Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207 223

www.elsevier.com/locate/geomorph

A comparative analysis of terrain stability models for predicting

shallow landslides in colluvial soils
C. Meisina , S. Scarabelli 1
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Pavia, Via Ferrata n1, 27100 Pavia, Italy
Received 20 August 2004; received in revised form 9 January 2006; accepted 25 March 2006
Available online 19 October 2006

Abstract
Most of the slopes of the hilly areas of the Apennines are composed of colluvial soils originating from the weathering of the
bedrock and down slope transportation. Shallow slides affect this superficial cover, depend largely on the surface topography and
are a recurrent problem. SINMAP and SHALSTAB are terrain stability models that combine steady state hydrology assumptions
with the infinite slope stability model to quantify shallow slope stability. They have a similar physical basis but they use different
indices to quantify instability. The purposes of this study are to test and compare the approaches of SINMAP and SHALSTAB
models for slope stability analysis and to compare the results of these analyses with the locations of the shallow landslides that
occurred on November 2002 in an area of the Oltrepo Pavese (Northern Apennines). The territory of S. Giuletta, characterized by
clayeysilty colluvial soils, represents the test site. The Digital Elevation Model was constructed from a 1:5000 scale contour map
and was used to estimate the slope of the terrain as well as the potential soil moisture conditions. In situ and laboratory tests
provided the basis for measuring values for soil hydraulic and geotechnical parameters (moisture content, soil suction, Atterberg
limits, methylene blue dye adsorption, hydraulic conductivity). Soil thickness was extracted from a soil database. An inventory of
landslide from interpretation of aerial photographs and field surveys was used to document sites of instability (mostly soil slips)
and to provide a test of model performance by comparing observed landslide locations with model predictions. The study discusses
the practical advantages and limitations of the two models in connection with the geological characteristics of the studied area,
which could be representative of similar geological contexts in the Apennines.
2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Shallow landslide; Colluvial soils; SINMAP; SHALSTAB; Oltrepo Pavese

1. Introduction
Most of the slopes of the hilly areas of the Apennines
are covered by colluvial soils originating from the
weathering of the bedrock and down slope transportation.
Shallow translational landslides are the most commonly

Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0382985831; fax: +39 0382985890.

E-mail address: cmeisina@manhattan.unipv.it (C. Meisina).
1
Tel.: +39 0382985831; fax: +39 0382985890.
0169-555X/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.03.039

observed failure mode involving colluvial slopes; they

depend largely on the surface topography and are a
recurrent problem. The soil types involved are quite
varied, ranging from sand to clayey silt (Hutchinson,
1988). The triggering factor is represented by heavy
rainstorms with high rainfall intensities and high duration.
Several authors have studied these phenomena in order to
determine the predisposing and triggering factors, to
prevent future disasters (Van Asch et al., 1999; Antronico
and Gull, 2000; Campus et al., 2001; D'Amato Avanzi
et al., 2003). Despite the modest volume involved,

208

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

shallow landslides are very dangerous, due to the absence

of incipient movement evidence and their high velocity.
Numerical models are often used for the preliminary
identification of slopes prone to shallow landslide occurrence (Borga et al., 1998; Morrissey et al., 2001;
Guimaraes et al., 2003). Several shallow landslide models
have been developed on the basis of the infinite slope
equation. SHALSTAB (Montgomery and Dietrich, 1994)
and SINMAP (Pack et al., 1998, 2001; Pack and
Tarboton, 2004) are two such models that combine steady
state hydrology assumptions with the infinite slope
stability model to quantify slope stability. Inputs are
digital elevation data from which slope and drainage area
are evaluated as well as hydrologic and soil parameters.
These are two models with similar physical basis but they
use different indices to quantify instability. SINMAP
quantifies terrain stability in terms of the probability that
the infinite slope stability model factor of safety is greater
than one over uniform probability distributions quantifying the uncertainty in model parameters. SHALSTAB
quantifies terrain instability in terms of the critical
effective rainfall required to trigger pore pressure induced
instability.
The aims of the study are:
to apply and evaluate the different approaches of
SINMAP and SHALSTAB for shallow slope instability
analysis to a specific geological context (the Oltrepo
Pavese), characterized by colluvial soils originating
from the weathering of the clayey bedrock and down
slope transportation;
to compare the results of these analyses;
to understand their respective potentials, with regard to
their applicability and data demand, in the Apennines
context.
The territory of S. Giuletta represents the test site. It is
located in the Oltrepo Pavese (Northern Apennines, Italy)
and it is characterized by clayeysilty colluvial soils on
marly bedrock. In this area, representative of similar
situations in Apennines, shallow landslides occurred on
November 2002.
2. Weathered clay soils and shallow landslides
In most parts of the Italian Apennines the bedrock is
represented by highly tectonized clays and by flysch
consisting of alternating layers of clay, clay shales with
calcareous arenaceous marls. Both represent structurally
complex tectonized formations (Esu, 1977) having a
predominant argillaceous component and they are very
degradable material, also in temperate climate. The

