Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Basic Services and Transport Infrastructure 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Basic Services and Transport Infrastructure 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Cross-Border Multi Hazard Assessment
Identification of all relevant natural and human-induced hazards in the cross- border region
Work package: WP-2 Deliverable Number: D.2.1
Lead Beneficiary: UPT-FCE Coordinator: AUTH Contributing Beneficiaries: UPT-FCE, IZIIS, CMC
Dissemination Level: Public Version: 01
Due Date: December 31, 2020 Submission Date: December 31, 2020
Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Basic Services and Transport Infrastructure (CRISIS) 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Cross-Border Multi Hazard Assessment Identification of cross-border natural and human-induced hazards WP-2 | D.2.1
Contributing Authors Evi Riga (AUTH) Stavroula Fotopoulou (AUTH) Christos Petridis (AUTH) Dimitris Pitilakis (AUTH)
Radmila Salic (IZIIS) Julijana Bojadjieva (IZIIS) Kemal Edip (IZIIS) Marta Stojmanovska (IZIIS) Vlatko Sesov (IZIIS) Roberta Apostolska (IZIIS)
Dr. Stevko Stefanoski (CMC) Trajce Jovanovski (CMC)
Genti Qiriazi (UPT-FCE) Neritan Shkodrani (UPT-FCE) Shkëlqim Daja (UPT-FCE) Anjeza Gjini (UPT-FCE) Markel Baballëku (UPT-FCE)
December 31, 2020
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 BASIC INFORMATION RELATED TO CROSS BORDER REGION ...... 1 1.1 GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT ...... 1 1.1.1 Greece ...... 1 1.1.2 North Macedonia ...... 2 1.1.3 Albania ...... 4 1.2 DEMOGRAPHY ...... 6 1.2.1 Greece ...... 6 1.2.2 North Macedonia ...... 7 1.2.3 Albania ...... 9 1.3 GENERAL DATA ON RELEVANT EXPOSURE (BASIC SERVICES & TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE) ...... 11 1.3.1 Greece ...... 11 1.3.2 North Macedonia ...... 11 1.3.3 Albania ...... 15 2 NATURAL AND HUMAN-INDUCED HAZARDS ...... 16 2.1 METHODOLOGY ...... 16 2.2 IDENTIFICATION OF NATURAL HAZARDS AT THE CROSS-BORDER REGION ...... 20 2.3 EARTHQUAKE HAZARD ...... 27 2.3.1 Greek-side borders ...... 29 2.3.2 North Macedonian-side borders ...... 31 2.3.3 Albanian-side borders ...... 32 2.4 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE WITH RESPECT TO EARTHQUAKES ...... 35 2.4.1 Greek-side borders ...... 35 2.4.2 North Macedonian-side borders ...... 36 2.4.3 Albanian-side borders ...... 39 2.5 LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY ...... 43 2.5.1 Introduction ...... 43 2.5.2 Landslide Susceptibility model ...... 43 2.5.3 Greek-side borders ...... 44 2.5.4 North Macedonian-side borders ...... 46 2.5.5 Albanian-side borders ...... 47 2.6 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE WITH RESPECT TO LANDSLIDES ...... 48 2.6.1 Greek-side borders ...... 48 2.6.2 N. Macedonian-side borders ...... 48 2.6.3 Albanian-side borders ...... 50 REFERENCES ...... 51
ii
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Greek part of the studied cross-border region; Municipalities...... 1 Figure 2. Greek part of the studied cross-border region; Main cities...... 2 Figure 3. N. Macedonian part of the studied cross-border region ...... 2 Figure 4. Albanian part of the studied cross-border region ...... 5 Figure 5. Greek population by gender and age (left) and evolution (right)...... 6 Figure 6. Disposition of population in CBR-MKD...... 9 Figure 7. Disposition of population in CBR-ALB ...... 10 Figure 8. Disposition of relevant exposure...... 12 Figure 9. Disposition of relevant exposure ...... 15 Figure 10. Spatial distribution of earthquake hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard! ...... 22 Figure 11. Spatial distribution of landslide hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 22 Figure 12. Spatial distribution of extreme heat hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 23 Figure 13. Spatial distribution of coastal flood hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 24 Figure 14. Spatial distribution of tsunami hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 24 Figure 15. Spatial distribution of river flood hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 25 Figure 16. Spatial distribution of urban flood hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 26 Figure 17. Spatial distribution of water scarcity hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 26 Figure 18. Spatial distribution of wildfire hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 27 Figure 19. Spatial distribution of PGA at the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 475-year return period based on ESHM13...... 28 Figure 20. Spatial distribution of PGA at the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 975-year return period based on ESHM13...... 29 Figure 21. Spatial distribution of PGA at the Greek part of the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 475-year return period based on ESHM13...... 30 Figure 22. Spatial distribution of PGA at the Greek part of the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 475-year return period based on ESHM13...... 30 Figure 23. Strong earthquake activity in CBR-MKD...... 31 Figure 24. Strong earthquake activity in CBR-ALB ...... 33 Figure 25. Main road network at the Greek part of the cross-border region, superimposed at the ESHM13 PGA map for a 475-year return period (vs30 = 800 m/s)...... 36 Figure 26. Main road network at the Greek part of the cross-border region, superimposed at the ESHM13 PGA map for a 975-year return period (vs30 = 800 m/s)...... 36 Figure 27. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP475 map...... 38 Figure 28. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP975 map...... 39 Figure 29. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP475 map ...... 40 Figure 30. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP975 map ...... 42 iii
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 31. Landslide susceptibility of the cross-border region of Greece, North Macedonia and Albania (where landslide susceptibility 1 = very low; 2 = low; 3 = moderate; 4 = high; 5 = very high)...... 44 Figure 32. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region of Greece according to Elsusv2 (where landslide susceptibility 1 = very low; 2 = low; 3 = moderate; 4 = high; 5 = very high)...... 45 Figure 33. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region in N. Macedonia (Elsusv2) ...... 46 Figure 34. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region in Albania (Think Hazard) ...... 47 Figure 35. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region in Greece (Elsusv2) together with relevant transport exposure information (main road network, railway network) ...... 48 Figure 36. Transport infrastructure vs Landslide susceptibility (Elsusv2) at the cross-border region in N. Macedonia ...... 49 Figure 37. Transport infrastructure vs Landslide susceptibility (ThinkHazard) at the cross- border region in Albania...... 50
iv
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Municipalities in N. Macedonia Cross-Border Region [4] ...... 4 Table 2. Municipalities in Albania Cross-Border Region ...... 6 Table 3. Population distribution in CBR-MKD [1] ...... 7 Table 4.Population distribution in CBR-ALB ...... 9 Table 5. Main critical facilities of the Greek cross-border region...... 11 Table 6. Basic services in cross-border region Municipalities (N. Macedonia) ...... 12 Table 7. Transport infrastructure in cross-border region Municipalities (N. Macedonia) ...... 13 Table 8. Basic services in cross-border region Municipalities (Albania) ...... 15 Table 9. Transport infrastructure in cross-border region Municipalities (Albania) ...... 16 Table 10. A summary of damaging intensity parameters, units and thresholds used in the classification of probabilistic data in ThinkHazard! (Fraser et al., 2017) ...... 19 Table 11. Suggested return periods for each hazard classified from probabilistic data ...... 19 Table 12. Classification of the hazard levels of the municipalities of the Greek part of the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard! ...... 20 Table 13. Classification of the hazard levels of the municipalities of the N. Macedonian part of the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!...... 20 Table 14. Classification of the hazard levels of the municipalities of the Albanian part of the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard! ...... 21 Table 15. Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) for rock site conditions at the main cities of the Greek cross-border region for mean return periods equal to 475 years and 975 years based on ESHM13 ...... 30 Table 16 . List of significant earthquakes affecting the CBR-MKD ...... 31 Table 17. List of significant earthquakes affecting the CBR-ALB ...... 34 Table 18. Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) for rock site conditions at the main critical facilities of the Greek cross-border region for mean return periods equal to 475 years and 975 years based on ESHM13...... 35 Table 19. Level of seismic hazard in respect to CBR-MKD area ...... 37 Table 20. Seismic hazard in CBR-MKD (RP475, vs30=800m/s) ...... 37 Table 21. Seismic hazard in CBR-MKD (RP975, vs30=800m/s) ...... 38 Table 22. Level of seismic hazard in respect to CBR-ALB area ...... 39 Table 23. Seismic hazard in CBR-ALB (RP475, vs30=800m/s) ...... 39 Table 24. Seismic hazard in CBR-ALB (RP975, vs30=800m/s) ...... 41 Table 25. Percentage of landslide susceptibility zones of cross-border region in Greece ...... 45 Table 26. Percentage of landslide susceptibility zones of cross-border region in N. Macedonia ...... 46
v
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
1 Basic information related to cross border region 1.1 Geographical context 1.1.1 Greece Greece, with the official constitutional name Hellenic Republic, is a country in southeastern Europe at the southern tip of the Balkan Peninsula. It is bordered to the northwest by Albania, to the north by Northern Macedonia and Bulgaria, and to the northeast by Turkey. It has coasts in the Eastern Mediterranean east by the Aegean, west by the Ionian and south by the Libyan sea. Greece ranks 11th in the countries with the largest coastline at 13,676 km. According to official estimates by the European Statistical Office, the population of the country on 01/01/2020 is estimated at 10,691,204.
The term Northern Greece describes the geographical part of the Greek territory that includes Macedonia and Thrace. Other departments of Greece and other regions may be included in Northern Greece. Historically and bibliographically, Epirus and the islands of the North Aegean can be included in Northern Greece. Thessaly is sometimes included in Northern Greece, mainly due to its geographical proximity. As an administrative structure, responsible for the affairs of the regions of the geographical regions of Macedonia and Thrace, is the homonymous Ministry of Macedonia-Thrace, which was formerly known as the Ministry of Northern Greece, while at other times, was the General Secretariat of the Greek Government. According to the 2011 census it has a population of 3,108,785 inhabitants.
