Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoleng

Slope stability and vegetation: Conceptual and numerical

investigation of mechanical effects
Nomessi Kuma Kokutse a , André Guy Tranquille Temgoua a,∗ , Zanin Kavazović b
a
INRS, Centre Eau Terre Environnement, 490 Rue de la Couronne, Québec, QC, G1 K 9A9, Canada
b
Khalifa University of Science, Technology and Research, Department of Applied Mathematics and Sciences, UAE

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper is dedicated to numerical analysis of the influence of vegetation on slope’s stability using the
Received 31 August 2015 calculation of the safety factor of different slopes by a classical shear reduction method with the software
Received in revised form 30 October 2015 PLAXIS in 2D. The soil is modelled as an elastic perfectly plastic material. The shear strength of the soil is
Accepted 9 November 2015
also modelled using the Mohr–Coulomb criterion. Slope stability is influenced by vegetation mechanical
Available online 22 November 2015
parameters: plant’s root matrix system and surcharge due to presence of trees. Based on 2D finite element
method, this paper investigates the combined effects of different rectilinear slope geometries, soil types
Keywords:
and vegetation mechanical parameters on the slope’s factor of safety. The effects of the roots are modelled
Soil reinforcement
Root cohesion
by increasing the soil cohesion following a classical Wu model. The additional cohesion depends on the
2D model vegetation type and on the depth from soil surface. The analysis examined reinforcement effects of the
Factor of safety roots’ systems of four idealised types of vegetation growing on three different types of soil composing
Vegetation the slope. The case study was performed on different slope configurations where slope’s height and angle
were allowed to vary significantly. Two key parameters of the root matrix system had been considered
for the finite element analysis: additional cohesion due to the presence of roots and depth of the root
matrix. Moreover, influence of geometrical parameters, height and angle of the slope, on the stability of
different slope configurations had been analysed by computing slope’s factor of safety. Parametric studies
were performed to assess the variation of the factor of safety of a slope in case of different geometrical
configurations combined with several types of vegetation coverage. Results showed that the slope angle
had the greatest impact on variation of factor of safety. Additional cohesion is regarded as the second most
important parameter influencing the factor of safety. These two parameters combined play an important
role in shallow failures of slopes and significantly affect stability of a slope regardless of a soil type
composing the slope. Results of the current study can help practitioners determine if a slope is at risk by
the lack of additional roots cohesion combined with different types of soil and young vegetation. Hence,
the proposed method helps evaluate slope’s vulnerability and could be efficiently used as management
or informative tool for ecological engineers and forest conservative practitioners.
© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction in mountainous regions. Other geotechnical studies have corre-

Vegetation growing on a slope has traditionally been consid-
ered to have a minor effect on a slope stability. However, in some
cases, this assumption is not appropriated. Effects of precipitation
events and deforestation on the slope stability in mountainous
regions are causing concerns in many parts of the world (DeGraff,
1989). Swanston (1974) as well as Burroughs and Thomas (1977)
found that landslides occurrence and slope stability problems
increase significantly first years after timber harvesting activities
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 4189147835.
E-mail address: andretemgoua@gmail.com (A.G.T. Temgoua).
lated decrease of apparent cohesion in soil to the loss of roots
(Rienstenberg, 1987; Operstein and Frydman, 2000; Van Beek et al.,
2005). Slope stability can be affected by the local soil characteristics
(Charlafti, 2014) and root traits can change depending on ontogeny
and climate (Stokes et al., 2009). In Philippines, widespread defor-
estation was recognised to be responsible for the catastrophic and
‘extraordinary’ landslides which brought tremendous damage and
killed more than 1600 people in November 2004 (Gaillard et al.,
2006). In 2001, timber harvesting in the mountainous regions of
Togo caused landslides during storm events and killed 3 peo-
ple (Kokutse, 2003). It has been demonstrated that after a storm,
groundwater flow in shallow layers is not always interconnected
with the water table during landslides (Hungr et al., 2001; Caine,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.11.005
0925-8574/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153
Fig. 1. Slope model and the geometrical parameters considered for the simulations.
Brief description of the slope angle ˛:
• ˛ +  = 90o .
• When ˛ is small, then the slope is mild.
• When ˛ is large, then the slope is sharp.
• A = Slope base length.
• B = Slope length.
Slope base length and Slope length are both variable and function of H and ˛.
1980). Most of the time, hydraulic conductivity decreases with
depth and lateral flow proceeds downslope especially for clayey
soil (Corominas and Moya, 1999). These discoveries have lent con-
siderable impetus to the quantification of influence of vegetation
in slope stability assessments.