processes of chemical alteration and physical breakdown

result in the weathering of the bedrock and the production of thick sequences of weathered materials, generally consisting in fine-grained soils (silt and clay),
including diffused lapideous fragments of different size,
with reduced physical and geotechnical properties. The
degradation of the mechanical properties of the bedrock
can be referred to processes concerning with water content changes, e.g. cycles of wettingdrying, softening
(Picarelli, 2000), infiltration of different aqueous solutions (Calvello et al., 2005). Gravitational forces acting
on these disaggregated materials cause them to move
down the slopes and accumulate in topographic depressions (colluvial deposits).
The most common slope instabilities in these colluvial
deposits are an initial shallow rotational or translational
slide followed by flowage of the disturbed mass (Turner,
1996), which occur following periods of heavy rainfall.
The infiltration of rain (saturation from above) and the
formation and rise of a temporary perched water table, in
contact with the less permeable bedrock, increase the pore
pressure and cause a reduction in shear strength of the
colluvial material. The failure surface may form within the
weathered material, but generally corresponds to the point
of contact between the colluvial soils and the bedrock.
3. The slope stability models
The mathematical models developed by Montgomery
and Dietrich (1994), Pack et al. (1998) available for
studying shallow landslides, take into account the infinite
plane slope stability model coupled with a steady state
topographic hydrologic model. The term steady state at
this point does not refer to any long term, e.g. annual,
averages, but to a critical period (event) of wet weather that
is likely to trigger landslides. Both models are tools
designed as an ArcView extension. Important assumptions
underlying the SINMAP (Stability INdex MAPping) and
SHALSTAB (SHAllow Lansliding STABility Model)
theory include that the subsurface hydrologic boundary
is parallel to the surface, and that soil thickness and
hydraulic conductivity are uniform. Soil thickness is
interpreted perpendicular to the slope. Other hypotheses
are a steady state shallow subsurface flow and the absence
of deep-drainage and flow in the substratum. Both models
require very detailed field surveys, at 1:5000 or 1:2000
scale and a minimum number of soil and hydraulic
parameters determined with in situ and laboratory tests.
SINMAP outputs the stability index value (SI). The
stability index is defined as the probability that a location is stable assuming uniform distributions of the
parameters over the uncertainty ranges. This value range

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

between 0 (most unstable) and 1 (stable). Where the most

conservative set of parameters (i.e. the set with the most
unfavorable combination of parameters for stability) in
the model results in stability, the stability index is defined
as the factor of safety at this location.
The factor of safety calculation (FS) in SINMAP is
based on the infinite slope form of the MohrCoulomb
failure law as expressed by the ratio of stabilizing forces
(shear strength) to destabilizing forces (shear stress) on a
failure plane parallel to the ground surface.
FS

Cr Cs cos2 hqs d gDDw qs gqw gDw tan/

Dqs sinhcosh

1
Where Cr = root cohesion [N/m2], Cs = soil cohesion [N/
m2], = slope angle, s =wet soil density [kg/m3], w =
the density of water [kg/m3], g =gravitational acceleration
(9.81 m/s2), D =the vertical soil depth [m], Dw =the vertical
height of the water table within the soil layer [m], and the
internal friction angle of the soil []. The slope angle is the
arc tangent of the slope, S, expressed as a decimal drop per
unit horizontal distance. Soil thickness, h [m], and depth
are related as follows
h Dcosh
With this change FS reduces to
FS

C cosh1wrtan/
sinh

Where, w = Dw/D = hw/h = relative wetness, C = (Cr + Cs) /

(h s g) = combined cohesion made dimensionless relative
to the perpendicular soil thickness, r = w/s = water to
soil density ratio.
Following TOPMODEL (Beven and Kirkby, 1979)
SINMAP makes the following assumptions:

q = Ra [m2/h]. With assumption 3 the relative wetness

is


Ra
;1
3
w min
T sinh
The relative wetness, which defines the relative depth
of the perched water table within the soil layer, has an
upper bound of 1 with any excess assumed to form
overland flow. The ratio R/T in Eq. (3) quantifies the
relative wetness in terms of assumed steady state recharge
relative to the soil's capacity for lateral drainage of water.
The ratio R/T, which SINMAP treats as a single parameter,
therefore combines both climate and hydrogeological
factors. The quantity (T/R)sin [m] may be thought of as
the length of hillslope (planar, not convergent) required to
develop saturation in the critical wet period being
considered.
To define the stability index, the wetness index from
Eq. (3) is incorporated into the dimensionless factor of
safety, Eq. (2), which becomes



C cosh 1min T Ra
sinh ; 1 r tan/
FS
4
sinh
The variable a and are derived from the Digital
Elevation Model topography whereas the values of C,
tan, r and R/T are user input. In SINMAP the cohesion
is retained in the infinite slope stability model. A dimensionless cohesion factor C is established, combining
cohesion due to soil and root properties and soil density
and thickness. The resulting factor gives a ratio of the
cohesive strength of the soil relative to its weight.
SINMAP allows uncertainty of the variables through
the specification of lower and upper bounds. Formally
these bounds define uniform probability distributions over
which these quantities are assumed to vary at random. We
denote R/T =x, tan =t, and the uniform distributions with
lower and upper bounds as C U(C1,C2), x U(x1,x2)
and t U(t1,t2). The smallest C and t, (i.e. C1 and t1)

(1) Shallow lateral subsurface flow follows topographic gradients. This implies that the contributing area to flow at any point is given by the specific
catchment area (a) defined from the surface
topography (Fig. 1);
(2) Lateral discharge q at each point is in equilibrium
with a steady state recharge R [m/h];
(3) The capacity for lateral flux at each point is Tsin,
where T is the soil transmissivity [m2/h], i.e. hydraulic conductivity [m/h] times soil thickness, h [m].
Assumptions 1 and 2 together imply that lateral
discharge (depth integrated per unit contour length), is

209

Fig. 1. Definition of specific catchment area.

210

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

together with the largest x (i.e. x2) defines the worst case
(most conservative) scenario under this assumed uncertainty (variability) in the parameters. Areas, where under
this worst case scenario FS is greater than 1, are in terms of
this model unconditionally stable and SINMAP define



a
C1 cosh 1min X 2 sinh
; 1 r t1
5
SI FSmin
sinh
For areas where the minimum factor of safety is less
than 1, there is a possibility (probability) of failure. This
is a spatial probability due to the uncertainty (spatial
variability) in C, tan and T. This probability does have
a temporal element in that R characterizes a wetness that
may vary with time. Therefore the uncertainty in x
combines both spatial and temporal probabilities. In
these regions (with FSmin b 1) SI = Prob(FS N 1).
The best case scenario is when C = C2, x = x1, and
t = t which leads to



a
C2 cosh 1min X 1 sinh
; 1 r t2
6
SI FSmax
sinh
In the case that FSmax b 1, then SI = Prob(FS N 1) = 0.
SINMAP differentiates between six different classes
of SI. Stable, moderately-stable and quasi-stable classes
have SI N 1.5 and FS N 1.0, and they represent regions
that should not fail with the most conservative
parameters in the specified range (destabilizing factors
are required for instability, as local loading, road
drainage, etc). For lower threshold and upper
threshold classes the calculated FS is b1.0, yet the
probability of failure is less than and greater than 50%,
respectively. These two classes define a lower and upper
limit for ground failure and have SI values 1.01.5 and
01.0, respectively. The unconditionally unstable
(defended) class means that the probability of failure,
within the specified range of parameters, is greatest
(assumed N 90% probability).
SHALSTAB predicts the steady state rainfall necessary
for slope failure throughout a study area. The output is log
q/T that is the hydrological ratio (q =amount of water
infiltration into the soil; T = water flow within the soil).