Figure 1 shows the municipalities at the cross-border region of Greece and Figure 2 shows the corresponding main cities. In particular, crossing Greek-Albanian borders is possible mainly via Krystallopigi (Prespes), Kakavia-Ktismata (Pogoni) and Sagiada (Filiates). Also, crossing Greek-N.Macedonian borders is possible mainly via Evzoni (Paionia).
Figure 1. Greek part of the studied cross-border region; Municipalities.
1
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 2. Greek part of the studied cross-border region; Main cities.
1.1.2 North Macedonia The part of the studied cross-border region that belongs to N. Macedonia (CBR-MKD), consists of 18 municipalities (Figure 3 and Table 1). Generally, it covers the most western and southern part of the country.
Figure 3. N. Macedonian part of the studied cross-border region
2
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
The whole cross-border region has a diverse geographical profile. The cross-border region with Albania is dominated by the Dinaric mountain group of alpine massifs (such as Pelagonija and Grimasi in the south and Korab, Vinjol and Shara in the north) which offers huge opportunities for the development of tourism and the timber industry, but also complicates transport infrastructure and communications [1,3]. Golem Korab (2,753 m) is the highest peak in the region. The mountainous area is rich in forests (forests cover 44% of the cross-border area of the N. Macedonia and 37% of the cross-border area of Albania), with wildlife and pastures. It is a traditional sheep breeding area and is considered one of the largest pastures in Europe. It contains numerous natural monuments such as glacial lakes, glacial caves and spectacular canyons, such as the Radika River canyon.
Another significant part of this region consists of valleys and plains, which differ in size, population density, vegetation and altitude (from 130 to 880 m). The largest and most fertile plains are the Pelagonija plain between Bitola and Prilep, and Korcha plain, between Ohrid and Struga. They are known as the most favorable agricultural areas in both countries.
The natural lakes in the south are world famous: lake Ohrid and lake Prespa. Lake Ohrid is the second largest tectonic lake in the Balkans and was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site due to its rich history and unique flora and fauna. It lies at an altitude of 693 m and covers an area of 349 square kilometers (of which 66% belong to N. Macedonia and 34% to Albania). Lake Prespa covers an area of 274 km2, of which 64.5% belong to N. Macedonia, 18% to Albania and 17.5% to Greece.
Similarly, the main characteristics of the cross-border region with Greece are Prespa Lakes, the valley of the river Vardar, Dojran Lake and the mountain range Beles/Belasica, with a maximum height of 2029 meters to the east [2,3]. The border area is characterized by a very diverse flora, mushrooms, fauna and natural dwellings. The dominant types of terrestrial ecosystems are forests, mountains and pastures. In this region, the mountain Nidze prevails, representing natural border between the two countries along the border line.
CBR-MKD region also has 22 protected areas: two strict natural reserve (Category I) Ezerani (proclaimed in 1996, covers the northern coastal area of Lake Prespa, habitat of approximately 200 bird species, including wild geese, pelicans, and local moorhens and is included in the World Ramsar list) and Lokvi; three national parks (Category II): Mavrovo National Park (established in 1949), Galicica National park, between the Ohrid and Prespa lakes, Pelister National Park (established in 1948); and 17 sites (Category III)-the hydrological site Vevchanski Izvori (Vevchani Springs) was proclaimed Natural Monument in 1999.
Additionally, the cross-border area is also included in several initiatives for developing ecological networks. The National Emerald Network includes 16 Areas of special conservation interest among which: NP Mavrovo, Shar Planina, NP Galichica and SNR Ezerani. The Balkan Green Belt (IUCN initiative) includes all the protected areas mentioned above.
The entire cross-border region enjoys a climate that is divided into transitional-continental in the north to transitional-Mediterranean in the southern and central parts. However, in the highest mountain areas of these regions the winters are cold and wet, while the summers are hot and dry. Temperatures in mountainous areas along the border range between -16 and 36
3
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
degrees. The border area is rich in minerals such as chromium, coal, iron-nickel, copper, chalk, granite, quartz sand and marble [3].
Table 1. Municipalities in N. Macedonia Cross-Border Region [4] Population Area Towns Population # Municipality Main Town Density (km2) (No) (No) (No/km2) 1 Mavrovo i Rostuse 663.19 42 Rostuse 8.618 12.99 2 Debar 145.67 18 Debar 19.542 134.15 3 Centar Zupa 107.21 23 Centar Zupa 6.519 60.81 4 Struga 483 51 Struga 63.376 131.21 5 Vevcani 22.8 1 Vevcani 2.433 106.71 6 Debarca 425.39 30 Belchishta 5.507 12.95 7 Ohrid 389.93 29 Ohrid 55.749 142.97 8 Resen 550.77 44 Resen 16.825 30.55 9 Bitola 787.95 66 Bitola 95.385 121.05 10 Novaci 753.53 41 Novaci 3.549 4.71 11 Prilep 1194.4 59 Prilep 76.768 64.27 12 Kavadarci 992.44 40 Kavadarci 38.741 39.04 13 Gevgelija 485 17 Gevgelija 22.988 47.39 14 Valandovo 331.4 31 Valandovo 11.890 35.88 15 Bogdanci 114.54 4 Bogdanci 8.707 76.02 16 Dojran 129.16 13 Star Dojran 3.426 26.53 17 Strumica 321.49 25 Strumica 54.676 170.07 18 Novo Selo 424.82 16 Novo Selo 11.567 27.23 Total Population: 506.266
1.1.3 Albania The Cross-Border Region of Albania between N.Macedonia and Greece consist in 17 Municipalities (Figure 4 and Table 2). This region covers almost all the south-east and east part of Albania.
The Cross-Border region of Albania (CRB-ALB) is mostly covered by mountains, such as Korrabi Mountains and Pindus Mountains in the East and South-East. The height terrain and the mountains make it difficult the communication and transportation between the areas, but also it gives the possibility for tourism developing.
In this region there are 2 of 3 major lakes in Albania (Ohrid lake and Prespa lake). Ohri Lake is divided between Albania and North Macedonia. Prespa lake is divided between Albania, North Macedonia and Greece.
4
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 4. Albanian part of the studied cross-border region
5
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Table 2. Municipalities in Albania Cross-Border Region N Municipality Area Settlements Municipality Population Population o (km2) (No) Center (No) Density (No/km2) 1 Bulqizë 658.24 68 Bulqizë 31210 47.41 2 Devoll 445.28 44 Bilisht 26716 60.00 3 Dibër 918.62 135 Peshkopi 61619 67.08 4 Kolonjë 821.10 78 Ersekë 11070 13.48 5 Korçë 793.83 64 Korçë 75994 95.73 6 Librazhd 791.16 50 Librazhd 31892 40.31 7 Maliq 698.42 85 Maliq 41757 59.79 8 Përmet 621.67 50 Përmet 10614 17.07 9 Pogradec 717.98 73 Pogradec 61530 85.70 10 Prrenjas 352.57 27 Prrenjas 24906 70.64 11 Pustec 216.20 9 Pustec 3290 15.22 12 Dropull 456.13 41 Sofratikë 3503 7.68 13 Finiq 431.59 56 Dermish 7284 16.88 14 Gjirokastër 458.70 39 Gjirokastër 28673 62.51 15 Konispol 220.46 12 Konispol 8245 37.40 16 Libohovë 230.61 17 Libohovë 3667 15.90 17 Sarandë 82.26 6 Sarandë 23183 281.83 Total 455153 Population:
1.2 Demography 1.2.1 Greece The demographics of Greece concern the study of the population of Greece both in terms of statistical data and in terms of quality. In Greece, population censuses, which examine other statistics other than the total population and place of residence, are normally conducted every ten years, after 1951. Responsible for them, as well as for inventories of other population statistics, such as employment, education, etc. is the Hellenic Statistical Authority. Figure 5 shows the Greek population by gender and the corresponding evolution in time.
Figure 5. Greek population by gender and age (left) and evolution (right).
Below is a list of cities that are within the Greek part of the cross-border region, where critical structures and infrastructure can be found.
6
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
• Filiates is a town in the prefecture of Thesprotia and the Municipality of Filiates with 2512 permanent residents (2011 census). The city is built on a small plateau, at an altitude of 200 meters and is about 17 km from Igoumenitsa. • Konitsa is a town in the prefecture of Ioannina and the Municipality of Konitsa in Epirus, 64 km north of Ioannina, near the Albanian border, with an estimated population of 2,942 inhabitants (2011 census). • Kalpaki, Municipality of Pogoni (estimated population of 754 inhabitants in 2001) is an important transportation hub where it owes its continuous development. • Florina is a city in Macedonia, the municipality of Florina and the capital of the Regional Unit of Florina in Western Macedonia. The city of Florina is located at an altitude of 687 meters and has a population of 17,686 inhabitants (2011 census). • Kastoria is a city in Macedonia, the municipality of Kastoria and capital of the Regional Unit of Kastoria in western Macedonia. The actual population of the city is 20,147 inhabitants, according to the 2011 census. • Nestorio is a town in the prefecture of Kastoria in Macedonia. Nestorio is located 25 km southwest of Kastoria. It is divided into Ano Nestorio and Kato Nestorio. Kato Nestorio reaches the river Aliakmonas. It is located on a slope of Grammos, at an altitude of 890 meters and has a population of 964 inhabitants (2011 census). • Laimos is a mountainous settlement in the Municipality of Prespa of the Regional Unit of Florina. It is built on the western slopes of Varnounta at an altitude of 900 m. It is located 50 km away from Florina and 60 km from Kastoria, with a population of 185 (2011). • Aridea is a town in Greece, which belongs to the prefecture of Pella. It is located 25 km north of Edessa on the west bank of the Almopaio river Moglenitsa and north of Belitsa. It has a population of 6,900 inhabitants (2011). It is the seat of the Municipality of Almopia and once the seat of the former province of Almopia (Before 1997) and the former Municipality of Aridea (1997-2010). • Kilkis is a city in Macedonia, the municipality of Kilkis and capital of the Regional Unit of Kilkis in Central Macedonia, with a permanent population of 22,740 inhabitants (2011). • Polykastro is a city in the prefecture of Kilkis in Central Macedonia, with 7,064 inhabitants and the capital of the Municipality of Paionia. It is the second largest city in the prefecture of Kilkis and is built on the Old National Road Thessaloniki - Evzonon and next to the river Axios. • Sidirokastro is a town in the prefecture of Serres and the Municipality of Sintiki. It is located 26 km NW of Serres and has a population of 5,117 (2011). • Corfu Town is the capital of the Corfu Regional Unit and the Ionian Islands Region. Located in the central part of the island of Corfu on the east coast, its population according to the 2011 census is 39,674 inhabitants. 1.2.2 North Macedonia Demographical context in the CBR-MKD is analyzed through the number of population in the related municipalities and towns, population density, gender and age distribution. The total number of population, as per the last official census in N. Macedonia [4] is stated to be 506.266 inhabitants. The majority of population has the Bitola Municipality with 95.385 inhabitants and lowest number Vevcani Municipality with 2.433 inhabitants (Table 3).