Research on the effects of plants’ roots on slope stability has
widely expanded in the last 30 years. Influence that grass, shrubs
and trees may have on slope stability is more and more recognised.
Vegetation–slope interactions are complex and this has hampered
the efforts to quantify them in stability analysis (Riestenberg and
Sovonick-Dunford, 1983). Several studies have been carried out in
different parts of the world by geotechnical engineers, foresters,
hydrologists and other professionals in order to understand how
plants can improve slope stability. For instance, Genet et al. (2005,
2007) correlated root tensile resistance of different species grow-
ing on slopes to roots cellulose content. Cano et al. (2002) analysed
the effects of local topoclimate on cut slope restoration success by
herbaceous plants. By carrying out laboratory shear tests on soil
samples reinforced by roots, Operstein and Frydman (2000) have
quantified the additional strength in chalky and clayey soils due to
the presence of roots of some plant species. Other comprehensive
and illustrative results may be found in Wu (1995, 1988). Although
experimental work and field observations have shown that plant
roots may increase soil shear strength, the need of quantification
of the reinforcement mechanism lead researchers to build mech-
anistic models (Terzaghi, 1950; Wu et al., 1979; Gray and Ohashi,
1983; Wu et al., 1988).
In spite of the fact that numerous investigations have been
carried out to understand vegetation–slope interactions, unfor-
tunately, few consideration is given to them for geotechnical
engineering applications, such as design and stability analysis of
rooted embankments. In the literature, most studies related to
slope stability purposes are focusing either on different ways to
assess slope stability (Griffith and Lane, 1999; Baudin et al., 2000;
Xie et al., 2004; Kokutse et al., 2006), either on slope stabilisation
using mechanical mechanisms such as pins (Sommers et al., 2000).
It is known that roots provide reinforcement effect to soil through
their tensile resistance and frictional properties (Wu et al., 1979;
Waldron, 1977). Different types of root reinforcement models
have been built to better understand slope soil reinforcement
147
mechanism (Wu et al., 1979; Waldron and Dakessian, 1981; Wu
and Sidle, 1995; Genet et al., 2007; Kokutse, 2008). In a particular
case of trees, the tree’s weight is recognised to be one of tree’s
mechanical parameters. Its effect on slope’s stability has been
analysed in the framework of a non-exhaustive list of publications
(Dhakal and Sidle, 2002; Kokutse, 2003, 2008; Pretzsch, 2010).
Vegetation growing on a slope could be of different types: grass,
shrubs, trees or a combination of any two types or all three types
of vegetation. Among the mechanical parameters of vegetation,
mechanical stabilisation due to presence of roots and surcharge
from the weight of trees (Nilaweera and Nutalaya, 1999) are the
ones that are considered most of the time.
The aim of the present study is to quantify effect of the slope’s
geometry as well as mechanical parameters of four idealised types
of vegetation on the stability (factor of safety) of a slope. Hence,
stability of different rectilinear slopes (three different types of soil
were considered) was analysed using 2D finite element calculations
implemented in PLAXIS code. In addition, a simple sensitivity anal-
ysis was performed to assess the sensitivity of the factor of safety of
a slope to variations of vegetation. Moreover, mechanical parame-
ters for different type of soil involved in the slope stratigraphy were
also analysed.
2. Material and methods
Finite element method was used to investigate stability of
the slope under effects of several types of vegetation coverage,
various slope geometries and soil types. Roots’ systems of differ-
ent types of vegetation were modelled as additional cohesion in
Mohr–Coulomb’s law. Weight of trees was also taken into account
and was applied as a uniform surcharge on the slope. In this study,
we considered two families of parameters that influence the sta-
bility of a slope: parameters related to the slope geometry as well
as mechanical parameters of a slope related to both different vege-
tation coverage and depth of their respective root matrix systems.
Hence, height of a slope and its angle were retained as slope geom-
etry parameters whereas additional cohesion due to presence of
roots and depth of a root zone were regarded as vegetation mechan-
ical parameters.
2.1. Description of slope geometry and root reinforcement model
2.1.1. Slope geometry
A scheme of 2D slope geometry is defined using two param-
eters: height H of a slope and angle ˛ of a slope (Fig. 1). The
slope was assumed rectilinear. In this study, simulations were per-
formed using several values of slope height H ranging from 5 m
to 20 m (H = 5 m, 10 m, 15 m, and 20 m). Furthermore, we exam-
ined the influence of different angles ˛ of a slope ranging from 11◦
to 45◦ (˛ = 11◦ , 14◦ , 19◦ , 22◦ , 27◦ , 34◦ , and 45◦ ). Hence, for each
scenario (different value of H or ˛), a different domain with appro-
priate dimensions was built as illustrated in Fig. 1. This domain
was meshed using an adaptive triangular mesh available in PLAXIS.