q
q
tanh b
s 1
sinh
T qw
tan/ a

The drainage area a, the outflow boundary length b

and hillslope angle are defined by the numerical
surface used in the digital terrain model. Thus four
parameters may need to be assigned to apply this model:
the soil bulk density s, the angle of internal friction ,
the soil transmissivity T, and the effective precipitation

q (rainfall minus evapotranspiration). Because the

transmissivity is always much larger than the effective
precipitation, the ratio of q/T is small, thus the logarithm
of q/T is used.
A fundamental assumption of this model is that areas
calculated to have the lowest q/T values (least amount of
precipitation required for instability) should represent
the least stable land that has the greatest potential for
shallow landsliding. If tan equals or exceeds tan,
slope instability will occur even under dry conditions
according to the model. This category of instability is
called chronic. If tan b tan (1 w / s), then slope
instability is unlikely as the ground is not expected to
fail even at saturation. Grid cells falling into this
category are ranked as stable.
4. Geological and climatological setting of the study
area
The Oltrepo Pavese is characterized by a complex
geological and structural setting. The geology is
dominated by sedimentary formations, ranging from
the lower Cretaceous to the Pliocene, with a dominant
clay component (Beatrizzotti et al., 1969; Braga et al.,
1985). Silty and/or clayey deposits formed by weathering and down slope transportation cover the argillaceous
bedrock units. The territory of S.Giuletta is located in
the northern part of Oltrepo Pavese (Northern Apennines) (Fig. 2). The study site covers an area of 5 km2
and lies within the municipalities of Santa Giuletta and
Redavalle in the province of Pavia. In its upper part the
area is characterized by sandstones and conglomerates
(M. Arzolo Sandstone) and cavernous limestones
(GessosoSolfifera Formation), which act as hydrogeological reservoirs steadily imbibing the underlying
clayey and silty S.Agata Fossili Marls (Scagni and
Vercesi, 1987; Braghieri et al., 1997). These MioPliocene units have a sub-horizontal layering and are
highly fractured, with different sets of subvertical faults.
The Quaternary is represented by alluvial deposits of the
Po River in the Northern part of the study area and by
pedogenized colluvial soils, which cover the bedrock
with a thickness ranging from 0.5 to about 56 m in
topographic hollows.
Elevation ranges from 80 m to 339 m above sea level
(M. Zavo). The structuralgeological context influences
the morphology. The ridges bounding the area (Castello,
M. Zavo) are made up mainly of sandstone. Slope
values are between 0 (alluvial plain) and 40. There are
a number of slopes that locally exceed 45 at the contact
between the GessosoSolfifera Formation and the M.
Arzolo Sandstone.

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

211

Fig. 2. Geological sketch of the study area (from Scagni and Vercesi, 1987, modified). 1: Alluvial deposits (HolocenePleistocene); 2: Lugagnano
Clay (lower-medium Pliocene); 3: M. Arzolo Sandstone (Upper Messinian); 4: GessosoSolfifera Formation (Messinian); 5: S. Agata Fossili Marls
(Tortonian); 6: fault; 7: probable fault; 8:study area.

A shallow water table is present. The depth to the

water table varies between 0.5 and 34 m, the maxima
(34 m) occur in November (Braghieri et al., 1997). The
area has a mean annual rainfall of around 700 mm

(Voghera rain gauge). The general annual rainfall pattern

is characterized by a summer minimum in July and two
maxima, one in OctoberNovember and the other in
May (Rossetti and Ottone, 1979). A land use map was

212

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

Fig. 3. Landslide inventory with the location of shallow landslides.

established by photo-interpretation. Vineyard cover

about 83% of the S. Giuletta region.
5. The landslide inventory
A landslide inventory was completed in 1999 by aerial
photograph interpretation at 1:10,000 scale (Fig. 3). The

slopes are subjected to widespread instability and very

large landslides developed in the years 197678, due to
high intensity rainfalls that mobilized some old dormant
slides. These events caused also the collapse of many
houses. Different types of slope instability are present.
The deepest kinds of movement, with a depth down to
40 m, concern the bedrock and are rotational slides, in the

Fig. 4. A shallow landslide triggered by heavy rainfall on November 2002.

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

213

Formation. Remediation works consist of trench drains

located downwards Castello.
Larger landslides mapped in Fig. 3 indicate areas where
many small instability phenomena are currently present.
Shallow landslides are the most commonly observed
failure mode involving colluvial soils. Shallow movements
were already reported in 1955, particularly in the Pizzolo
area (AquaterSnamprogetti, 1982). Their identification
and mapping is difficult due to their small size, and to the
intensive farming activity. They developed above all in the
upper portion of the slopes, underlain by S. Agata Fossili
Marls and GessosoSolfifera Formation. Despite the
modest volume involved, shallow landslides appear very
dangerous to roads, buildings and vineyards (Fig. 4).
6. The November 2002 event

Fig. 5. a) Daily and cumulative rainfalls measured for 60 day period

before the November 2002 event (Voghera rain gauge); b) comparison
between the average monthly rainfall of the Voghera rain gauge and the
rainfall of November 2002.

upper part of the slope, and translational slides in the

middle and lower slope (Cruden and Varnes, 1996). At
present they are dormant or stabilized. Multiple sliding
surfaces have been recognized (Braghieri et al., 1997).
The landslides are situated in the S. Agata Fossili Marls,
but their scars involved also the GessosoSolfifera