Table 3. Population distribution in CBR-MKD [1]
7
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Gender Age Total age<19y 19y< age <64y age>64y # Municipality Female Male Population Tot. % Tot. % Tot. % Tot. % Tot. % Mavrovo i 1 8618 3.200 37 5418 63 3147 37 4687 54 784 9 Rostuse 2 Debar 19542 6913 35 12629 65 7287 37 10842 55 1413 7
3 Centar Zupa 6519 2040 31 4479 69 2720 42 3586 55 213 3
4 Struga 63376 23246 37 40130 63 23243 37 34886 55 5247 8
5 Vevcani 2433 984 40 1449 60 606 25 1513 62 314 13
6 Debarca 5507 2353 43 3154 57 1085 20 2882 52 1540 28
7 Ohrid 55749 23094 41 32655 59 14594 26 34727 62 6428 12
8 Resen 16825 7072 42 9753 58 4234 25 9538 57 3053 18
9 Bitola 95385 40388 42 54997 58 23645 25 57729 61 14011 15
10 Novaci 3549 1468 41 2081 59 721 20 1893 53 935 26
11 Prilep 76768 31432 41 45336 59 19561 25 47111 61 10096 13
12 Kavadarci 38741 15693 41 23048 59 10203 26 24420 63 4118 11
13 Gevgelija 22988 9626 42 13362 58 5584 24 14749 64 2655 12
14 Valandovo 11890 4641 39 7249 61 3239 27 7335 62 1316 11
15 Bogdanci 8707 3601 41 5106 59 2214 25 5416 62 1077 12
16 Dojran 3426 1376 40 2050 60 942 27 2030 59 454 13
17 Strumica 54676 21914 40 32762 60 15256 28 34048 62 5372 10
18 Novo Selo 11567 4434 38 7133 62 2992 26 6964 60 1611 14
Total: 506.266 203.475 302.791 141.273 304.356 60.637
Regarding the population density, CBR-MKD in total has 60.83 inh/km2 which globally is ranked as medium population density. Strumica Municipality has the largest density of about 170.07 inh/km2, and lower density has the Novaci Municipality with only 4.71 inh/km2. In total 8 Municipalities in CBR-MKD are characterized with low population density 0-40 inh/km2 (Figure 6). The population density is mainly influenced by the economic opportunities as well as the technological development of the municipalities.
From the Table 3 it can be observed that in general, the number of males is greater than the females in the CBR-MKD municipalities. Males consist 59.81% of the total population. The population group of youngest inhabitants up to 19 years old is around quarter of the total population. On the other hand, the group of older population is around 15%.
8
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 6. Disposition of population in CBR-MKD. 1.2.3 Albania The demographic context is analyzed through the calculation of the population from the municipalities. The data are taken from INSTAT (the institution for statistics in Albania). According to the last census the number of the population for the region is around 455153. The largest city for the population in the region is Korca. The density of the region is around 60 no/km2.. Saranda, Korca and Dibra are the municipalities with the largest density and Dropull and Kolonje municipalities have the smallest density in the region.
Table 4.Population distribution in CBR-ALB No Municipality Gender Age Female Male Age<15y 15y
9
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
In
Table 4 we can see the distribution of the population. The ratio between male and female population is almost 1 with around 50 % for the both Gender. As we can see, the population is relatively young with more than 60% between the age 15-65 years and up to 19% < that 15 years.
Figure 7. Disposition of population in CBR-ALB
10
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
1.3 General data on relevant exposure (basic services & transport infrastructure) 1.3.1 Greece The relevant exposure that is crucial for the efficient emergency and disaster preparedness and management includes basic services (hospitals and disaster management facilities) and transport infrastructure (road network and bridges) that might be interrupted. Disaster management facilities are considered to be the town hall of each considerably large municipality or city, and the police and fire stations. The coordinates of these critical facilities, along with the hospitals, are shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Main critical facilities of the Greek cross-border region. # City Critical facility Latitude (o) Longitude (o) 1 Kilkis Hospital 40.99082 22.86674 2 Kilkis Townhall 40.99534 22.87775 3 Kilkis Police 40.99423 22.88548 4 Kilkis Fire station 40.99397 22.86638 5 Polykastro Hospital 40.9978 22.5773 6 Polykastro Townhall 40.99816 22.57031 7 Polykastro Police 40.99874 22.56991 8 Florina Hospital 40.78562 21.40963 9 Florina Townhall 40.77884 21.4015 10 Florina Police 40.79013 21.41532 11 Florina Fire station 40.78419 21.41309 12 Kastoria Hospital 40.50499 21.28115 13 Kastoria Townhall 40.52243 21.26437 14 Kastoria Police 40.5222 21.26049 15 Kastoria Fire station 40.51065 21.252 16 Ioannina Hospital 39.68227 20.82656 17 Ioannina Townhall 39.66671 20.8542 18 Ioannina Police 39.66574 20.85277 19 Ioannina Fire station 39.68298 20.83517
1.3.2 North Macedonia The relevant crucial exposure for N. Macedonia are shown in Figure 8. School buildings are considered as important basic service facilities since in disaster situation they can easily overtake a function of shelter, medical facility, coordination center etc. In the cross-border region municipalities in N. Macedonia currently exists in total 322 school buildings (elementary and secondary) with different spatial capacities [5]. General analysis shows satisfactory spatial distribution in respect to number of inhabitants, except Debar (2443 inh/school) and Bogdanci Municipality (1741 inh/school) which has significantly lower number of schools in respect to the other municipalities (ex. Novaci Municipality 394 inh/school) (Table 3).
11
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Health facilities and their operability is crucial in disaster management phase. In CBR-MKD several types of medical facilities exist (health houses, clinical hospitals, general hospitals and specialized hospitals) with total number of 18 [6]. Ambulance buildings are not taken into account since they have limited spatial and functional capabilities. Clinical hospitals and general hospitals are of the outmost interest for the disaster management of the region (Table 6). Disposition of health and educational facilities (Figure 8) are according the provided CMC- Database (2020). Provided database is not complete for certain municipalities and should be upgraded further.
Figure 8. Disposition of relevant exposure.
In N. Macedonia there are two relevant institutions involved in the disaster management (CMC – Crisis Management Centre and PRD – Protection and Rescue Directorate, both under the Government of N. Macedonia). Both institutions have their regional centers through which they coordinate the disaster at regional level. In CBR-MKD we have total 9 regional centers of CMC and 9 PRD regional units. Also, in CBR-MKD integral part of disaster response system are the 12 territorial firefighter units (Figure 8, Table 6).
Table 6. Basic services in cross-border region Municipalities (N. Macedonia)
# Municipality Elementary Schools Secondary Schools Health Houses University Clinics Clinical Hospitals General Hospitals Specialized Hospitals CMC-RC PRD-RU TFFU 1 Mavrovo i Rostuse 16 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Debar 6 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 3 Centar Zupa 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
4 Struga 35 5 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 Vevcani 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Debarca 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 Ohrid 18 4 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 8 Resen 22 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 9 Bitola 48 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 10 Novaci 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 Prilep 27 5 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 12 Kavadarci 12 3 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 13 Gevgelija 12 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 14 Valandovo 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 15 Bogdanci 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 Dojran 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Strumica 23 4 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 18 Novo Selo 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total: 285 37 8 0 1 7 2 9 9 12
Apart from the basic services, transport infrastructure has a vital role in efficient and successful crisis management. The key elements that should remain safe and functional are bridges and roads.
As the result of topography there is a considerable number of bridge structures, in total 528 in CBR-MKD [7]. Per km2, the highest concentration of bridge structures we have in Gevgelija municipality (0.14 bridges/km2). In Dojran municipality there is no identified any bridge structure (Table 4).
Road network in CBR-MKD is medium dense. It is estimated to have app 2,786.77 km of roads [3]. Roads are classified as motorways (2.45%), primary (8.00%), secondary (42.45) and tertiary roads (47.10%) (Table 7).
For the efficient-cross border communication and cooperation of particular interest will be the functionality of the border crossings. With Albania there are 4 official border crossings: Blato (Debar Municipality), Trebishte (Centar Zupa Municipality), Sv. Naum (Ohrid Municipality) and Stenje (Resen Municipality). With Greece there are 3 official border crossings: Medjitlija (Bitola Municipality), Bogorodica (Gevgelija Municipality) and Star Dojran (Dojran Municipality).