Therefore, during simulations for each scenario, the density of
materials was kept constant.
2.2. Root reinforcement model: additional cohesion
Wu et al. (1979) considered contribution of roots in the shear
resistance of a soil layer as additional cohesion of the soil. They
proposed to express increase in the soil shear strength, CR , due to
roots by the following relationship:
CR = tR (cos  tan ˚ + sin ) (1)
where, tR is the average tensile strength of roots per unit area of
soil,  is the angle of shear rotation and ˚’ is the soil friction angle.
148 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153
Fig. 2. Values of root additional cohesion (CR ) considered to simulate presence of vegetation roots in various soil layers. For each type of vegetation, additional cohesion was
defined as a piecewise function whose value remained constant in a given sub-layer of the soil. The model expressing variation of CR as a function of depth (ZR ) is based on
two main principles: (1) roots could extend beyond the maximum depth of the root zone and larger distance from the stem and (2) roots’ density decreased from the soil
surface to the maximum depth of the root zone.
Table 1
Mechanical properties of different types of soil considered for the simulations.
Mechanical properties Soil type
Clay Sand
−3
Dry density  d [kN m ] 16 17
Young modulus E [kPa] 10,000 13,000
Poisson ratio  [dimensionless] 0.35 0.3
Shear modulus G [kPa] 3704 5000
Internal angle of friction  [◦ ] 20 30
Cohesion C [kPa] 2 0.001
This model considered plants roots as additional cohesion CR in the
soil matrix (Wu et al., 1979).
In the current study, we consider five different types of veg-
etation coverage: none (soil with no vegetation), grass (turf
vegetation), shrubs, young forest and mature forest. To be more
realistic, we furthermore consider additional cohesion as a func-
tion of soil depth measured from the surface (Fig. 2). Hence, another
vegetation-dependant parameter was introduced in our study: the
depth of a root zone, denoted by ZR . As a consequence, different
respective values of additional cohesion (as a function of ZR ) were
obtained for each vegetation coverage to appropriately simulate
the presence of roots in different soil layers composing the slope
(Fig. 2).
2.3. Finite element model and stability analysis
In the current study, a 2D slope geometry was considered (Fig. 1)
and its mesh consisted of triangular elements. Input data of the
model were derived from Kokutse (2003), Pretzsch et al. (2014),
Pretzsch (2010) and Pretzsch et al. (2002). Hence, a basic statis-
tical analysis of collected data related to roots’ distribution was
performed. Thus, only the data that satisfied a confidence interval
of 95% were used as input data for the current model. The 2D dis-
placement field was discretised by a quadratic P2 finite element
(6-noded triangular elements). A finite element code for soil and
rock analysis called PLAXIS was used for meshing, mechanical cal-
culations and stability analysis. A new stability analysis method
was implemented in PLAXIS software. This new stability analysis
method consisted of successively reducing soil shearing resistance
parameters (cohesion, internal angle of friction) while keeping the
gravity load constant. In this study, the quantity “factor of safety”
was the parameter which corresponds to a large jump in a nodal
displacement computed at a given node close to the soil surface
Silty-sand
17
11,500
0.25
4600
25
2
Fig. 3. Schema of the slope. Slope with soil sub-layers (7 top layers formed the
rooted zone) considered for the simulation of roots system’s additional cohesion.
The vegetation surcharge is considered as a uniformly distributed force W. Boundary
conditions are indicated by the green symbols. (For interpretation of the references
to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
indicating failure (soil slide) (Griffith and Lane, 1999; Dawson et al.,
2000).
2.4. Mechanical properties of soil
Mechanical behaviour of soil was assumed to be of elasto-plastic
nature with Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion. Three soil types were
considered for the simulations: clay, sand and silty-sand. Their
mechanical properties are presented in Table 1.
2.5. Root additional cohesion
Four active vegetation types were considered in this study. The
influence of their respective root systems was modelled by using
appropriate corresponding values of additional cohesion CR dis-
tributed through different soil layers as a function of depth ZR of the
root zone of the slope (Fig. 2). In order to incorporate root’s addi-
tional cohesion and its variation with depth in the numerical model,
a layer of 2 m in depth was considered and divided into 7 sub-layers
(0–0.25 m, 0.25–0.5 m, 0.5–0.75 m, 0.75–1 m, 1–1.50 m, 1.5–2 m,
and 2 m–bedrock) as illustrated in Fig. 3. Thereafter, soil cohesion
in each layer was modified accordingly by adding assumed corre-
sponding values of root additional cohesion CR . This process was
respectively applied for each of the four different vegetation types.
