction of
social and natural system
(Hizbaron, et al., 2012)
• RESILIENCE:
• The ability to rebound or build
back better from sudden shock.
• METHODS
• Research area: Areas
impacted by Lahar
along Konto River.
• Research units:
hamlets along those
area
• Research subject:
households
• Research variables:
demographic,
assets, hazard, and
land use variables
• Research analytical
tools: Spatial Multi
Criteria Evaluation
or SMCE
15. Locally Rooted, Globally Respected www.ugm.ac.id
Kelud
Arjuno-Welirang
Selorejo Reservoir
Kediri
Blitar
Malang
POST ERUPTION – 3D MODELLING USING SHUTTLE RADAR TOPOGRAPHIC MISSION
Tourism Route to Kelud Crater
Historical Record on
Eruption
Volume
(Billion m3)
Impacted
Group
1000 ? ?
1334 ? ?
1586 ? 10000
1 Mei 1752 ? ?
10 Januari 1771 ? ?
11-25 Oktober 1826 ? ?
1835 ? ?
3-4 Januari 1864 ? ?
22-23 Mei 1901 200 ?
20 Mei 919 190 5160
31 Agustus 1951 200 7
24 April 1966 90 211
10 Februari 1990 150 32
November 2007 –
Maret 2008
35 0
14 Februari 2014 130 1
16. Research unit: 21 hamlets along Konto River.
Historical record of lahar at Konto River:
- Pyroclastic material at upperstream 50 billion m3 (Dibyosaputro et al,
2015).
- Feb, 19th 2014 – 5 days after eruption – triggered by 3.5 hours
increased precipitation
- Konto, Srinjing, Lekso, Semut, and Pulo-Jengglong flooded by lahar.
17. Locally Rooted, Globally Respected www.ugm.ac.id
GEO EYE
2011
WORLD
VIEW 2014
TOPOGRAP
HIC MAP
2002
PRELIMINAR
Y
OBSERVATIO
N
CHANNEL
BUFFER
100 M
CHECK
DAM
INFORMATI
ONBUILDING
FOOTPRINT
FIELD
OBSERVATIO
N
HOUSEHOL
D
INTERVIEWINSTITUTIO
NAL
INTERVIEWSECONDARY
DATA
COLLECTION
DEMOGRAP
HICECON
ASSETS
LAND USE
HAZARD
RESEARCH DESIGN
HAZARD
VULNERABI
LITIY
X
(Triggered)
RISK DISASTER
Occurence
Emerge
ncy
PROBLEM
TREESTANDARDIZ
ATION
WEIGHTING
GENERATE
SCENARIO
Scenarios
Social Vulnerability
Physical Vulnerability
Economic Vulnerability
Equal Vulnerability
Total Vulnerability
Given Hazard
Modify
Vulnerability
Minimize Risk
Optimize
Resilience
VARIABLES
18. Step 1. Problem Tree Criteria
Develop variables and factors to
define vulnerability.
1. Physical Variable
a. Distance to river
b. Build up area
c. Building density
d. Sabo Dam
e. Early Warning System
f. Evacuation Route
2. Social Variable
a. Demography
b. Mining community
c. Difable group
d. Children and Elderly
3. Economic Variable
a. Agriculture land
b. Farmer community
c. Poverty group
4.
Step 2.
Standardization
Cost applied to value that contribute negatively to the
goals
Benefit applied to value that contribute positively to the
goals.Step 3. Weighting
The criteria received pairwise comparison method for its
weigh
RESEARCH RESULT
19. Locally Rooted, Globally Respected www.ugm.ac.id
RESEARCH RESULT
Variabel Standarisasi Consider Bobot
Jarak terhadap
sungai
Fuzzi-
Maximum
Cost 0,20
Luas area
terdampak lahar
Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,15
Jumlah bangunan Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,12
Kepadatan
bangunan
Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,09
Jumlah sabo dam Fuzzi-
Maximum
Cost 0,06
EWS Fuzzi-
Maximum
Cost 0,04
Jalur evakuasi Fuzzi-
Maximum
Cost 0,04
Variabel Standarisasi Consider Bobot
Jumlah Penambang
Pasir
Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,41
Jumlah Penduduk Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,23
Kepadatan
Penduduk
Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,16
Penduduk Cacat Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,10
Penduuduk Balita Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,05
Penduduk Lansia Fuzzi-
Maximum
Benefit 0,05
20. RESEARCH RESULT
The physical scenarios indicate that, “if the
area dynamically challenged by physical
characteristics, thus the most possible element
at risk or vulnerable area are depicted within
the physical scenarios”
The social scenarios indicate that, “if the area
dynamically challenged by social
characteristics, thus the most possible
element at risk or vulnerable area are
depicted within the social scenarios”.
21. The economic scenarios indicate that, “if
the area dynamically challenged by
economic characteristics, thus the most
possible element at risk or vulnerable area
are depicted within the economic
scenarios”
The equal scenarios indicate that, “if
the area equally challenged by
physical, social and economic
characteristics, thus the most
possible element at risk or vulnerable
area are depicted within the equal
scenarios”.
RESEARCH RESULT
22. Locally Rooted, Globally Respected www.ugm.ac.id
Scenario Physical Vulnerability exposes that those
area poses:
- Low cliff wall
- Rapid building footprint
Potentially vulnerable in terms of physical aspects
(a) Rumah di bawah Jembatan Kandangan tersapu oleh material lahar 2014
(b) Pemukiman di dalam alur Sungai Konto di bawah jembatan Desa Kandangan
Scenario Social Vulnerability exposes that
those area poses:
- High population
- High density
Potentially vulnerable in terms of social
aspects
Scenario Economic Vulnerability exposes
that those area poses:
- Productive land (agriculture)
- Poor family
Potentially vulnerable in terms of economic
aspects
Tahun Volume (Juta m3) Korban
1000 ? ?
1334 ? ?
1586 ? 10000
1 Mei 1752 ? ?
10 Januari 1771 ? ?
11-25 Oktober 1826 ? ?
1835 ? ?
3-4 Januari 1864 ? ?
22-23 Mei 1901 200 ?
20 Mei 919 190 5160
31 Agustus 1951 200 7
24 April 1966 90 211
10 Februari 1990 150 32
November 2007 –
Maret 2008
35 0
14 Februari 2014 130 1
23.
24.
25. CONCLUSION
• This research argues that:
• distribution of vulnerable area does not mainly focus on hazard
existence
• It mostly on the distribution of element at risk and the potential
aspects exist in the area.
• The SMCE has been very efficient to conduct vulnerability
analysis for future need.
26. Exercise
• Find a subject to observe within your environment
• Tag along the probability of hazard
• Identify the element at risk
• Apply your approach in evaluating vulnerability
• Critically, how will you leverage the observation using EcoDRR?