Table 7. Transport infrastructure in cross-border region Municipalities (N. Macedonia) # Municipality Bridges Motorways Primary Secondary Tertiary (No) (km) Roads (km) Roads (km) Roads (km) 1 Mavrovo i Rostuse 19 0 10.81 93.91 21.46 2 Debar 6 0 0 25.55 7.15 3 Centar Zupa 5 0 0 39.46 1.53 4 Struga 27 0 18.89 131.4 228.1 5 Vevcani 2 0 0 9.36 16.75 6 Debarca 16 0 31.8 19.29 27.37 7 Ohrid 49 0 35.26 64.64 48.33 8 Resen 11 0 19.96 77.9 134.7
13
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
9 Bitola 72 0 59.06 124.8 340.3 10 Novaci 13 0 0 107.9 20.26 11 Prilep 148 0 22.2 171.2 275.2 12 Kavadarci 29 0 0 92.32 80.95 13 Gevgelija 70 61.86 0 48.22 32.6 14 Valandovo 17 4.93 0 60.07 29.91 15 Bogdanci 8 1.29 0 14.9 22.4 16 Dojran 0 0 0 27.42 7.99 17 Strumica 28 0 12.06 60.85 11.9 18 Novo Selo 8 0 13.06 13.63 5.87 Total: 528 68.08 223.1 1182.82 1312.77
14
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
1.3.3 Albania
Figure 9. Disposition of relevant exposure
Table 8. Basic services in cross-border region Municipalities (Albania)
15
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
# Municipality School School School University University Secondary Secondary Elementary High School School High Health Facilities 1 Bulqizë 30 57 4 0 2 Devoll 29 38 5 0 1 3 Dibër 77 138 11 0 3 4 Dropull 1 10 2 0 5 Finiq 101910 6 Gjirokastër 22 30 8 1 2 7 Kolonjë 16 34 3 0 2 8 Konispol 8 8 1 0 9 Korçë 47 53 16 1 2 10 Libohovë 4 9 1 0 11 Librazhd 487060 2 12 Maliq 415580 13 Përmet 82920 1 14 Pogradec 58 69 11 0 4 15 Prrenjas 23 45 6 0 1 16 Pustec 7 6 1 0 17 Sarandë 10 12 3 0 4 439 682 89 2 22
Table 9. Transport infrastructure in cross-border region Municipalities (Albania)
Bridges Motorways Primary Secondary Tertiary # Municipality No (km) Roads (km) Roads (km) Roads (km)
1 Bulqizë 5 35.28 18.28 91.51 2 Devoll 6 20.07 16.02 125.09 3 Dibër 14 24.83 85.35 62.25 4 Dropull 7 30.59 5.75 37.27 5 Finiq 24 57.04 33.03 6 Gjirokastër 3 25.54 11.07 71.79 7 Kolonjë 29 89.27 1.58 17.23 8 Konispol 2 34.15 4.08 9 Korçë 23 36.53 31.23 115.84 10 Libohovë 42.82 11 Librazhd 24 27.43 39.26 24.60 12 Maliq 27 22.20 76.42 50.10 13 Përmet 9 53.44 1.17 23.82 14 Pogradec 6 38.49 18.96 162.64 15 Prrenjas 9 23.67 6.92 30.30 16 Pustec 23.24 12.54 17 Sarandë 2 7.05 24.63 3.37 190 434.40 451.09 908.28
2 Natural and human-induced hazards 2.1 Methodology For the identification of hazards in the cross-border region we used version 2 of the ThinkHazard! screening tool (thinkhazard.org), developed by the World Bank Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR - www.gfdrr.org), which enables users to screen
16
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG project locations for multiple natural hazards, globally [8]. The ThinkHazard! project was initiated in 2015 to facilitate greater access to hazard information and risk management guidance for development sector professionals. The open access thinkhazard.org website enables users to screen potential project locations for the existence of multiple natural hazards, then to obtain guidance on how to manage the risks to their project, and any impacts of their project on the local hazard.
ThinkHazard! version 2, released in July 2017, provides guidance for 11 hydro-meteorological and geological hazards: 1. river (‘fluvial’) flood: Overflow of a body of water (river, lake) that submerges land otherwise not normally inundated 2. urban flood: Flood data in urban areas only, from both fluvial and pluvial (surface flooding from intense rainfall) sources. 3. coastal flood: Inundation of land from coastal waters, due to high tidal levels, or storm surge. Storm surge is a temporary rise in sea level as water is pushed toward the shore by the force of winds associated with a tropical or extra-tropical cyclone 4. tropical cyclone: A non-frontal storm system characterized by a low-pressure center, spiral rain bands and strong winds. Usually, it originates over tropical or subtropical waters and rotates clockwise in the southern hemisphere and counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere. 5. water scarcity: Water Scarcity originates from a deficiency of precipitation over an extended period, usually a season or more. This deficiency results in a water shortage for some activity, group, or environmental sector. 6. extreme heat: Extreme heat, and heatwave, refer to an extended period of high atmosphere-related heat stress, relative to usual conditions 7. wildfire: Wildfire, or bushfire refers to fire in occurring in an area of vegetation. Wildfire can spread rapidly in the right conditions and cause destruction of landscapes and the built environment at the urban-wildland interface. Wildfires require high temperatures, combustible vegetation and an ignition source to develop and spread. Ignition may be natural (e.g., lightning) or human-influenced such as arson or accidental ignition. 8. earthquake: Shaking, trembling or displacement of the earth surface due to seismic waves or other phenomena of volcanic or tectonic origin 9. landslide: The movement of a mass of rock, debris, or earth down a slope. These encompass events such as rock falls, topples, slides, spreads, and flows, such as debris flows commonly referred to as mudflows or mudslides. Landslides can be initiated by disturbance and change of a slope due to rainfall, earthquakes, volcanic activity, changes in groundwater, man-made construction activities, or any combination of these factors. 10. tsunami: A series of multiple ocean waves generated by submarine earth movements, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions or landslides. 11. volcano: Volcanoes are vents in the surface of the Earth through which magma and associated gases erupt, and the resulting structures that are produced by the erupted material. Volcanic hazard comprises proximal hazards such as ballistics, lava, lahars and debris flow, in addition to the more distal effects of volcanic ash fall
ThinkHazard! translates technical hazard data describing hazard intensity, frequency and susceptibility in scientific parameters, into four categories of hazard: very low, low, medium and high. The hazard classification is used to communicate hazard to users who are not expert in natural hazards but require hazard information for project planning and disaster risk
17
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG management purposes. Hazard level is aggregated to ADM1 and ADM0 unit levels, providing a view of hazard for users with a less certain project location, or projects spanning large areas in a country. The four hazard levels (very low, low, medium and high) are derived from hazard maps, which present the spatial distribution of hazard intensity (e.g., flood depth, ground shaking) at a given frequency, or return period. The description of the hazard levels is provided in the following: • High: Users should be highly aware of potentially severe damage from this hazard for the project location. Without taking measures to mitigate the hazard and risk, high levels of damage can be expected to occur within the project or human lifetime (and potentially frequently in that timeframe, for hydro-meteorological hazards, e.g., floods, extreme heat). • Medium: Users should be aware of potentially damaging effects of this hazard for the project location. Potentially damaging events can be expected to occur within the project or human lifetime and measures to mitigate the hazard and risk should be considered. For hydro-meteorological hazards, damaging effects could occur frequently in that timeframe. • Low: Potentially damaging events are less likely to occur within the project or human lifetime but are still possible. Measures to mitigate the hazard and risk would be prudent at critical locations. Hazard has been classified based on long-term averages, and there is still potential that damaging events could occur in this timeframe. • Very Low: Available data suggest that potentially damaging effects are unlikely to occur, on average, in the project or human lifetime. Hazard has been classified based on long-term averages, and there is still potential that damaging events could occur in this timeframe. • No Data Available: No dataset covering the chosen location is currently available in ThinkHazard!
For most types of hazards, data are provided as probabilistic data. A step-by-step procedure is applied to classify hazards based on probabilistic data in ThinkHazard! This procedure is applied for each ADM2 Unit:
1. Hazard = HIGH if hazard intensity exceeds, at any location in the ADM2 Unit, the damaging intensity threshold at the shortest return period (highest frequency threshold); 2. Hazard = MEDIUM if (1) is not satisfied and if hazard intensity values exceed the damaging intensity threshold at the medium return period; 3. Hazard = LOW if (1, 2) are not satisfied and if the hazard intensity values exceed the damaging intensity threshold at the longest return period (lowest frequency threshold); 4. Hazard = VERY LOW if (1, 2, 3) are not satisfied in data values given for the ADM2 Unit. 5. NO DATA is recorded if there are no data values given for the ADM2 Unit.
Damaging intensity threshold is the intensity above which damage would be expected to occur and is defined specifically for each hazard in Table 10.
18
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Table 10. A summary of damaging intensity parameters, units and thresholds used in the classification of probabilistic data in ThinkHazard! (Fraser et al., 2017)
Frequency thresholds determine which hazard level is assigned to a location, given that the damaging intensity threshold is achieved. These thresholds are assigned on a hazard-specific basis, based on de facto standards for a given peril – i.e. the return periods at which data are usually produced. The common return periods reflect the timescales over which a hazard operates. For example, damaging floods occur more frequently than earthquakes due to atmospheric process operating on much shorter timeframes than tectonic processes. ThinkHazard! uses the return periods given in Table 11 to classify hazard based on probabilistic data.
Table 11. Suggested return periods for each hazard classified from probabilistic data
For landslide and volcano hazards, data are usually provided as index data showing susceptibility (non-probabilistic hazard data). Volcanic hazard levels are defined outside of ThinkHazard! using a combination of historical eruption records: maximum recorded eruption size (Volcanic explosivity index -VEI) and last known eruption date). Landslide susceptibility or hazard index is reclassified into four hazard levels following a procedure which depends on the source of the hazard data.
19
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
2.2 Identification of natural hazards at the cross-border region The classification of the hazard levels for all the different hazards included in ThinkHazard! (except for volcano and tropical cyclone) are shown in Table 12, Table 13 and Table 14 for the Greek, North Macedonian and Albanian parts of the cross-border region respectively.