 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153 149

2.6. Boundary conditions

For each slope model, similar boundary conditions were defined.

They were applied in order to simulate soil stability as well as sur-
roundings. Boundary conditions consisted of applying kinematic
conditions on lateral and underside edges of the slope (Fig. 3).
Underside edge was blocked, i.e., neither horizontal nor vertical
displacement was allowed (Fig. 3). On lateral edges, only horizontal
displacements were blocked whereas vertical displacements were
allowed. Moreover, boundaries were placed far enough to avoid
their influence on the results.
Fig. 4. Relative increase of the factor of safety (FS) of the slope due to roots additional
2.7. Loads cohesion. Results represent the mean value of the factor of safety increase (expressed
in %) together with the standard deviation bars. For each type of vegetation coverage
considered in the study, the mean and the standard deviation were computed by
A constant gravity load was applied in order to generate geo- aggregating the results obtained for all slope angles, heights and soil types.
static stress. Apart from the gravity load, a surcharge W due to
the presence of trees was also modelled by using a uniformly dis-
of FS was estimated in the case of young forest whereas an increase
tributed force which was applied on slope’s surface (Fig. 3). The
of 18.7% of FS was associated to mature forest (Fig. 4).
values of W that we considered were 0 for bare soil, grass and
shrubs, whereas the value of 600 Pa was associated with young
trees and mature forest. The value of 600 Pa corresponds to the 3.2. Effects of slope geometry parameters on the factor of safety of
mean value of the pressure exerted on the soil by a plantation the reinforced soil
of 350 trees/ha of maritime pine. In this paper loads values were
derived from O’Loughlin (1974), Beinsteiner (1981), Nilaweera and Regardless of soil type (clay, sand and silty-sand) and slope’s
Nutalaya (1999) and Medicus (2009). height H, regression analysis showed that there was an increase of
the factor of safety probably due to the presence of roots. This can
be seen on Fig. 5 where all vegetation types and all types of soil
2.8. Factor of safety
were aggregated whereas, for each value of the angle, the results
corresponding to different values of the slope heights H are pre-
The factor of safety (FS) was determined based on strength
sented. Indeed, Fig. 5 presents mean values of FSR (factor of safety
reduction technique which consists to decrease the shear strength
influenced by the presence of roots) as a function of the slope angle
of the soil matrix until failure occurs (Matsui and San, 1992;
˛ for different slope heights H. An improvement of the slope’s sta-
Dawson et al., 2000; Rocscience Inc., 2001). With this method, the
bility, with decreasing slope angle ˛, is easily perceptible (Fig. 5).
criterion to identify failure in the soil matrix is the big jump in the
Mild or moderate slope (smaller inclination) is more stable than
nodal displacement at a chosen point close to the slope’s surface.
a sharp (peaked) slope. So, as suggested by the results in Fig. 5, a
This procedure is implemented in PLAXIS software and was auto-
mild slope angle ˛ improves stability of a slope (Kokutse, 2003;
matically applied to analyse slopes stability in the present study1 .
Chok et al., 2004; Kokutse et al., 2006).

2.9. Parametric analysis
The parametric analysis of five parameters (one at a time) was
considered, namely: height H of a slope, angle ˛ of a slope, roots’
additional cohesion in the first (CR1 ) and the second (CR2 ) top sub-
layers (0–0.25 m and 0.25–0.50 m, respectively; see Fig. 3), and
surcharge W due to the presence of trees.
3.3. Threshold of the slope angle for the effectiveness of root
reinforcement
Diagrams of mean values of the factor of safety (slope with addi-
tional cohesion) presented in Fig. 6 clearly suggest a non linear
relationship between the factor of safety FSR and the slope angle
˛. This behaviour is very similar to the one observed on Fig. 5. One

3. Results

3.1. Influence of roots’ additional cohesion on the factor of safety

as a function of different types of vegetation

The root system was characterised by two major parameters:

additional root cohesion (CR ) and depth of the root zone (ZR ) (Fig. 2).
