A GIS-BASED TSUNAMI EVACUATION MODEL CONSIDERING LAND COVER AND SPATIAL CONFIGURATION (CASE OF PURWOREJO REGENCY, INDONESIA)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.143-156
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Article Metrics: (Click on the Metric tab below to see the detail)

Article Info
Submitted: 20-11-2016
Published: 30-10-2017
Section: Articles
Fulltext PDF Tell your colleagues Email the author
In Indonesia, several programs have dealt with tsunami mitigation, such as The German-Indonesian Tsunami Early Warning System (GITEWS) project (2005-2011). Despite the success of these projects, many coastal areas in Indonesia are still vulnerable to tsunamis, due to the variety of land cover and spatial configuration characteristics. One of such vulnerable areas includes Purworejo Regency. This paper evaluated the degree to which land cover and spatial configuration characteristics influence the tsunami evacuation process, and thus influence tsunami hazard mitigation. The evaluation drawn on data from a low to medium density populated coastal area of Purworejo Regency. The analysis relied on a quantitative approach, using a cross-sectional field survey, followed by a GIS-based analysis. This is complemented by a raster-based analysis to incorporate the land cover and spatial configuration aspects.  The combined analysis derived which buildings could act as evacuation buildings in case of a tsunami. The associated tsunami evacuation routes were calculated using a Least Cost Path (LCP) analysis method. The results suggested that several public facility buildings are likely to be used as tsunami evacuation buildings. Yet, even though the overall capacity of these buildings is adequate to accommodate the estimated number of evacuees in a larger area, the specific demand at certain locations in the study area is much higher than these localities can handle. This disproportionate spatial variation in required capacity needs further attention. Moreover, the survey responses indicated that the majority of the respondents was not well informed regarding the tsunami evacuation procedures

Keywords

Tsunami evacuation; land cover; spatial configuration; least cost path

  1. Febri Fahmi Hakim 
    Ministry of Public Works and Housing, Republic of Indonesia, Indonesia
  2. Walter Timo de Vries 
    Technische Universität München, Germany
  3. Florian Siegert 
    Technische Universität München, Germany
  4. Joesron Alie Syahbana 
    Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
  1. Agency for Meteorology Climatology and Geophysic. (2010). InaTEWS: Indonesia Tsunami Early Warning System Concept and Implementation. Jakarta.

  2. Babeyko, A. (2012). EasyWave: fast tsunami simulation tool for early warning.

  3. Budiarjo, A. (2006). Evacuation Shelter Building Planning for Tsunami-prone Area; a Case Study of Meulaboh City, Indonesia. ITC Enschede.

  4. Dewi, R. S. (2010). A GIS-Based Approach to the Selection of Evacuation Shelter Building and Routes for Tsunami Risk Reduction- A Case Study of Cilacap Coastal Area, Indonesia. University of Twente.

  5. Dijkstra, E. W. (1959). A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numerische Mathematik, 1(1), 269–271. [Crossref]

  6. Fakhrurrazi, & Nes, A. van. (2012). Space and Panic. The application of Space Syntax to understand the relationship between mortality rates and spatial configuration in Banda Aceh during the tsunami 2004. In M. Greene, J. Reyes, & A. Castro (Eds.), Eighth International Space Syntax Symposium. Santiago de Chile.

  7. FEMA. (2008). Guidelines for Design of Structures for Vertical Evacuation from Tsunamis. [Crossref]

  8. Gayer, G., et. al. (2010). Tsunami inundation modelling based on detailed roughness maps of densely populated areas. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 10, 1679– 1687. [Crossref]

  9. Grimmond, C. S. B., et al. (2001). Rapid methods to estimate sky-view factors appiled to urban areas. International Journal of Climatology, 21, 903–913. [Crossref]

  10. Hakim, F. F. (2016). Application of GIS-based Tsunami Evacuation Model Considering Land Cover and Spatial Configuration Case of Purworejo Regency, Indonesia. Technische Universität München.

  11. Juliao, R. P. (1999). Measuring accessibility using GIS.

  12. Kaiser, G., et al. (2013). Mapping tsunami impacts on land cover and related ecosystem service supply in Phang Nga , Thailand, 3095–3111. [Crossref]

  13. Kaiser, G., et. al. (2011). The influence of land cover roughness on the results of high resolution tsunami inundation modeling. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 11, 2521–2540. [Crossref]

  14. Kongko, W. & Hidayat, R. (2014). Earthquake-Tsunami in South Jogjakarta Indonesia: Potential, Simulation Models, and Related Mitigation Efforts. IOSR Journal of Applied Geology and Geophysics, 2(3), 18–22.

  15. Lonergan, C. D. (2011). Advancing Tsunami Risk Communication through Geographic Vizualization. Simon Fraser University.

  16. Menke, K., et. al. (2015). Mastering QGIS. Mumbai: PACKT Publishing.

  17. Mück, M. (2008). Tsunami Evacuation Modelling: Development and application of a spatial information system supporting tsunami evacuation planning in South-West Bali. Universität Regensburg.

  18. Münch, U., Rudloff, A., & Lauterjung, J. (2011). Postface “The GITEWS Project – results, summary and outlook”. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 11, 765–769. [Crossref]

  19. Pemerintah Kabupaten Purworejo. (2011). Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah Kabupaten Purworejo 2011-2031. Purworejo.

  20. Roberts, S., et. al. (2015). ANUGA User Manual Release 2.0. Geoscience Australia.

  21. Romer, H., et. al. (2012). Potential of remote sensing techniques for tsunami hazard and vulnerability analysis – a case study from Phang-Nga province, Thailand. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 12, 2103–2126. [Crossref]

  22. Samek, J. H., Skole, D. L., & Chomentowski, W. (2004). Assessment of Impact of the December 26 2004 Tsunami In Aceh Province Indonesia.

  23. Schiff, J. L. (2011). Two-Dimensional Automata. In Cellular Automata: A Discrete View of the World (p. 272). John Wiley & Sons.

  24. Schmidtlein, M. C., & Wood, N. J. (2015). Sensitivity of tsunami evacuation modeling to direction and land cover assumptions. Applied Geography, 56, 154–163. [Crossref]

  25. Soule, R. G., & Goldman, R. F. (1972). Terrain coefficients for energy cost prediction. Journal of Applied Physiology, 32(5), 706–708.

  26. Sturnz, G., et. al. (2011). Tsunami risk assessment in Indonesia. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 11, 67–82. [Crossref]

  27. USGS. (2004). Filling the Gaps to use in Scientific Analysis.

  28. USGS. (2015). US Land Cover.

  29. Wood, N. (2009). Tsunami exposure estimation with land-cover data: Oregon and the Cascadia subduction zone. Applied Geography, 29(2), 158–170. [Crossref]

  30. Wood, N. J., & Schmidtlein, M. C. (2012). Anisotropic path modeling to assess pedestrian-evacuation potential from Cascadia-related tsunamis in the US Pacific Northwest. Natural Hazards, 62(2), 275–300. [Crossref]