Table 12. Classification of the hazard levels of the municipalities of the Greek part of the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard! Municipality Earthquake Landslide Wildfire Tsunami Extreme Water River Coastal Urban heat scarcity flood flood flood Filiates High High High Medium Medium Low High High Medium Konitsa High High High No Data Medium Low Very low No Data Low Pogoni High High High No Data Medium Low Very low No Data Low Florina Medium Low High No Data Medium Low Low No Data Medium Kastoria Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low Very low No Data High Nestorio Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low Very low No Data High Prespes Medium Low High No Data Medium Low Low No Data Medium Almopia Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data Medium Kilkis Medium Very low High No Data Medium Low High No Data Medium Paionia Medium Very low High No Data Medium Low High No Data Medium Sintiki Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data Medium Corfu High High High Medium Medium Low Very low High Very low
Table 13. Classification of the hazard levels of the municipalities of the N. Macedonian part of the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard! Municipality Earthquake Landslide Wildfire Tsunami Extreme Water River Coastal Urban flood heat scarcity flood flood Bitola Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Bogdanci Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Centar Zupa Medium Medium High No Data Low Low High No Data Low Debarca Medium Low High No Data Low Low Low No Data High Debar Medium Medium High No Data Low Low High No Data Low Gevgelija Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Kavadartsi Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Mavrovo and Medium Medium High No Data Low Low Very No Data High Rostuse low Novatsi Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Novo Selo Medium High High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Ohrid Medium Low High No Data Low Low Low No Data High Prilep Medium Low High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Resen Medium Very low High No Data Low Low Very No Data Low low Star Dojran Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Struga Medium Medium High No Data Low Low High No Data High Strumitsa Medium High High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Valandovo Medium Medium High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Vevcani Medium Medium High No Data Low Low High No Data High
20
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Table 14. Classification of the hazard levels of the municipalities of the Albanian part of the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard! Municipality Earthquake Landslide Wildfire Tsunami Extreme Water River Coastal Urban heat scarcity flood flood flood Bulqize Medium High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Delvine High High High Medium Medium Very low Very Very High low low Devoll High High High No Data Low Low Low No Data High Diber Medium High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Dropull High High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Gjirokaster High High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Himare High High High Medium Medium Very low High High High Kelcyre High High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Kolonje Medium High High No Data Low Low High No Data Low Konispol High High High Medium Medium Low High Very High low Korce Medium High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Libohove High High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Librazhd Medium High High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Finiq High High High Medium Medium Low High Very High low Maliq Medium High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Permet High High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Pogradec Medium High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Prrenjas Medium High High No Data Medium Low High No Data High Pustec Medium High High No Data Low Low High No Data High Sarande High High High Medium Medium Low High Very High low
The spatial ditribution of hazard levels across the cross-border region for all hazards included in ThinkHazard! except for volcano and tropical cyclone is shown in Figure 10 to Figure 18. As far as earthquake is concerned (Figure 10), the whole cross-border region is characterized by medium to high earthquake hazard. High level of earthquake hazard is concentrated at the western part of the cross-border region, covering a significant area of both the Greek and Albanian parts of the cross-border region, while the North-Macedonian part is characterized with medium seismic hazard level. It should be noted that based on Table 12, Table 13 and Table 14, high seismic hazard is associated with an exceedance of a PGA threshold of 0.2 g for a 100-year return period (or 250-year if the 100-year data are not available), while medium seismic hazard is associated with a PGA value greater than 0.1 for a return period of 475 years.
21
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 10. Spatial distribution of earthquake hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard! .
Regarding landslide hazard (Figure 11), the hazard levels at the cross-border region range between very low and high. High landslide hazard level is again observed at the western part of the cross-border region, with the whole of the Albanian part being characterized with high hazard level.
Figure 11. Spatial distribution of landslide hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!. 22
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Regarding extreme heat hazard (Figure 12), the cross-border region is characterized with low to medium hazard level. The Greek part, most of the North Macedonian part, as well as a small part of the Albanian part are associated with medium level for extreme heat hazard, i.e. an exceedance of a temperature threshold of 28oC for a return period of 20 years, while the remaining part of the cross-border region is characterized with low level of extreme heat hazard, i.e. an exceedance of 25oC for a return period of 100 years.
As far as coastal flood hazard is concerned (Figure 13), only the western part of the cross- border region (Corfu island and the coasts of Greece and Albania to the Ionian Sea) exhibits a non-negligible hazard level. More specifically, Corfu island, municipality of Filiates in Greece and Himare in Albania are characterized with a high hazard level (inundation depth greater than 2 m for a 10-year return period), while municipalities of Konispol, Finiq and Sarande are characterized with very low level of coastal flood hazard (inundation depth lower than 0.5 m for a 100-year return period).
Regarding tsunami hazard, the same areas that have a non-negligible level of coastal flood hazard exhibit a medium level of tsunami hazard, with a coastal maximum amplitude threshold value of 1 m for a 500-year return period (Figure 14).
Figure 12. Spatial distribution of extreme heat hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!.
23
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 13. Spatial distribution of coastal flood hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!.
Figure 14. Spatial distribution of tsunami hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!.
24
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 15. Spatial distribution of river flood hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!.
The river flood hazard level ranges between very low and high as shown in Figure 15. Most of the Albanian and N. Macedonian parts are characterized by high level of river flood hazard, i.e. an inundation depth greater than 0.5 m for a 10-year return period.
The urban flood hazard level ranges between very low and high as shown in Figure 16. Most of the Albanian and Greek parts are characterized by medium level of urban flood hazard (exceedance of an inundation depth of 0.5 m for a 50-year return period), while the Macedonian part is mostly characterized by high hazard level, described by the exceedance of an inundation depth of 0.5 m for a 10-year return period.
As far as water scarcity is concerned, the whole cross-border region is categorized as low hazard level (with a water availability threshold valued <=1700 m3/capita/yr for a 1000-year return period), except for Delvine and Himare in Albania, which are categorized with very low water scarcity level.
Regarding wildfire, the whole cross-border region is characterized with high hazard level, which represents a wildfire which is difficult to control and often spread over large areas and is specified with a value of the Canadian Fire Weather Index (FWI) greater than 30 for a 2-year return period (Figure 18).
In the ensuing, we will describe in greater detail the earthquake and landslide hazard for the cross-border region, as these two types of hazard are considered as the most crucial for critical infrastructure.
25
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 16. Spatial distribution of urban flood hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!.
Figure 17. Spatial distribution of water scarcity hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!.
26
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 18. Spatial distribution of wildfire hazard levels at the cross-border region based on ThinkHazard!.
2.3 Earthquake hazard For a more comprehensive presentation of the earthquake hazard at the cross-border region we use the 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) [9], which resulted from a community- based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment supported by the EU-FP7 project “Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe” (SHARE, 2009–2013) [10]. The ESHM13 is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties. The ESHM13 represents a significant improvement compared to previous efforts as it is based on (1) the compilation of updated and harmonised versions of the databases required for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (2) the adoption of standard procedures and robust methods, especially for expert elicitation and consensus building among hundreds of European experts, (3) the multi-disciplinary input from all branches of earthquake science and engineering, (4) the direct involvement of the CEN/TC250/SC8 committee in defining output specifications relevant for Eurocode 8 and (5) the accounting for epistemic uncertainties of model components and hazard results. Furthermore, enormous effort was devoted to transparently document and ensure open availability of all data, results and methods through the European Facility for Earthquake Hazard and Risk (www.efehr.org) [9].
An update of the ESHM13 hazard model was undertaken in the framework of the Horizon 2020 EU SERA project (http://www.sera-eu.org/en/home/), including updated datasets for the European 29 Earthquake Catalogue and the European Database of Seismogenic Faults, as well as the adoption of the so-called backbone approach [11] for modelling the epistemic uncertainty in the ground-motion model. The updated seismic hazard model (ESHM20) is expected to be released in the beginning of 2021.
27
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
In the following we present the results of ESH13 for the cross-border region, however, given that the updated ESHM20 model will be released in 2021, we plan to use the updated seismic hazard data for the forecoming Deliverables.
Figure 19 and Figure 20 illustrate the spatial distribution of the mean Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) at the cross-border region for a reference rock condition, i.e. Eurocode 8 Type A with an average shear wave velocity vs30 = 800 m/s, for a 475-year and a 975-year return period, respectively, obtained from ESHM13. Results are provided for sites equally spaced at 10 km. For T=475 years, PGA ranges between 0.21 and 0.45g, while for T=975 years PGA ranges between 0.29 and 0.62g. The regions where the highest levels of PGA are observed are the western coasts of the cross-border region to the Ionian Sea, as well as the island of Corfu. It should be noted that these PGA values refer to rock-site conditions and are expected to be amplified if local site conditions are considered.
Figure 19. Spatial distribution of PGA at the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 475-year return period based on ESHM13.
28
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 20. Spatial distribution of PGA at the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 975-year return period based on ESHM13. 2.3.1 Greek-side borders Figure 21 and Figure 22 illustrate the spatial distribution of the mean Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) at the Greek part of the cross-border region, for a reference rock condition of vs30 = 800 m/s) for a 475-year and a 975-year return period, respectively, obtained from ESHM13. The maps also include the PGA values at the main cities of all municipalities, which are listed in Table 15.
29
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 21. Spatial distribution of PGA at the Greek part of the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 475-year return period based on ESHM13.
Figure 22. Spatial distribution of PGA at the Greek part of the cross-border region for a reference rock condition (vs30 = 800 m/s) and for a 475-year return period based on ESHM13.