Fig. 4 clearly shows that the factor of safety (FS) of the slope
exhibited a significant increase from the slope covered by grass veg-
etation to the forested slope. Indeed, the stability of a non reinforced
slope is significantly improved when plants’ root additional cohe-
sion was taken into account. For grass (ZR = 0.25 m, CR1 = 2 kPa) and
shrubs (ZR = 1 m, CR1 = 2 kPa and CR2 = 1 kPa) (see Fig. 2) for instance,
FS increased respectively by 7.1% and 13.6% (Fig. 4). The increase
appeared to be more significant with a deeper root zone and higher
Fig. 5. Mean values of FSR as function of slope angle for various slope heights H.
apparent or additional root cohesion. Hence, an increase of 17.1% Mean values of FSR (factor of safety influenced by the presence of roots) decreased
significantly with increasing slope angle ˛ for all vegetation types and all heights H of
the slope. Note that the data for all vegetation types and all types of soil were aggre-
gated whereas, for each value of the angle, we present the results corresponding to
1
www.planis.nl. different values of the slope heights H.
150 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153
Fig. 6. Mean values of FSR as function of slope angle for various types of soil.
As in Fig. 5, mean values of FSR decreased with increasing slope angle ˛. For each
value of the angle of the slope, we present the results corresponding to different
types of soil. In each case, data corresponding to all vegetation types (grass, shrubs,
young forest and mature forest) and slope heights were aggregated.
Table 2
Threshold values (˛lim ) of the slope angle. ˛lim is the slope angle up to which rein-
forcement effects of roots were efficient. For each type of soil, the results represent
mean values (and standard deviation) for the angles and the corresponding values of
the safety factor. These mean values were aggregated for different vegetation types
and heights.
Soil type ˛lim [◦ ] FSR
Clay 29.9 ± 1.29 1.12 ± 0.07
Sand 41.03 ± 2.17 1.27 ± 0.09
Silty-sand 31.5 ± 2.43 1.19 ± 0.07
Fig. 7. Mean values of FSR as a function of slope heights for different slope angles.All
vegetation types (grass, shrubs, young forest and mature forest) and types of soil
were aggregated whereas, for each value of H, we present the results corresponding
to different slope angles.
can also see that there is a threshold ˛lim for the slope angle ˛:
when ˛ > ˛lim , the factor of safety is smaller than 1 (FSR < 1). In
other words, the reinforcing effect of plants’ roots was sufficient
to ensure stability (FSR > 1) of the slope when ˛ < ˛lim . The thresh-
old appeared to depend on the soil type (Table 2). Moreover, the
limit value of the slope angle for clay was relatively higher than
those for sandy and silty-sand soils (Table 2). Clay seems to require
milder slopes.
When all types of vegetation were considered together, regres-
sion analysis showed that, contrarily to the angle, relationship
between of the factor of safety FSR and slope’s height H was linear
(Fig. 7). A negative slope of the regression lines (−0.02) put forward
that an increase of height would decreased the factor of safety.
Therefore, increase of height is expected to have a destabilising
effect on the slope.
Fig. 8. Relative increase of slope’s factor of safety (FSR ) as a function of slope angle.
For each value of slope angle ˛, a mean value of the results for all heights is presented
for each soil type while considering trees (young and mature vegetation) surcharge.
Table 3
Influence of the main vegetation parameters affecting the slope’s safety factor.
Data in the column of “soil type” represent the increase (in %) of the safety factor
FS. Results represent mean values aggregated for different vegetation types, slope
angles and heights.
Parameters Soil type
Clay (%) Sand (%) Silty-sand (%)
CR1 14 13 13
CR2 6 7 4
W −1 1 −1
3.4. Effects of trees’ surcharge on the stability of the slope
While comparing the factor of safety due to only additional
cohesion (FSR ) and the factor of safety due to the combined effects
of additional cohesion and vegetation surcharge (FSRW ), relative
increase ε of the factor of safety FSR was calculated and found to
be very low (|ε| < 1%) (see Fig. 8). Thus, surcharge should have a
minor influence on the stability. Despite that evidence, the sign
(positive or negative) of relative increase ε pointed up that one of
the important aspects of the effects of the pressure exerted on the
slope by trees was the variation of the sign of ε (Fig. 8). Indeed,
one would naturally expect the presence of the trees to be bene-
ficial to the stability of the slope. However, we observed that the
sign of the relative increase of the factor of safety was positive for
the slope angles ˛ ranging from 11◦ until the slope angle reached a
critical value ˛0 , which depended on the type of soil. For instance,
˛0 ∈ [18◦ , 22◦ ] for clay, ˛0 ∈ [27◦ , 34◦ ] for sand and ˛0 ∈ [22◦ , 27◦ ]
for silty-sand (Fig. 8). As the slope angle ˛ exceeded ˛0 , the sign of
ε became negative and remained negative for the higher values of
˛. Therefore, each soil type has a critical value ˛0 of the slope angle
after which the presence of the trees (because of the trees’ sur-
charge weight) becomes adverse to stability of the slope. Another
interesting observation was made when the mean values of the crit-
ical slope angle ˛0 were computed (angle from which the sign of ε
changed). Indeed, for each type of soil, that value was very similar
to the value of soil angle of internal friction (Fig. 8 and Table 1).
