A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain Roads

For avalanche risk management, local authorities need streamlined and quantitative approaches to define the risk of exposed elements. In this paper, two quantitative avalanche risk assessment approaches are compared: (1) Wilhelm’s method, referring exclusively to transport routes, defines numericall...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Matteo Dalmasso, Barbara Frigo, Bernardino Chiaia
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-05-01
Series:Geosciences
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/15/5/172
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850126389734277120
author Matteo Dalmasso
Barbara Frigo
Bernardino Chiaia
author_facet Matteo Dalmasso
Barbara Frigo
Bernardino Chiaia
author_sort Matteo Dalmasso
collection DOAJ
description For avalanche risk management, local authorities need streamlined and quantitative approaches to define the risk of exposed elements. In this paper, two quantitative avalanche risk assessment approaches are compared: (1) Wilhelm’s method, referring exclusively to transport routes, defines numerically the risk, and (2) the multi-criteria risk assessment (McRA) (Italian avalanche risk guidelines), which defines the risk through categorical results. It provides a degree of avalanche risk to which the element is exposed, according to the definition of a risk class (RC). This method allows a simplified avalanche risk analysis for different types of buildings or infrastructures. The paper presents a comparison of the two methods for studying avalanche risk on a stretch of road that reaches the village of Planpincieux in Val Ferret (Aosta Valley, IT), highlighting their advantages and drawbacks. Additionally, to demonstrate the flexibility of the multi-criteria risk assessment, a risk analysis was performed on the hotel in Planpincieux hamlet. The key findings illustrate that Wilhelm’s method shines in defining the risk posed by diverse avalanche paths, but is hampered by imprecise parameter definition. McRA, by means of the RC, allows hierarchical and direct assessment of the risk severity at the territory scale but requires hazard intensity maps.
format Article
id doaj-art-1fc605c8fbbc4f63abca071139086159
institution OA Journals
issn 2076-3263
language English
publishDate 2025-05-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Geosciences
spelling doaj-art-1fc605c8fbbc4f63abca0711390861592025-08-20T02:33:56ZengMDPI AGGeosciences2076-32632025-05-0115517210.3390/geosciences15050172A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain RoadsMatteo Dalmasso0Barbara Frigo1Bernardino Chiaia2Department of Structural, Geotechnical and Building Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca Degli Abruzzi, 24, 10129 Turin, ItalyDepartment of Structural, Geotechnical and Building Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca Degli Abruzzi, 24, 10129 Turin, ItalyDepartment of Structural, Geotechnical and Building Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca Degli Abruzzi, 24, 10129 Turin, ItalyFor avalanche risk management, local authorities need streamlined and quantitative approaches to define the risk of exposed elements. In this paper, two quantitative avalanche risk assessment approaches are compared: (1) Wilhelm’s method, referring exclusively to transport routes, defines numerically the risk, and (2) the multi-criteria risk assessment (McRA) (Italian avalanche risk guidelines), which defines the risk through categorical results. It provides a degree of avalanche risk to which the element is exposed, according to the definition of a risk class (RC). This method allows a simplified avalanche risk analysis for different types of buildings or infrastructures. The paper presents a comparison of the two methods for studying avalanche risk on a stretch of road that reaches the village of Planpincieux in Val Ferret (Aosta Valley, IT), highlighting their advantages and drawbacks. Additionally, to demonstrate the flexibility of the multi-criteria risk assessment, a risk analysis was performed on the hotel in Planpincieux hamlet. The key findings illustrate that Wilhelm’s method shines in defining the risk posed by diverse avalanche paths, but is hampered by imprecise parameter definition. McRA, by means of the RC, allows hierarchical and direct assessment of the risk severity at the territory scale but requires hazard intensity maps.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/15/5/172snow avalancheshazardvulnerabilityexposurenetwork resiliencerisk analysis
spellingShingle Matteo Dalmasso
Barbara Frigo
Bernardino Chiaia
A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain Roads
Geosciences
snow avalanches
hazard
vulnerability
exposure
network resilience
risk analysis
title A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain Roads
title_full A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain Roads
title_fullStr A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain Roads
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain Roads
title_short A Comparative Analysis of Avalanche Risk Assessment for Local Mountain Roads
title_sort comparative analysis of avalanche risk assessment for local mountain roads
topic snow avalanches
hazard
vulnerability
exposure
network resilience
risk analysis
url https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/15/5/172
work_keys_str_mv AT matteodalmasso acomparativeanalysisofavalancheriskassessmentforlocalmountainroads
AT barbarafrigo acomparativeanalysisofavalancheriskassessmentforlocalmountainroads
AT bernardinochiaia acomparativeanalysisofavalancheriskassessmentforlocalmountainroads
AT matteodalmasso comparativeanalysisofavalancheriskassessmentforlocalmountainroads
AT barbarafrigo comparativeanalysisofavalancheriskassessmentforlocalmountainroads
AT bernardinochiaia comparativeanalysisofavalancheriskassessmentforlocalmountainroads