Table 15. Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) for rock site conditions at the main cities of the Greek cross-border region for mean return periods equal to 475 years and 975 years based on ESHM13 # PGA (g) PGA (g) Municipality Main city Latitude (o) Longitude (o) T=475 years T=975 years 1 Filiates Filiates 39.599997 20.30912 0.43 0.57 2 Konitsa Konitsa 40.045556 20.74889 0.28 0.39 3 Pogoni Kalpaki 39.886111 20.62611 0.36 0.5
30
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
4 Florina Florina 40.7824 21.4089 0.24 0.33 5 Kastoria Kastoria 40.518131 21.26876 0.23 0.33 6 Nestorio Nestorio 40.4167 21.0667 0.23 0.33 7 Prespes Laimos 40.836389 21.14056 0.25 0.36 8 Almopia Aridaia 40.975278 22.06278 0.21 0.3 9 Kilkis Kilkis 40.9833 22.8667 0.28 0.4 10 Paionia Polykastro 40.997881 22.5709 0.25 0.36 11 Sintiki Sidirokastro 41.233333 23.38333 0.24 0.34 12 Corfu Corfu 39.616667 19.91667 0.41 0.55 Ioannina 39.666667 20.85 0.34 0.48
2.3.2 North Macedonian-side borders The CBR-MKD is characterized with relatively high seismic hazard, particularly expressed in three epicentral zones of strong seismicity: Debar zone (border region with Albania), Ohrid zone (border region with Albania) and Valandovo zone (border region with Greece). The catalogue of earthquakes [12] which consists of historical and instrumental data, shows that this region has been often shaken by a strong earthquakes with ML>5.0 (Figure 23). This region was affected also with a destructive earthquake with ML>6.0, accompanied with considerable material and human losses.
Figure 23. Strong earthquake activity in CBR-MKD.
Table 16 . List of significant earthquakes affecting the CBR-MKD Observed and reported Year Month Day МL I0 Epicentral area effects Earthquakes before 1900 -300 - - 6.05 IX Valandovo (MKD) 400 - - 6.05 IX Gradsko (MKD)
31
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
527 - - 6.05 IX Ohrid (MKD) Earthquakes after 1900 1906 09 28 6.00 VIII South of Ohrid lake (ALB) --- 1911 02 18 6.70 IX South of Ohrid lake (ALB) Heavy destruction, human loss and injury 1912 02 13 6.00 VIII South of Ohrid lake (ALB) --- 1931 03 07 6.00 VIII Valandovo (MKD) Heavy destruction, human 1931 03 08 6.70 X loss and injury, ground settlement 1942 08 27 6.00 IX Peshkopi (ALB) --- 1967 11 30 6.50 IX Debar (MKD) Destruction, human loss and injury, surface faulting
In the last 30 years, CBR-MKD was affected by several moderate earthquakes, with ML ≥ 5: 1990 Gevgelija earthquake (ML=5.5), 1994 Bitola earthquake (ML=5.2), 2009 Dojran earthquake (ML=5.1), 2017 Ohrid earthquake (ML=5.0) and 2020 Mavrovo earthquake (ML=5.0). For Gevgelija and Bitola earthquakes economic loses were reported and damage assessment was performed [13] [14], for Ohrid earthquake minor damage was reported and rapid damage assessment was performed. Dojran and Mavrovo earthquakes minor damages were reported and no assessment was performed.
According ESHM13 [10], earthquake hazard in this region generally is estimated in the range 0.2-0.4g (return period 475 years, vs30=800m/s, Figure 19) and 0.25-0.5g (return period 975 years, vs30=800m/s, Figure 20).
2.3.3 Albanian-side borders The CBR-ALB (Korça-Ohrid-Peshkopia seismogenetic zone) is in the form of a relatively narrow belt with a long almost meridional extension from Leskovik to Erseka, Korça, Pogradec, Ohrid, Dibra, Peshkopia up to Kukësi. Along this zone lie epicenters of strong and medium earthquakes as shown in Figure 24.
32
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 24. Strong earthquake activity in CBR-ALB
This region was affected also with strong earthquakes as shown in Table 17.
33
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Table 17. List of significant earthquakes affecting the CBR-ALB Year month day Depth I M type Mw ref 1922 1 12 15 VI- VII 5 S 5.1 Sul 1933 7 27 8 VII 5 S 5.1 Sul 1938 8 15 13 VII 5 S 5.1 Sul 1962 6 28 17 VI - VII 5 S 5.1 Sul 1969 8 26 30 VI - VII 5 S 5.1 Sul 1977 8 18 8 V- VI 5 S 5.1 Sul 1987 1 7 10 VI - VII 5 S 5.1 Sul 1922 6 9 13 VII 5.1 S 5.2 Sul 1936 1 29 15 VII 5.1 S 5.2 Sul 1911 2 20 0 VII 5.2 S 5.3 Sul 1911 2 20 0 VII 5.2 S 5.3 Sul 1912 4 1 0 VII 5.2 S 5.3 Sul 1921 7 6 17 VII 5.2 S 5.3 Sul 1975 11 22 0 VII 5.3 S 5.4 Sul 1912 2 15 0 VII 5.4 S 5.5 Sul 1935 11 7 21 VII 5.4 S 5.5 Sul 1978 8 18 18 VII 5.4 S 5.5 Sul 1967 12 2 9 VII 5.5 S 5.6 Sul 1906 9 28 0 VII- VIII 5.7 S 5.8 Sul 1911 2 18 0 VIII 5.7 S 5.8 Sul 1921 3 30 13 VIII 5.8 S 5.9 Sul 1931 1 28 17 VIII 5.8 S 5.9 Sul 1911 2 22 0 VIII 5.9 S 6 Sul 1912 2 13 19 VIII 6 S 6.1 Sul 1942 8 27 16 VIII 6 S 6.1 Sul 1960 5 26 8 IX 6.4 S 6.5 Sul 1967 11 30 10 IX 6.6 S 6.7 Sul 1911 2 18 21 IX 6.7 S 6.8 Sul
Among the strong and medium earthquakes of this region are: February 18, 1911 with M=6.7 (Ohrid Lake), December 22, 1919 with M=6.1 (Leskovik), March 30, 1921 with M=5.8 (Peshkopia), May 26, 1960 with M=6.4 (Korça), September 17, 1974, with M=5.2 (Gërmenji- Leskovik).
The earthquake hazard in this region is estimated in the range 0.25-0.45 (return period 475 years, Vs30=800m/s) and 0.35-0.5 (return period 975 years, vs30=800m/s).
34
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
2.4 Critical infrastructure with respect to earthquakes 2.4.1 Greek-side borders Table 18 includes PGA values for rock site conditions at the main critical facilities of the Greek cross-border region for mean return periods equal to 475 years and 975 years based on ESHM13.
Table 18. Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) for rock site conditions at the main critical facilities of the Greek cross-border region for mean return periods equal to 475 years and 975 years based on ESHM13. Critical Latitude Longitude PGA (g) PGA (g) # City facility (o) (o) T=475 years T=975 years 1 Kilkis Hospital 40.99082 22.86674 0.28 0.40 2 Kilkis Townhall 40.99534 22.87775 0.28 0.40 3 Kilkis Police 40.99423 22.88548 0.28 0.40 4 Kilkis Fire station 40.99397 22.86638 0.28 0.40 5 Polykastro Hospital 40.9978 22.5773 0.25 0.36 6 Polykastro Townhall 40.99816 22.57031 0.25 0.36 7 Polykastro Police 40.99874 22.56991 0.25 0.36 8 Florina Hospital 40.78562 21.40963 0.24 0.33 9 Florina Townhall 40.77884 21.4015 0.24 0.33 10 Florina Police 40.79013 21.41532 0.24 0.33 11 Florina Fire station 40.78419 21.41309 0.24 0.33 12 Kastoria Hospital 40.50499 21.28115 0.23 0.33 13 Kastoria Townhall 40.52243 21.26437 0.23 0.33 14 Kastoria Police 40.5222 21.26049 0.23 0.33 15 Kastoria Fire station 40.51065 21.252 0.23 0.33 16 Ioannina Hospital 39.68227 20.82656 0.37 0.52 17 Ioannina Townhall 39.66671 20.8542 0.34 0.48 18 Ioannina Police 39.66574 20.85277 0.34 0.48 19 Ioannina Fire station 39.68298 20.83517 0.34 0.48
Figure 25 and Figure 26 illustrate the main road network of the Greek cross-border region, superimposed on the ESHM13 PGA maps for 475-year and 975-year return period respectively. We observe that most of the road network in the municipality of Filiates, including connections with the Albanian side of the cross-border region, is in an area with high seismic hazard, with PGA values ranging between 0.41 g and 0.45 g for 475-years return period and between 0.55 g and 0.62 g for 975-years return period.
35
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 25. Main road network at the Greek part of the cross-border region, superimposed at the ESHM13 PGA map for a 475-year return period (vs30 = 800 m/s).
Figure 26. Main road network at the Greek part of the cross-border region, superimposed at the ESHM13 PGA map for a 975-year return period (vs30 = 800 m/s). 2.4.2 North Macedonian-side borders
36
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
CBR-MKD according the ESHM13 [10] is characterized with moderate to high seismic hazard. To zones of moderate seismic hazard (0.1-0.25g, RP475, vs30=800m/s) belongs 39.36% of the CBR-MKD territory, and the rest of territory of about 60.64% belongs to zones of high seismic hazard (>0.25g, RP475, vs30=800m/s) (Table 19).
Table 19. Level of seismic hazard in respect to CBR-MKD area RP475, vs30=800m/s RP975, vs30=800m/s PGA (%g) % Area PGA (%g)% Area 0.20-0.25 39.36 0.20-0.25 - 0.25-0.30 39.25 0.25-0.30 9.63 0.30-0.35 9.78 0.30-0.35 25.08 0.35-0.40 11.61 0.35-0.40 32.02 0.40-0.45 - 0.40-0.45 16.49 0.45-0.50 - 0.45-0.50 7.01 >0.50 - >0.50 9.77
According data related to the two characteristic return periods (475 and 975 years), can be concluded that the municipalities with the highest seismic hazard are Debar, Mavrovo and Rostuse and Centar Zupa Municipality in the western part of the country where the expected max PGA for the main towns reaches a value in range of 0.38 to 0.52 g. The municipalities with lower seismic hazard in the CBR-MKD are Novaci, Prilep and Kavadarci Municipality in the southern part of the country, where the expected max PGA for the main towns reaches a value in range of 0.22-0.25 to0.31-0.35 (Table 20 and Table 21).