3.5. Parametric analysis
On the basis of the factor of safety obtained from the finite ele-
ment calculations, parametric studies were carried out and showed
that variation of FS was mainly depended on the slope angle ˛,
the slope height H and additional cohesions in the first two lay-
ers of the soil. For geometrical parameters, increase of height H
induced instability of the slope (coefficient Ai < 0 for H in Table 3).
 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153
Nevertheless, a decrease in the slope angle ˛ led to a significant
increase of the factor of safety FS.
Table 3 illustrates the effect of an increase of 1% of vegetation
parameters (additional cohesion and surcharge due to trees) on the
factor of safety of a slope. It was observed that, among the vegeta-
tion parameters, the root additional cohesion in all soil layers lead
to the largest increase in factor of safety. Moreover, among the val-
ues of additional cohesion in the two top layers, the first one (CR1 )
was the most influential with, on average, around 13% increase
in terms of stability improvement, whereas CR2 contributed for
5.6% average increase in stability (Table 3). The third mechanical
parameter related to the vegetation in this study was a surcharge of
trees, W. It appeared to be the less influential vegetation parameter
with a contribution of 1% (in absolute terms) towards the stability
(Table 3). Nevertheless, its sign (positive for sandy soil and nega-
tive for the others) indicated that its influence on the factor of safety
was in fact dependent on soil type (Table 3 and Fig. 8). Influence of
trees surcharge could have adverse effect on the stability of a slope
in the case of clay and silty-sand soil. In summary, a decrease in the
slope angle ˛ and the slope height H led to an increase of the fac-
tor of safety. Concurrently, the presence of vegetation root systems
(accompanied by an increase in additional cohesion of the soil) had
in general a beneficial effect and improved stability.
A more detailed sensitivity study on the influence of different
vegetation parameters on the factor of safety will be conducted and
presented in a subsequent publication.
4. Discussion
4.1. Global analysis of variation of the factor of safety
A global analysis of variation of the factor of safety showed its
relative increase (Fig. 4) due to the presence of roots in the soil.
For the same geometric configuration, hillslopes that were initially
unsafe (FS < 1) without roots in soil, became safe (FS > 1) mainly
due to roots reinforcement effects. The finite element analysis of
a non-reinforced hillslopes showed that the failure mechanism is
a shallow planar one (planar failure). This mechanism of failure is
prevented when a slope is uniformly reinforced by plants’ roots.
As apparent root cohesion and depth of the root zone increase, the
critical slip surface shifts deeper below the ground surface. In the
case where critical slip surface is beyond the extent of the root zone,
increase of the root density for additional cohesion of soil does not
seem to be helpful for the stability of the hillslope as the factor of
safety does not increase significantly. Since the critical slip surface
was not intercepted by roots (case of deep-seated slip surfaces),
increase of the root system for additional cohesion did not lead
automatically to an increase of the factor of safety. For some slopes
whose critical slip surfaces are crossed by root systems, the finite
element analysis showed that an insufficient increase of additional
root cohesion (grass for instance) could not prevent slope from any
failure. Similar failure mechanisms could be observed for nailed
reinforced slopes in geotechnical engineering applications. There-
fore, in order to ensure an improvement of stability of a slope using
vegetation, not only apparent cohesion should be adequate, but
also root system must extend beyond the critical slip surface. Sim-
ilar results were found by Kokutse (2003), Chok et al. (2004) and
Kokutse et al. (2006).
4.2. Influence of slope’s geometry on the stability of the reinforced
hillslope
Analysis showed that geometry parameters (angle and height
of a slope) had a significant influence on the factor of safety
(Fig. 5 and Fig. 7). For the slope angle ˛, increase of its value
151
showed that hillslope was stable up to a certain value of the angle
(Fig. 5). Using a curve fitting, we established a parabolic relation-
ship (FSR = 0.0023˛2 − 0.174˛ + 3.83) between the factor of safety
and the slope angle with a strong correlation (R2 = 0.93). Results
presented in Fig. 5 suggest that the hillslope stability is strongly
influenced by the slope angle. On the other hand, Fig. 7 shows that
the relationship between the slope height H and the factor of safety
is linear (FSR = −0.02H + b) with a strong correlation (R2 = 0.91). One
can notice (Fig. 7) that the growth rate is negative and low (−0.02).