On November 2002 intense rainfall triggered some

shallow landslides. During the rainstorm of 252627
November, roughly 140 mm of rain fell within a
72-h period. During the 10 days prior to the storm,
antecedent rainfalls were about 90 mm (Fig. 2),
increasing the soil moisture. The total November
rainfall summed up to 249 mm, about three times the
November average of 83 mm in normal years (Fig. 5)
and was the highest since 1950. The rainfall during this
event exceed the threshold for shallow landslide
triggering, according to the diagrams proposed by
Govi et al. (1985) and Moser and Hohensinn (1982).
The greatest frequency of shallow landslides occurred near the village of Pizzolo in the eastern part of
the area. The thicknesses of the superficial cover
involved are all of the order of 11.5 m. The area of
each phenomenon was from 500 to 800 m2 (Fig. 6),
however it has been observed that critical pluviometric

Fig. 6. 3D-block diagram showing some shallow landslides triggered by the November 2002 event.

214

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

conditions can produce contiguous single phenomena

involving much larger portions of slope.
The field investigation consisted of a geologic
geomorphologic survey at a scale of 1:5000. Field studies
showed that the majority of these landslides initiated on
slopes from 12 to 25, the landslide scars correspond to
change in slope angle. Many of the shallow landslides
were also placed within the scars of old landslides. The
land use was an important triggering factor, a great
number of instabilities occurred in the youngest vineyard.
7. Characterization of the colluvial soil
7.1. Pedological characteristics
The depth of a shallow landslide is generally not more
than 12 m. Therefore the pedological map provides a
useful basis for the study of the characteristics of these
soils. Information on the soils are available from the soil
maps at a scale of 1:10,000 covering the entire study area
(ERSAL, 2001).
Following are the definitions of the soils (Fig. 7):
MRI2 Eutric Leptosol: silt and silt loam, up to
0.8 m thick, derived from the strong weathering of
marls with silty intercalations (S. Agata Fossili
Marls), presence of surface marly stones, well
drained profile. The slope angle is of about 15 and
the soil is susceptible to erosion, especially sheet

erosion. Land use: vineyard (83%) and crop. The

region represents the 52% of the study site, landslides
cover the 70% of the area. Twenty-one shallow
landslides have been identified in the field.
FGI Calcaric Cambisol: clay loam and silt, up to
1.20 m thick, derived from marls with intercalations
of sandstone and cavernous limestone (Gessoso
Solfifera Formations and M. Arzolo Sandstones),
well drained. The slope angle is of about 7 and the
slope presents slight erosion. Land use: vineyard
(53%) and forest (29%). The region represents the
20% of the study site, landslides cover the 20% of the
area. Twenty-two shallow instabilities occurred on
November 2002 event.
MRL1 Calcaric Cambisol: stony sandy loam; up to
0.8 m thick; carbonate content increasing with depth
(N 20%), the parent material is composed by sandstone
and lenses of conglomerates. Well drained. The slope
angle is of about 15, and it is characterized by
moderate erosion. Land use: vineyard (67%), forest
(17%). The region represents the 15% of the study site,
landslides cover the 38% of the area.
CTU1 Eutric Leptosol: the soil is uniform in
texture (silt loam), has a thickness up to 1.50 m and
has almost uniform reddish brown color throughout.
The parent material is sand and gravel belonging to
old and strongly weathered alluvial deposits. The
slope angle ranges between 7 and 10. Land use:
vineyard (67%), crop (16%) and forest (13%).

Fig. 7. Soil map (ERSAL, 2001) (between brackets the calibration regions used in SINMAP).

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

215

Fig. 8. Geotechnical profile of colluvium type A (borehole S3). w: natural water content, Wl: liquid limit; Wp: plastic limit; Sr: degree of saturation;
d: dry density.

SNN1 Calcaric Cambisol: clay and silty clay, with

a high carbonate content and with thickness up to
1.50 m, the parent material is composed by clay,
poorly drained. The soil cover alluvial terraces. Land
use: vineyard (32%), crop (43%).
RSN1 Calcaric Cambisol: silty clay with few
gravel, derived from alluvial silty gravel, poorly
drained, (average thickness of about 0.50 m). The
soils cover the alluvial plane. Land use: vineyard
(62%), crops (19%) and forest (16%).
Soils of CTU1, SNN1 and RSN1 type cover only the
6.5% of the test site, and do not present shallow
instabilities. Urban areas cover the remaining 6.4% of
the study area.
7.2. Geotechnical characteristics of the soil
At the end of 1980s the area, corresponding to the
MRI2 soils, was studied by the Public Administration of

the Province of Pavia for the design of remediation works

concerning deep landslides (Braghieri et al., 1997)
(Fig. 3). Geotechnical investigation consisted of boreholes and laboratory tests, including grain size analysis,
Atterberg limits, measurement of water content, unit
weight and degree of saturation (Figs. 8 and 9). In these
previous studies direct shear tests, performed in the 100 to
300 kPa stress range, allowed the measurement of shear
strength parameters in terms of effective stresses. For the
measure of the residual shear strength the Kanji method
was adopted (Kanji, 1974).
In addition to these data the site of Pizzolo was
selected for geotechnical characterization of the colluvial soils. Pizzolo, where shallow landslides had been
localised with the greatest frequency in the past, could
be considered representative of the study area. The field
investigation consisted of soil profile description, field
permeability tests and soil sampling. The values of the
matric suction were determined during March 2003 (wet
season) by the filter paper technique (Chandler and

216

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

Fig. 9. Geotechnical profile of colluvium type B (borehole S2). w: natural water content, Wl: liquid limit; Wp: plastic limit; Sr: degree of saturation;
d: dry density.