As shown on the maps (Figure 27 and Figure 28), most of the road network and bridges, as well as basic services (CMC Data Base) are placed in the territories which belongs to the high seismic hazard zones (60.64% from the total territory of CBR-MKD). Of the particular attention for the further investigations should be basic services and transport infrastructure in the municipalities in the west and south-west as well as those on the south-eastern part of the country.
Table 20. Seismic hazard in CBR-MKD (RP475, vs30=800m/s) Area (%) PGA # Municipality Main Town 0.20-0.25 0.25-0.30 0.30-0.35 0.35-0.40 %g 1 Mavrovo i Rostuse 0 0 6.86 93.14 Rostuse 0.38 2 Debar 0 0 4.66 95.34 Debar 0.38 3 Centar Zupa 0 0 10.92 89.08 Centar Zupa 0.38 4 Struga 0 12.47 82.15 5.38 Struga 0.31 5 Vevcani 0 0 98.39 1.61 Vevcani 0.32 6 Debarca 0 32.09 67.10 0 Belchishta 0.30 7 Ohrid 0 63.84 36.16 0 Ohrid 0.30 8 Resen 0 95.74 4.26 0 Resen 0.29 9 Bitola 13.47 86.53 0 0 Bitola 0.26 10 Novaci 93.17 6.83 0 0 Novaci 0.25 11 Prilep 91.26 8.47 0 0 Prilep 0.24 12 Kavadarci 100.00 0 0 0 Kavadarci 0.22 13 Gevgelija 69.94 30.06 0 0 Gevgelija 0.25 14 Valandovo 4.02 95.98 0 0 Valandovo 0.27 15 Bogdanci 10.00 90.00 0 0 Bogdanci 0.26 16 Dojran 0 100.00 0 0 Star Dojran 0.27 37
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
17 Strumica 0 100.00 0 0 Strumica 0.27 18 Novo Selo 32.18 67.82 0 0 Novo Selo 0.25
Figure 27. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP475 map.
Table 21. Seismic hazard in CBR-MKD (RP975, vs30=800m/s) Area (%) PGA # Municipality 0.25- 0.30- 0.35- 0.40- 0.45- >0.50 Main Town %g 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 1 Mavrovo i Rostuse 0 0 0 4.19 25.47 70.34 Rostuse 0.52 2 Debar 0 0 0 0 4.67 95.33 Debar 0.52 3 Centar Zupa 0 0 0 0 10.91 89.09 Centar Zupa 0.52 4 Struga 0 0 0 55.57 30.94 13.49 Struga 0.43 5 Vevcani 0 0 0 70.38 28.05 1.57 Vevcani 0.45 6 Debarca 0 0 0 47.19 52.81 0 Belchishta 0.41 7 Ohrid 0 0 0 92.28 7.72 0 Ohrid 0.42 8 Resen 0 0 57.34 42.39 0.27 0 Resen 0.40 9 Bitola 0 3.42 79.64 16.94 0 0 Bitola 0.37 10 Novaci 24.07 59.46 16.47 0 0 0 Novaci 0.35 11 Prilep 12.78 78.49 8.73 0 0 0 Prilep 0.34 12 Kavadarci 47.12 52.88 0 0 0 0 Kavadarci 0.31 13 Gevgelija 0 32.50 67.50 0 0 0 Gevgelija 0.35 14 Valandovo 0 0 100.0 0 0 0 Valandovo 0.38 15 Bogdanci 0 0 100.0 0 0 0 Bogdanci 0.38 16 Dojran 0 0 100.0 0 0 0 Star Dojran 0.38 17 Strumica 0 0 100.0 0 0 0 Strumica 0.38 18 Novo Selo 0 65.27 34.73 0 0 0 Novo Selo 0.36
38
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 28. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP975 map.
2.4.3 Albanian-side borders CBR-ALB is characterized with high seismic hazard where all the area belongs to high seismic hazard (>0.25g, RP475, vs30=800m/s) (Table 22).
Table 22. Level of seismic hazard in respect to CBR-ALB area RP475, vs30=800m/s RP975, vs30=800m/s PGA (%g) % Area PGA (%g) % Area 0.20-0.25 - 0.20-0.25 - 0.25-0.30 20% 0.25-0.30 - 0.30-0.35 42% 0.30-0.35 - 0.35-0.40 21% 0.35-0.40 9% 0.40-0.45 18% 0.40-0.45 40% 0.45-0.50 - 0.45-0.50 16% >0.50 - >0.50 35%
Table 23. Seismic hazard in CBR-ALB (RP475, vs30=800m/s) Area % (km2) NO MUNICIPALITY 0.25-0.30 0.30-0.35 0.35-0.40 0.40-0.45 1 Bulqizë 54.05 594.58 2 Devoll 437.64 3 Dibër 306.08 483.70 114.93 4 Dropull 7.89 156.83 284.44 5 Finiq 427.48 6 Gjirokastër 4.74 444.87 7 Kolonjë 370.34 446.07 8 Konispol 215.18 9 Korçë 274.17 513.76 10 Libohovë 135.79 94.08 39
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
11 Librazhd 137.82 644.51 12 Maliq 218.71 472.37 13 Përmet 425.59 189.00 14 Pogradec 710.55 15 Prrenjas 343.69 5.24 16 Pustec 147.03 64.23 17 Sarandë 79.41
Figure 29. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP475 map
40
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Table 24. Seismic hazard in CBR-ALB (RP975, vs30=800m/s) Area (km2) NO MUNICIPALITY 0.35-0.40 0.40-0.45 0.45-0.50 >0.50 1 Bulqizë 46.42792 235.8863 366.3191 2 Devoll 437.6361 3 Dibër 236.236 470.997 113.1207 84.36112 4 Dropull 7.886067 441.2744 5 Finiq 427.4838 6 Gjirokastër 449.6063 7 Kolonjë 729.5494 12.77488 8 Konispol 215.1796 9 Korçë 78.96513 708.9724 10 Libohovë 229.8694 11 Librazhd 12.68911 201.6571 567.9791 12 Maliq 0.392979 513.5083 132.8162 13 Përmet 115.8085 309.7815 189.1017 14 Pogradec 423.0268 287.5207 15 Prrenjas 280.9706 67.96024 16 Pustec 0.388083 135.9584 0.0133 17 Sarandë 79.41179
41
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 30. Disposition of relevant exposure in respect to RP975 map
42
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
2.5 Landslide susceptibility 2.5.1 Introduction Landslide susceptibility is the likelihood of a landslide occurring in an area controlled by local terrain conditions [15]. Susceptibility does not consider the temporal probability of a failure (i.e. when or how frequently landslides occur), or the magnitude of the expected events (i.e. how large or destructive possible failures may be) [16].
A landslide susceptibility map subdivides the terrain into zones with differing likelihoods that a landslide may occur. Landslide susceptibility assessment can be considered the initial step towards a landslide hazard and risk assessment, but it can also be an end product in itself that can be used in land-use planning and environmental impact assessment. The methods used for landslide susceptibility analysis are usually based on the assumption that past conditions are indicative of future conditions. Therefore, areas that have experienced landslides in the past are likely to experience them in the future too, as they maintain similar environmental settings (e.g. topography, geology, soil, geomorphology and land use). This approach emphasizes the need to collect detailed landslide inventories before conducting any landslide susceptibility assessment [17].
2.5.2 Landslide Susceptibility model The landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region of Greece, North Macedonia and Albania is presented based on the Pan-European Landslide Susceptibility Map version 2 (ELSUS v2) (Figure 31). ELSUS v2 shows landslide susceptibility zonation for individual climate-physiographic zones across Europe [18] with the aim to display a harmonized picture of the terrain susceptibility to generic landslides across Europe. It covers a larger area of Europe than ELSUS 1000 [19] including all European Union member states except Malta, in addition to Albania, Andorra, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, N. Macedonia, Iceland, Kosovo, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, Norway, San Marino, Serbia, and Switzerland. The map can be viewed at scales up to 1:200,000 as determined by the cell size of 200 × 200 m and should not be enlarged to greater scales.
The methodological approach for the elaboration, validation and classification of ELSUSV2 is the same as the previous version called ELSUS 1000 reported in [19]. More specifically, a semi-quantitative method is used, combining landslide frequency ratios information with a spatial multi-criteria evaluation model of three thematic predictors: slope angle, shallow subsurface lithology and land cover. A landslide susceptibility index (LSI) for each model zone is computed based on the specific weight of these three thematic predictors for ‘plain’ and ‘mountainous’ model zones. To account for missing or biased landslide information in specific parameter classes of the individual model zones, these initial weights were modified by expert knowledge in the spatial multi-criteria evaluation model to obtain a landslide susceptibility index satisfying both expert knowledge and landslide signal indicated by Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) metrics [19]. The expert knowledge-based modifications also consider comments and inputs from regional experts collected during the evaluation of the ELSUS 1000 map that mainly refer to areas without landslide information. A landslide inventory containing 149,117 generic landslide locations has been used to prepare ELSUS V2, considerably extended with respect to the 102,182 data points used for ELSUS 1000.
43
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 31. Landslide susceptibility of the cross-border region of Greece, North Macedonia and Albania (where landslide susceptibility 1 = very low; 2 = low; 3 = moderate; 4 = high; 5 = very high).
2.5.3 Greek-side borders Landslide susceptibility map according to Elsusv2 for the cross-border region in Greece is presented in Figure 32.
Expect for the already shown landslide susceptibility assessment of the cross-border region in Greece according to Elsusv2, a preliminary national-scale assessment of the landslide susceptibility in Greece has already been presented in [20] using a landslide inventory derived from historical archives. Moreover, certain partial research efforts for selected locations across the country are available such as [21, 22, 23]. However, no official landslide hazard map on regional level is currently available in Greece.
Table 25 represents the percentage of area in each susceptibility zone of the cross-border region. It can be observed that around 51% of the total cross border region of Greece falls within high and very high susceptibility to landslides.