Hence, for all slope angles, the safety factor slightly decreased as
the slope height increased. Moreover, values of the constant terms
b were different for each value of the slope angle ˛: b = 1.6 for 27◦ ,
b = 1.78 for 22◦ , b = 2.21 for 19◦ , b = 2.6 for 14◦ and b = 3.14 for 11◦ .
Therefore, height had a minor adverse effect on the stability of the
hillslope. Thus, the slope angle ˛ appeared to be the most important
geometrical parameter.
An important observation (Fig. 6) related to the slope angle ˛
is the threshold ˛lim (around 40◦ for sand, and 30◦ for clay and
silty-sand; see Table 2) up to which the stability of a hillslope
could be significantly improved (˛ < ˛lim ) by plants’ roots system.
Indeed, Fig. 6 suggests that plants’ roots could not systematically
improve the slope stability. Hence, for some steep slope configu-
rations (˛ > ˛lim ), the factor of safety remained lower than 1 for all
soil types regardless of the type of vegetation coverage. Alterna-
tively, when the slope angle is lower than a threshold (˛ < ˛lim ),
the stability of a slope is greatly improved (FS > 1), especially for
low values of ˛ (Fig. 6). Furthermore, when FS is above 1, one can
observe, for each value of the slope angle in Fig. 6, non negligible
differences in the FS values related to different soil types. In cases
in which the slope angle ˛ is greater than the threshold, one could
think about alternative means to ensure the hillslope stability, both
by mechanical mechanisms (geotextiles and nails) and adequate
vegetation roots system. Another way to improve stability could
be to reduce declivity of the hillslope until threshold value could
be eventually reached before using ecoengineering techniques for
slope reinforcement.
4.3. Trees’ weight and slope stability: role of soil internal angle of
friction
During simulations, forest (young and mature trees) vege-
tation’s surcharge was modelled with a low value of pressure
(0.6 kPa). This value was measured in situ on a slope populated
by young trees. As the results presented in Fig. 8 suggest, effects
of the vegetation’s surcharge on the factor of safety seemed to
be negligible (relative increase in absolute value |ε| ≤ 1%). This
could be mainly explained by the consideration of the total normal
stress (pressure exerted by a column of soil above this point) at a
given point of the discretised domain which increased very slightly
because of the additional pressure. Nevertheless, analysis of rela-
tive increase’s sign brought out a major remark: influence of trees’
surcharge could in some cases be advantageous yet, in other cases,
adverse to the stability of a hillslope (Fig. 8). This result agreed with
the assumptions of Greenway (1987) and the work of Dhakal and
Sidle (2002). Furthermore, Fig. 8 reveals that the adverse impact
of vegetation’s surcharge on slope’s stability depends on the type
of soil composing the slope as well as slope’s angle. It should be
noticed that beneficial aspect of surcharge induced by trees on the
hillslope stability depended only on two parameters: slope angle
˛ and soil internal angle of friction ˚. We found that the sur-
charge was adverse to slope stability when slope’s angle ˛ was
greater than internal angle of friction ˚ (Fig. 8 and Table 1). This
could be explained by the increase of normal stress, a component
of shear stress in Mohr–Coulomb’s failure criterion (Godwin and
Spoor, 1977).
152 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153
Despite relatively low influence of trees’ surcharge, some quali-
tative guidelines could nevertheless be proposed regarding suitable
woody species choices as well as the number of trees to be planted
per unit surface hectare in the perspective of reforestation of unsta-
ble hillslopes:
• If the slope angle ˛ is lower than soil internal angle of friction
˚, mature forest surcharge could be beneficial for stability of the
slope. In this case, the chosen wood species is not expected to
have any destabilizing mechanical effects on the slope.
• In all other cases, wood species should be chosen in such a
way that the plantation density has negligible effects on initi-
ation of failure surface. Results on this aspect of vegetation and
slope interactions should be considered with caution since more
numerical and in situ investigations should be conducted. It is
important to notify the scarcity of such studies in the literature.
Only few authors, such as Wu (1995), expressed points of view
on this aspect of slope–vegetation interactions. These observa-
tions are in accordance with our findings stipulating that mature
trees’ surcharge could, in very specific conditions of a slope angle,
be beneficial to the stability of a slope and adverse to it in other
conditions.