Gutierrez, 1986; ASTM, 1994; Swarbrick, 1995). The

values range between 195 and 200 kPa. The soils are
saturated or quasi-saturated for most of the year. The
hydraulic conductivity of the saturated soils was
determined through field test (variable load well test).
The results show that colluvial soils present a permeability ranging from 2.3/2.7 to 10 3 m/s.
For the geotechnical investigation laboratory tests were
conducted on samples taken up to a depth of 12 m from
ground level in the landslide scar (Fig. 10). Laboratory
analyses were carried out with the aim of identifying the
particle size classes, the Atterberg limits and the methylene
blue dye adsorption (Vb). Water content and dry density
were also measured to determine the in situ state of the
material. The tests were carried out following the
American Society for Testing and Materials Standards
(ASTM, 1994). The methylene blue dye adsorption
(value of blue Vb) was determined in accordance with
the French AFNOR standards (AFNOR, 1998). This
method is based on the adsorption of methylene blue dye
by clay minerals. Methylene blue dye in aqueous solution
dissociates into anion chloride and methylene blue cation.
This cation displaces Na+, Ca2+, K+ and Mg2+cations

allowing the determination of the specific surfaces of these

minerals (Sa) (Magnan and Youssefian, 1989; Chiappone
and Scavia, 1999).
The geotechnical profiles (Figs. 8, 9) show a slight
variability of the geotechnical properties with depth. The
colluvium is quite homogeneous especially on the top soil
(thickness b 2 m, Fig. 10). There is no evidence of a
mineralogical evolution down the profile. The Vb of
colluvial soils varies between 4.4 and 5.5 g/100 g of soil
and underlines the presence of a certain amount of swelling
minerals (smectite and vermiculite), as confirmed by X-ray
diffraction analyses (Piccio et al., 1990) and by the
modified activity chart, that classify the swelling
shrinkage potential of these colluvial soils as high and
very high (Fig. 11).
More evident is the areal variation of the geotechnical
properties. Silt with clay of high plasticity (CH) (Figs. 12
and 13) characterizes colluvial soils in the lower part of
the slope and in eastern part of the area (borehole S3, S4,
S5 and trench pit T6) (colluvium of type A) (Fig. 8). In the
upper part of the area colluvial soils are represented by
clayey silt with sand (boreholes S1 and S2) (Figs. 12, 13)
being classified as CL and OLMH in the USCS

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

217

Fig. 10. Geotechnical profile of the soils in the Pizzolo area (colluvium type A) (see Fig. 3). w: natural water content, Wl: liquid limit; Wp: plastic
limit; Sr: degree of saturation; d: dry density, Vb: value of blue.

(colluvium of type B) (Fig. 9). This can be partially

referred to a substantial difference in the bedrock of the S.
Agata Fossili Marls where most of the shallow landslides
occur: from the top of this formation (borehole S1 and S2)
down (boreholes S3, S4) the plasticity of the bedrock
changes from low to high (Braghieri et al., 1997).

Shallow landslides mainly involve a homogeneous

superficial cover and they concentrate in correspondence
both of the colluvium of type A (Pizzolo area) and of
type B.
Soil strength parameters (cohesion, residual and
effective friction angle) were measured in laboratory
(direct shear tests and Kanji method) for regions 1a and
1b. They were derived from back analysis for the other
regions. In colluvial soils, which are involved in shallow
landslides, the residual friction angles (r) vary between
11 and 25, the lowest values, measured in laboratory,
correspond to the colluvium of type B. Colluvial soils of
depth till 2 m and not yet involved in shallow movements
show an effective friction angle () ranging from values
of 2427 (measured in laboratory on sample of the S3
borehole) to 3035 (FGI, CTU1), while the effective
cohesion parameter (c) is 1820 kPa. The geotechnical
analysis allows the subdivision of the MRL2 soil into two
portions, corresponding respectively to colluvial soils of
type A and B (Fig. 7).
8. Application of SINMAP and SHALSTAB

Fig. 11. Modified activity chart (Williams and Donaldson, 1980).

c: colluvium; s: bedrock.

The input data set of SINMAP and SHALSTAB

consists of topographic slope and parameters quantifying
material properties and climate (primarily a hydrologic

218

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

Fig. 12. Grain size distribution envelope. c: colluvium; s: bedrock.

wetness parameter). A Digital Elevation Model (DEM)

provides the topographic basis for SINMAP and
SHALSTAB study. The accuracy of output is heavily
reliant on the accuracy of the DEM data input. Therefore
the DEM was constructed from a 1:5000 scale contour
map, with a resolution of the topographic data on the
order of 5 m (grid size of 5 5 m).
SINMAP requires the calibration regions, which are
sub-samples of the total area of analyses in which
selected properties are assumed to be uniform enough
for further analysis. Seven calibration regions were
chosen on the basis of soil depth and soil texture derived
by the pedological map of the area, and on the basis of
the geotechnical characterization of the colluvial soils
(Fig. 7). Table 1 shows the parameters for the different

calibration regions. Uniform probability distributions

with upper and lower bounds of parameters account for
parameter uncertainty (Pack et al., 1998). The cohesion
and friction angles range from minimal values (residual
conditions), corresponding to areas of old landslides, to
the maximal values measured in laboratory or calculated
through back analysis in areas not affected by shallow
landslides.
Generally, root systems contribute to soil strength
by providing an additional cohesion component. Nevertheless the vegetation in the area is mainly represented by vineyards, with root systems that vary
widely in time and space, in relationship also with the
age of the vineyards. Due to the difficulty in estimating this parameter we take into account the most

Fig. 13. Plasticity chart.