44
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
Figure 32. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region of Greece according to Elsusv2 (where landslide susceptibility 1 = very low; 2 = low; 3 = moderate; 4 = high; 5 = very high).
Table 25. Percentage of landslide susceptibility zones of cross-border region in Greece Susceptibility level Description Percentage (Elsusv2) [%] 1 very low 14.29 2 low 14.40 3 moderate 19.99 4 high 27.51 5 very high 23.81
45
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
2.5.4 North Macedonian-side borders Landslide susceptibility map for the cross-border region in North Macedonia is presented in Figure 33. Data and results from the Pan-European landslide susceptibility mapping: ELSUS Version 2 have been used and implemented [18].
Figure 33. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region in N. Macedonia (Elsusv2)
Additional information currently available for landslide inventories from, Crisis Management Center (period 2015-2020) [24] and Peshevski, 2015 [25] are presented on the same map [figure 7] along with ELSUS data. It is important to mention that no official landslide hazard map on regional level is currently available in North Macedonia, so at this point only the presented inventories are available as well as certain partial research efforts for selected locations across the country such as [26], [27], [28].
Table 26 represents the percentage of area in each susceptibility zone of the cross-border region. It can be observed that around 55% of the total cross border region of N. Macedonia falls within high and very high susceptibility to landslides.
Table 26. Percentage of landslide susceptibility zones of cross-border region in N. Macedonia Percentage Susceptibility level (Elsusv2) Description [%] 1 very low 13.5 2 low 9.9 3 moderate 21.0 4 high 30.5 5 very high 25.1
46
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
2.5.5 Albanian-side borders
Figure 34. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region in Albania (Think Hazard)
47
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
2.6 Critical infrastructure with respect to landslides 2.6.1 Greek-side borders When it comes to assess the landslide risk combining information regarding the landslide susceptibility, landslide frequency of occurrence, exposure and vulnerability information of the elements at risk, the transport infrastructure is expected to be the most exposed element rather than hospitals and schools, which are mainly located in urban lowland areas.
Figure 35 represents the landslide susceptibility map according to ELSUSv2 together with the exposed transport infrastructure, which includes the main road and railway network.
Figure 35. Landslide susceptibility map of the cross-border region in Greece (Elsusv2) together with relevant transport exposure information (main road network, railway network)
Based on the presented map (Figure 35) it can be observed that approximately 30 km of Kozani- Ioannina primary road in Konitsa Municipality is located in very high landslide susceptible zone. Moreover, approximately 20 km of Kristalopigi-Florina primary road that connects Prespes and Florina Municipalities lie within the very high susceptibility class. Generally, as shown on the map of Figure 35, the railway network is less affected by the landslide hazard.
2.6.2 N. Macedonian-side borders The potential instabilities, i.e., level of susceptibility for a given analyzed location would have no significance if, no human presence or material properties were at stake. The main purpose of risk assessment is to define, by connecting the information on susceptibility with the exposure level from economic, social, and physical aspect. When it comes to exposure to
48
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
landslides, it is the most probable that the transport infrastructure is going to be most exposed element (physical and socio-economic) rather than hospitals and schools which are mainly located in urban lowland areas. Figure 36 represents the exposed transport infrastructure to landslide susceptibility map according to ELSUSv2.
Figure 36. Transport infrastructure vs Landslide susceptibility (Elsusv2) at the cross-border region in N. Macedonia
Based on the presented map (Figure 36) it can be observed that approximately 11 km of the only motorway in the cross-border region in North Macedonia, more specifically in the northern part of the Gevgelija Municipality is located in very high susceptible zone to landslides. At this zone there are 5 bridges. This zone of the motorway can be recognized as critical infrastructure having in mind that this is the main road connecting not just North Macedonia to Greece, but also this motorway represents the main link from European countries to Greece.
Another zone which can be point of interest is the secondary road in the Mavrovo and Rostuse Municipality in the western part of N. Macedonia. Approximately 65 km of road network falls within territory of very high landslide susceptibility. Also, based on available data from landslide inventory significant number of events of registered landslides are reported by CMC and [25]. This road is very important connection (and in many cases thy only connection) for many municipalities in the most western part of country. It also represents the connection road with Albania.
49
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
2.6.3 Albanian-side borders
Figure 37. Transport infrastructure vs Landslide susceptibility (ThinkHazard) at the cross-border region in Albania.
50
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
References [1] www.sep.gov.mk › data › file ›IPA CBC Republic of Macedonia – Republic of Albania Cross-Border program 2007-2013. [2] Interreg IPA CBC Programme ‘Greece – the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2014-2020’. [3] Assessment of the security from risks and dangers, Crisis Management Centre, Government of Republic of N. Macedonia (for each Municipality), official documents. [4] Census of Population, Households and Dwellings in the Republic of Macedonia, 2002, Book XIII, The State Statistical Office, 2002. [5] School premises of primary, lower secondary and upper secondary schools, 2016, State statistical office of the Republic of Macedonia, 2017, ISBN 978-608-227-257-3. [6] http://zdravstvo.gov.mk/ [7] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/41.6154/21.7514 [8] Fraser, V.S., Douglas, S.J., Simpson, A., Kuijper, M., Winsemius, H., Burzel, A., Hohmann, A., Taillefer, N., Vermooten, S., Jacon, F., Giraud, P. (2017). Methodology report for ThinkHazard! V2. [9] Woessner, J., Danciu L., D. Giardini and the SHARE consortium (2015), The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model: key components and results, Bull. Earthq. Eng., doi:10.1007/s10518-015-9795-1. [10] SHARE Project: Giardini, D., Woessner J., Danciu L., (2014) Mapping Europe’s Seismic Hazard. EOS, 95(29): 261-262. [11] Douglas, J. (2018). Capturing Geographically-Varying Uncertainty in Earthquake Ground Motion Models or What We Think We Know May Change, Recent Advances in Earthquake Engineering in Europe, Editor: Kyriazis Pitilakis, Chapter 6, 153-181. [12] Cejkovska, V., L. Pekevski, K. Drogreska, J. Najdovska (2016). Report per the Project of the Standardization Institute of the Republic of Macedonia entitled National Annexes for Eurocodes, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Seismological Observatory, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, February 2016 (in Macedonian). [13] Damage assessment of buildings in private and public property by the earthquake of 21.12.1990 on the territory of the Municipality of Gevgelija and Valandovo, IZIIS Reports 1991-05, 1991-14, 1991-15, 1991-18. [14] Damage assessment of buildings in private and public property by the earthquake of 01.09.1994 on the territory of the Municipality of Bitola, Resen, Demir Hisar and Ohrid, IZIIS Reports 1994-47/3, 1994-48-51, 1994-69. [15] Fell, R., Corominas, J., Bonnard, C., Cascini, L., Leroi, E., & Savage, W. Z. (2008). Guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land use planning. Engineering Geology, 102, 85–98. [16] Committee on the Review of the National Landslide Hazards Mitigation Strategy. (2004). Partnerships for reducing landslide risk: Assessment of the National Landslide Hazards Mitigation Strategy. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. [17] Corominas J., Van Westen C., Frattini P., Cascini L., Malet J.-P., Fotopoulou S., Catani F., Van Den Eeckhaut M., Mavrouli O., Agliardi F., Pitilakis K., Winter M. G., Pastor M., Ferlisi S., Tofani V., Hervás J., Smith J. T. 2014. Recommendations for the quantitative assessment of landslide risk. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 73(2):209-263. [18] Wilde, M., Günther, A., Reichenbach, P., Malet, J.-P., Hervás, J., 2018. Pan-European landslide susceptibility mapping: ELSUS Version 2. Journal of Maps, 14(2): 97-104 and supplemental map. [19] Günther, A., Van Den Eeckhaut, M., Malet, J.-P., Reichenbach, P., Hervás, J., 2014. Climate- physiographically differentiated Pan-European landslide susceptibility assessment using spatial multi-criteria evaluation and transnational landslide information. Geomorphology, 224: 69-85. [20] Sabatakakis N., Koukis G., Vassiliades E., Lainas S. (2013). Landslide susceptibility zonation in Greece, Nat Hazards (2013) 65:523–543 DOI 10.1007/s11069-012-0381-4. [21] Kalantzi, Doutsou, & Koukouvelas (2010). Historical landslides in the prefecture of Ioannina- Collection and analysis of data. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece, 43, 1350-1360. [22] Ambas, V., Katsaros, E., Alexoudi, M., Olasoglou, E., Tsapanos, T., Koravos, G., Drakatos, G., & Tzamos, E. (2016). Landslides in Vitsi (Florina) territory. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece, 50(2), 577-585. doi:https://doi.org/10.12681/bgsg.11762. [23] Aggeliki Kyriou & Konstantinos Nikolakopoulos (2020) Landslide mapping using optical and radar data: a case study from Aminteo, Western Macedonia Greece, European Journal of Remote Sensing, 53:sup2, 17-27, DOI: 10.1080/22797254.2019.1681905. [24] Landslide inventory database from 2015-2020. Crisis Management Center.
51
WP-2 | D.2.1 101004830 - CRISIS - UCPM-2020-PP-AG
[25] Peshevski, I. (2015). Landslide susceptibility modelling using GIS technology. Extended abstract of candidate’s thesis, 181. [26] Milevski, I., & Dragicevic, S. (2018). GIS-Based Landslide Susceptibility Modelling of the Territory of the Republic of Macedonia. In 7th International Conference on Cartography and GIS (pp. 82-91). [27] Bojadjieva, J., Sheshov, V., & Bonnard, C. (2018). Hazard and risk assessment of earthquake-induced landslides—case study. Landslides, 15(1), 161-171. [28] IPA cross-border programme: Joint Applicable Research for Natural Recourses Preservation and Environmental Protection in the Cross-border Region within the municipalities of Pehchevo and Simitli, 2007CB16IPO007-2012-2-106.
52