## 4 Regional Scale Analysis
### Hazard Indicators
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \(\mathbf{\times}\) & **Index** & **Scores** & **Description** & **Database** & **Bibliographic Reference** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{6} & Vegetation and & \multirow{4}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Projection forest 42\({}^{\circ}\) = H1 \\ Protection forest 28\({}^{\circ}\) \\ forests \\ \end{tabular} } & \begin{tabular}{c} Soil cover is \\ important in the \\ senescent forest 28\({}^{\circ}\) \\ Forest \\ \end{tabular} } & \begin{tabular}{c} Rockfall database in \\ Alpine space: past results, \\ rockfall areas and rockfall \\ on important role in \\ stop stabilization. \\ \end{tabular} & ROCKHEALPS project \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{7} & Existing & Buffer of 50 m from existing gravitational events = H2 & Past events are & \\  & & Deep-seared gravitational slope deformations = H4 & important because & Catasto Dissesti della \\  & & Landsides (\"disseet,\"frame\" = \"disseet,\"allowing,\"frame,\"2000\" + \"disseet,\" & \\  & & alluvince,\"sondazioni,\"2000\") = H5 & & \\  & & & periods of dormancy. & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{8} & \multirow{4}{*}{8} & 0-1.4 mm = H1 & The effect of the water & \\  & & 1.4–2.1 mm = H2 & & \\  & & 2.1–2.3 mm = H3 & & \\  & & 2.3–2.7 mm = H4 & & \\  & & 2.7–4.1 mm = H5 & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{9} & Lithology and & \multirow{4}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Sedimentary rocks = HS \\ leadslides bodies, alluvial deposits, glacial deposits, and slope debris = H4 \\ Igneous and metamorphic rocks = H2 \\ \end{tabular} } & Landsides are greatly & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Carta Geologica della \\ condtioned by the \\ lithological properties \\ of the surface. \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} [PERSON], \\ [PERSON] \\ [82] \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Cont. The hazard assessment methodology and the data employed are explained in more detail as follows:  
1. The slope was calculated from a Digital Terrain Model (DTM), and the risk classes were derived from the findings of research conducted by [PERSON] [49]. This research proposed a synthesis of the slope values that were generally preferred in the literature review. The classes used in this work were selected based on these findings. 2. Aspect depicts the direction of the slope with respect to the cardinal points of all the slopes of the territory. The references that have been examined in this work divide the aspect value into nine classes (north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, northwest, zenith), which have been reclassified in 3 classes to evaluate the potential hazard: good, moderate and low exposure. 3. Slope stability in Alpine and high-latitude regions is significantly influenced by glacier retreat, leading to paraglacial slope adaptation. There are a lot of studies about paraglacial areas; among all, \"paraglacial rock slope stability\" [69] has been used as theorical reference to calculate the index. In the framework of the GlaRiskAlp project, an \"Inventory of Current and Past Glacier Extents\" has been produced to quantify the general glacier retreat in the Western Alps since the end of the Little Ice Age. For this work, the temporal thresholds of glacier extent have been used: 1850, 1975, 1999, and 2005. Since the latest data are not so recent, the GlaRiskAlp database has been completed with the last available data of 2019 from Catasto ghiacciai della Regione autonoma Valle d'Aosta. 4. For the glacial geomorphological feature layer, a qualitative analysis was conducted based on the typology of material derived from glacier retreat. Index values have been  
Figure 3: Individual hazard layers obtained through GIS software processing. Data sources are listed in Table 1.  
reclassified into four classes: since bedrock can be considered \"stable\", it is classified with a low potential hazard, differently from deposits and till, which are classified with the highest scores. Glacial land epiglacial lakes are classified with middle values. 5.