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

Table 1
Initial setting for the input parameters for SINMAP

Table 3
Input parameters for SHALSTAB

Region min [] max [] Cmin

[]

1a
1b
2
3
4
5
6

18.0
18.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
21.0
19.4

24.0
27.0
35.00
30.00
35.00
24.00
32.00

0
0
0
0
0.054
0
0.20

Cmax

T/Rmin [m] T/Rmax [m]

0.05
3.083
0
50.00
0.097 134.40
0
193.63
0.060
7.06
0.034
4.87
0.231
1.79

6614.1
6.000.0
3696
3227.32
635.59
481.23
172.78

conservative scenario and we excluded root strength in

the calculation.
The ratio steady state recharge R/T soil transmissivity
combines both climate and hydrogeological factors. The
transmissivity T represents the water flow within the soil
and was derived from the hydraulic conductivity
(minimal and maximal) measured in the field. The
parameter R (steady state recharge rate) is difficult to
measure; it is hard to evaluate the amount of infiltrated
subsurface water from the total rainfall measurement. In
fact R is influenced by factors like rainfall intensity and
duration. The recharge was assumed to be the effective
precipitation. It means rainfall minus evapotranspiration
and bedrock infiltration. For each region the potential
evapotranspiration was calculated from the rainfall and
temperature with the Thornthwaite and Mather method
(1957). The land use map allows determining the water
holding capacity necessary for the evapotranspiration
calculation. The amount of infiltration depends on slope
angle (Table 2) and we suppose that only of the water
infiltrates in the substratum.
The other input is a point map with locations of the
zone of initiation of the shallow landslides. This procedure includes an interactive visual calibration, allowing
adjusting parameters while directly referring to observed
landslides. As SINMAP's concept is based on field
information for calibration, the models output depends
heavily on accurate positioning of known landslide
initiation zones. The landslide initiation points were
taken in field-survey at a 1:5000 scale map. A total of 44
shallow landslide initiation points were identified. The
calibration process was used to fine-tune the values
entered in terms of upper and lower bounds. Regions 4
Table 2
Amount of infiltrated subsurface water versus slope angle
Slope angle ()

Infiltration (%)

015
1530
3060

75%
40%
20%

28

C [N/m2]
1044

s [kN/m3]
19.50

219

T [m2/h]

q [m]
2

8.93 10

7.93 10 5

and 5 were excluded from the analysis, as no landslide

points exist to verify the calibration and the areas are very
small.
For SHALSTAB the parameters are considered
constant and uniformly spatially distributed all over
the study domain. They have been calculated as
weighted average of the all parameters (Table 3). The
zone of initiation of shallow landslides (landslide scars)
were used to test the model predictions.
9. Results and discussion
The stability index (SI) distribution in the study area
is shown in Fig. 14. About the 53% of the study area is
classified with SI below one (upper threshold and lower
threshold classes), which refer to conditions that are
highly unstable and thus critical. The areas most prone
to instability are located on steep slopes on the contact
between two different formations (GessosoSolfifera
Formation and M. Arzolo Sandstones). The area around
the village of Pizzolo (north-eastern sector of the study
area) also represents an unstable situation. To assess the
accuracy of prediction the predicted instabilities were
compared to the shallow landslides initiation points
triggered by the November 2002 event.
The SINMAP approach to instability modelling was
quite successful in describing slope failure in the study
area, identifying 78% of the 44 observed failures during
November 2002 event (Fig. 15). The largest number of
landslides is found in the upper threshold stability class
(47%) that represent the 25% of the entire area. The
areas classified as defended represents only the 1.8% of
the study area.
The individual calibration regions contribute to the
result in different ways, which can reflect the different
mechanisms of instabilities. About 75% of the region 1a
and 63% of the region 1b are classified as unstable. The
85% (1a) and 75% (1b) of the landslides were predicted.
The areas predicted to fail during the event of November
2002 include areas with slope angle between 11 and
25 and catchment areas b 1000 m2. This is in good
agreement with the field surveys.
In region 2 the 77% of the landslides are predicted by
SINMAP. The predicted areas are characterized by high
slope angle (10 and 34). This region is located
in correspondence of the contact between different

220

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

Fig. 14. Stability Index Map (SINMAP).

lithologies: the marls (S. Agata Fossili Marls) and the

limestones and sandstones (M. Arzolo Sandstone and
GessosoSolfifera Formation). As observed in the field,
the slope angle is the most important factor for
instability in this region.
For all the regions a certain number of landslides fall
within the moderately stable, quasi-stable or stable
index classes. Landslides that had a SI N 1.0 were
checked and were found to be concentrated in the
western and southern part of the study area. In the
western sector the discrepancy between measured and
calculated slopes may be attributed to other triggering
mechanisms as farming activities. Landslides not
predicted by SINMAP in the southern sector are located
downward M. Zavo and have slopes less than 12.
SINMAP needs high numeric and spatial consistency
in parameter measurement (friction angle, cohesion,
hydraulic conductivity). The spatial variability of input
parameters was overcome by an accurate selection of the
testing locations which may be considered representative of the regions, which are areas with homogeneous
soil characteristics. The parameter uncertainty was also
avoided with the use of uniform probability distributions
with upper and lower bounds of parameters, representing generally the values of friction angle and cohesion in
shallow landsliding areas and in non-landsliding areas.
The comparison of the results of the SINMAP analysis
with the landslide initiation points allows to calibrate the

model, to adjust the initial R/T parameters, which are

difficult to measure, and then to obtain an improvement
of the model performance.
We excluded root strength from the calculation of C,
therefore a sensitivity analysis of the role of the
parameter C was carried out. Results from a series of
calculations in which dimensionless cohesion varied
and all other parameters remaining unchanged were
found to have a significant influence on the stability
calculation for region 1a and 1b. If C has a range of 00
the 75% of the inventoried landslides are predicted to
occur. Under the range 00.5 about 60% of the
inventoried landslides are considered unstable and all
are within the lower threshold class.

Fig. 15. Prediction accuracy of SINMAP (balls = landslide density;

bars = area of the stability classes).

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

221

Fig. 16. Log (q/T) distribution in the study area.

Fig. 16 shows the slope instability map obtained with

SHALSTAB. The lowest q/T values (least stable land)
are located above all in the eastern sector of the area
(village of Pizzolo). Near the contact between marl,
limestones and sandstones, where the steepest slopes are
present, the values of (q/T ) are also very low. This is in
agreement with the results of SINMAP. The 76% of the
area is considered stable (Table 4).
Two means of examining model performance were
used. One method was to compare the distribution of q/T
values for mapped landslides with that created by a
biased random distribution. Model success occurs if the
majority of the landslide scars occur in grid cells with
low values of q/T. For areas mapped as chronic or
those falling into the category of b 3.1 (log (q/T )), the
incidence of landsliding is high (Table 4). This
demonstrates that SHALSTAB is successful at identifying the most unstable areas of the landscape.
The other method of examining model performance
was to compare the drainage area per cell size (a/b) and
slope values for each landslide with that computed for
various q/T values in the model.
In Fig. 17 the drainage per cell size (a/b) and slope
values, for each landslide, were compared with those
computed for various q/T. Two vertical lines separate
the fields of unconditionally stable, potentially
unstable and unconditionally unstable. Most of the
landslides (39%) fall to the right of the unconditionally
unstable line, the slope is expected to be unstable even

when dry. Only 5 landslide scars (11%) are placed to the

left of the unconditionally stable. Each log (q/T ) curve
also defines a threshold: for a given q/T value, points
plotted above curve are predicted to be unstable whereas
below the curve the points would be stable (due to
insufficient effective precipitation). By comparing these
curves with the landslide points, one can see the value of
log(q/T ) that places the majority of points above the line.
The majority of the points are placed above the 2.5 line,
this is the critical value of q/T, which will produce
unstable force balance when exceeded (log (q/T ) =
3.05 during the event of November 2002).
10. Conclusions
The event of November 2002, which triggered many
shallow landslides in the S. Giuletta territory, can be
Table 4
Results of SHALSTAB model
Log(q/T )
Chronic
instability
b 3.1
3.1 to 2.8
2.8 to 2.5
2.5 to 2.2
N 2.2
Stable

Area
(%)

Landslides
(n)

Landslides
(%)

Landslide
density (#/km2)

2.09

17

38.64

125

2.84
4.31
6.62
5.03
2.79
76.32

5
6
9
2
0
5

11.36
13.64
20.45
4.55
0.00
11.36

27
21
21
6
0
1

222

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

Fig. 17. Area-slope scatterplot.

considered as an extreme pluviometric event. The greatest

frequency of shallow landslides occurred near the village
of Pizzolo in the eastern part of the area. The superficial
covers involved are all of the order of 11.5 m and
correspond to colluvial soils derived by the weathering of
the bedrock and, above all, by the down slope transportation due to deep landslides that characterize the area. The
soil maps provide a useful tool for the identification of the
different types (in terms of thickness and texture) of soils
involved in shallow slides. Nevertheless the geotechnical
analysis allows better distinction between the different
types of soils. On the basis of pedological and geotechnical
properties seven types of colluvial soils were identified.
They are represented by clayey silt and clayey silt with
sand with a medium hydraulic conductivity and a degree of
saturation greater than 90% for most of the year. Important
factors leading to shallow slope instabilities are represented
by steep slopes on the contact between different lithologies
(marls, sandstone and limestones) and by farming activity.
Both SINMAP and SHALSTAB identify the eastern
part of S. Giuletta (Pizzolo) as the most unstable area. This
is in agreement with the field surveys. The data required to
implement the models include soil and climate properties
that can be highly variable in both space and time.
SINMAP does not require numerically precise input and
accepts ranges of values that represent this uncertainty.
For SHALSTAB the parameters are constant and
uniformly spatially distributed all over the study domain.
The choice of an average value was very difficult for the S.
Giuletta site, due to the different geotechnical properties
and thicknesses of the colluvial soils.
SINMAP modelling was done with a parameter setting
simulating the extreme event of November 2002. The

multi-calibration regions allowed us to take into account

the different types of colluvial soils and their geotechnical
properties. Another advantage in SINMAP is that
improvements of the model can be made for a small
area, (e.g. the 1a and 1b regions needed more attention
during calibration). Only few landslides are not predicted.
The model seems promising; a high percentage of
landslides (7585%) is captured. Nevertheless the shares
of the upper threshold class is very high for regions 1a and
1b and sometimes the stability index map shows many
areas that did not fail during the November 2002 event.
Therefore, the amount of unstable area is overestimated.
The results of SHALSTAB seem to be more realistic in the
study area for non-extreme events. Using the number of
landslides associated with different log (q/T ) values
thresholds value was assigned. The stability index (SI)
and the ratio q/T should not be interpreted as numerically
precise but in terms of relative hazard. In this context both
models can distinguish between areas of higher hazard
(village of Pizzolo) and areas of lower hazard.
References
AFNOR, 1998. Mesure de la quantit et de l'activit de la fraction
argileuse: determination de la valeur de bleu de mthylne d'un sol
par l'essai a la tache. Norme franaise homologue, NF P94-068
(in French).
Antronico, L., Gull, G., 2000. Slopes affected by soil slips: validation
of an evolutive model. Landslides in Research, Theory and
Practice. Thomas Telford, London, pp. 7784.
AquaterSnamprogetti, 1982. Piano per il riassetto territoriale
dell'Oltrepo Pavese. Documento di sintesi degli elaborati di studio
relativi alla parte fisica e antropica. Technical Report, Regione
Lombardia (in Italian).

C. Meisina, S. Scarabelli / Geomorphology 87 (2007) 207223

ASTM, 1994. Annual Book of ASTM Standards. ASTM Publication,
Philadelphia, USA.
Beatrizzotti, G., Bellinzona, G., Beltrami, G., Boni, A., Braga, G.,
Marchetti, G., Mosna, S., 1969. Geological map of Italy Fg.71
Voghera, 2nd Ed. Servizio Geologico d'Italia, Roma.
Beven, K.J., Kirkby, M.J., 1979. A physically based variable
contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrological Sciences
Bulletin 24, 4369.
Borga, M., Dalla Fontana, G., Da Ros, D., Marchi, L., 1998. Shallow
landslide hazard assessment using a physically based model and
digital elevation data. Environmental Geology 35, 8188.
Braga, G., Braschi, G., Calculli, S., Caucia, F., Cerro, A., Colleselli, F.,
Grisolia, M., Piccio, A., Rossetti, R., Setti, M., Spalato, A.,
Soggetti, F., Veniale, F., 1985. I fenomeni franosi nell'Oltrepo
Pavese: tipologia e cause. Geologia Applicata e Idrogeologia 20,
621666 (in Italian).
Braghieri, R., Maggi, D., Piccio, A., 1997. I movimenti franosi nel
territorio di Santa Giuletta. Atti Ticinensi Di Scienze Della Terra
34, 163173 (in Italian).
Calvello, M., Lasco, M., Vassallo, R., Di Maio, C., 2005.
Compressibility and residual shear strength of smectitic clays:
influence of pore aqueous solutions and organic solvents. Italian
Geotechnical Journal 1, 3446.
Campus, S., Forlati, F., Sarri, H., Scavia, C., 2001. Shallow landslides
hazard assessment based on multidisciplinary studies. 14th
Southeast Asian Conference, Hong Kong, 1014 December.
Chandler, R.J., Gutierrez, C.I., 1986. The filter paper of suction
measurement. Gotechnique 36, 265268.
Chiappone, A., Scavia, C., 1999. La prova al blu di metilene nella
caratterizzazione geotecnica: un'applicazione allo studio della stabilit
dei versanti. Rivista Italiana di Geotecnica 4, 3651 (in Italian).
Cruden, D., Varnes, D.J., 1996. Landslide types and processes. In:
Turner, A.K., Schuster, R.L. (Eds.), Landslides, Investigation and
Mitigation. Special Report, vol. 247, pp. 3675.
D'Amato Avanzi, G., Giannecchini, R., Puccinelli, A., 2003. A
contribution to an evaluation of landslide susceptibility in the
Apuan Alps (Italy): geologic and geomorphic factors of the 1996
soil slip-debris flows. In: Picarelli, L. (Ed.), Proc. Int. Conf. Fast
Slope Movements: Prediction and Prevention for Risk Mitigation,
vol. 1. Patron Editore, Bologna, pp. 125130.
ERSAL, 2001. I suoli dell'Oltrepo Pavese. Milano (in Italian).
Esu, F., 1977. Behaviour of slopes in structurally complex formations.
Int. Symp. the Geotechnics of Structurally Complex Formations,
vol. 1, pp. 292303.
Govi, M., Mortara, G., Sorzana, P.F, 1985. Eventi ideologici e frane.
Geologia Applicata e Idrogeologia 20 (2), 359375 (in Italian).
Guimaraes, R.F., Montgomery, D.R., Greenbergb, H.M., Fernandes,
N.F., Trancoso Gomes, R., de Carvalho Junior, O.A., 2003.
Parameterization of soil properties for a model of topographic
controls on shallow landsliding: application to Rio de Janeiro.
Engineering Geology 69, 99108.
Hutchinson, J.N, 1988. Morphological and geotechnical parameters of
landslides in relation to geology and hydrology. Proc. 5th Int.
Symp. on Landslides, Lausanne, pp. 336.

223

Kanji, M.A., 1974. The relationship between drained friction angles

and Atterberg limits of natural soil. Geotechnique 24, 671674.
Magnan, J.P., Youssefian, G., 1989. Essai au bleu de mthylne et
classification gotechnique des sols. Bulletin de Liaison des
Laboratoires des Ponts et Chausses 159, 93104 (in French).
Montgomery, D.R., Dietrich, W.E., 1994. A physically based model
for the topographic control on shallow landsliding. Water
Resources Research 30, 11531171.
Morrissey, M.M., Wieczorek, G.F., Morgan, B.A., 2001. A comparative analysis of hazard models for predicting debris flows in
Madison County, Virginia. USGS, Open-File Report 01-0067.
Moser, M., Hohensinn, F., 1982. Geotechnical aspects of soil slip in
the Alpine Regions. Engineering Geology 19, 185211.
Pack, R.T., Tarboton, D.G., 2004. Stability index mapping (SINMAP)
applied to the prediction of shallow translational landsliding.
Geophysical Research Abstracts 6, 05122.
Pack, R.T., Tarboton, D.G., Goodwin, C.N., 1998. The SINMAP
approach to terrain stability mapping. In: Moore, D.P., Hungr, O.
(Eds.), 8th Congress of IAEG, vol. 2. Balkema, The Netherlands,
pp. 11571165.
Pack, R.T., Tarboton, D.G., Goodwin, G.N., 2001. Assessing terrain
stability in a GIS using SINMAP. 15th GIS Conf., Vancouver.
Picarelli, L., 2000. Mechanisms and rates of slope movements in fine
grained soils. Engineering Geology 1, 16181670.
Piccio, A., Setti, M., Veniale, F., 1990. Caratterizzazione mineralogico-geotecnica delle Marne di S. Agata Fossili (Appennino
Vogherese tortonese/PV-AL). Proc. SIMP, Bologna.
Rossetti, R., Ottone, C., 1979. Esame preliminare delle condizioni
pluviometriche dell'Oltrepo Pavese e dei valori critici delle precipitazioni in relazione ai fenomeni di dissesto franoso. Geologia Applicata e
Idrogeologia 14, 8399.
Scagni, G., Vercesi, P.L., 1987. Il Messiniano tra la Valle Versa e la
Valle Staffora. Considerazioni paleogeografiche. Atti Ticinensi di
Scienze Della Terra 31, 120 (in Italian).
Swarbrick, G.E., 1995. Measurement of soil suction using the filter
paper method. In: Alonso, E.E., Delage, P. (Eds.), Unsaturated
Soils, vol. 2. Balkema, The Netherlands, pp. 653658.
Thornthwaite, C.W., Mather, J.R., 1957. Instructions and tables for
computing potential evapotranspiration and the water balance.
Climatology 10, 3.
Turner, A.K., 1996. Colluvium and talus. In: Turner, A.K., Schuster,
R.L. (Eds.), Landslides, Investigation and Mitigation. Special
Report, vol. 247, pp. 525554.
Van Asch, T.W.J., Buma, J., Van Beek, L.P.H., 1999. A view of some
hydrological triggering systems in landslides. Geomorphology 30,
2532.
Williams, A.B., Donaldson, G.W., 1980. Developments relating to
building on expansive soils in South Africa: 19731980. Proc. of
the 4th Int. Conf. on Exp. Soils, Denver, vol. 2, pp. 834844.