4.4. General comments on effects of parameters on the slope
stability
Geometry, especially the slope angle, played the most influen-
tial role on stability of a slope. Curve fitted on the simulation results
relating the slope stability to the slope angle was parabolic (Fig. 5)
and exhibited significant variations of the factor of safety. On the
other hand, the relationship between the slope stability and the
height of a slope (for all slope angles) resulted in linear curves
(Fig. 7) showing minor variations in the slope factor of safety. Thus,
slope angle is identified as a major parameter influencing the slope
stability. This parameter should thus be well investigated and con-
trolled when using plants to improve the slope stability. Beneficial
influence of additional cohesion on the factor of safety highlighted
that plants improved the slope stability (Fig. 4). The current study
is in accordance with previous studies which pointed out, even
thought based on different types of experimental or theoretical
results, the ability of vegetation roots to improve stability of slopes
(Abe and Ziemer, 1991; Operstein and Frydman, 2000; Genet et al.,
2007). Moreover, the results presented in our study unveiled the
contribution of the two top (first and second) soil layers in the
stability of the slope (Table 3). It was also observed that the most
superficial soil layer had the greatest influence on the stability of
the slope (Table 3). This is mainly due to the fact that landslides
were shallow seated ones. Other areas of the slope indicated a low
to moderate risk of landslides. This informative result can help eco-
logical engineers and practitioners to provide a vulnerability or risk
map that can also be used as a friendly decision-making tool.
5. Conclusion
In this study, we used 2D finite element method to investigate
the combined effects of slope geometry (slope’s height and angle of
a slope) and vegetation mechanical parameters (additional cohe-
sion due to presence of roots and the depth of the root matrix
system as well as surcharge due to presence of trees) on the slope’s
factor of safety. Our objective was to quantify effects of the slope
geometry and mechanical parameters of vegetation on the stability
of a slope. Finite element analysis examined stability of different
rectilinear slopes rotating four types of vegetation coverage on
the slopes having various slope angles and heights. Reinforcement
effects of the roots’ systems of four types of vegetation coverage
were modelled as additional cohesion of the soil and were dis-
tributed over a depth of a root zone for each vegetation coverage
type. Weight of trees was also taken into account and was applied as
a uniform surcharge on the slope. Stability of the slope was analysed
by computing slope’s factor of safety in the case of each type of veg-
etation coverage on different slope configurations (various slope
angles and heights). Results showed that the slope angle had the
greatest impact on variation of factor of safety. Additional cohesion
is regarded as the second most important parameter influencing the
factor of safety. These two parameters combined play an important
role in shallow failures of slopes and significantly affect stability of
a slope. On the basis of this numerical study, some major aspects
should be noticed and general guidelines could be outlined:
• Among vegetation mechanical parameters, root additional cohe-
sion is the most predominant parameter.
• Additional cohesion in the first soil layer is more important for
stability improvement than additional cohesion in the second
layer.
• Mature trees surcharge can be beneficial to the slope stability
when the slope angle is lower than soil internal angle of friction.
Otherwise, the surcharge is adverse to the stability of a slope.
• Slope angle is the most influential among all parameters. High
values of the slope angle can sometimes inhibit the positive
effects that roots could have on the stability and induce the slope
to remain unstable. This occurs when the slope angle ˛ is greater
than the limit value ˛lim for a given type of soil. It could roughly
be suggested to use vegetation only when angle ˛ is smaller than
40◦ for sandy soil and 30◦ for clayey or silty-sandy soils. However,
these guidelines must be taken with caution because of some
idealisation in the 2D model used in this study.
In the current study, as a first approach, a landslide problem is
investigated by idealistic 2D model which is used for finite ele-
ment numerical simulations. For a future work, our intent is to
use a more realistic 3D model to better understand how differ-
ent parameters eventually interact to improve the stability of a
slope. It should be possible to pursue this study by building more
efficient reinforced soil model which will incorporate more param-
eters. Another item that would require additional attention is the
surcharge due to the presence of trees. At this stage, this parameter
seems to have a negligible effect probably because of a low value
of pressure used to model both immature and mature forests. In
further studies, it would be suitable to assume greater values for
this component, especially in the case of a mature forest. Ideally,
additional appropriate data should be collected in situ (by mapping
a forest for example or using remote sensing) to have a more real-
istic model of surcharge on the slope. These aspects will be tackled
and analysed in a subsequent paper. Coupling the current model
with hydrogeological model to consider interconnected physical
processes where applicable may improve the accuracy of the model.
Despite the inherent limitations of the model, results of the current
study can help practitioners determine if a slope is at risk by the lack
of additional roots cohesion combined with different types of soil
and young vegetation. Hence, the proposed method helps evaluate
slope’s vulnerability and could be efficiently used as management
or informative tool for ecological engineers and forest conservative
practitioners.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to kindly acknowledge Dr Neal Harries for
assistance during PLAXIS modelling and his useful comments for
FE slope stability analysis.
 N.K. Kokutse et al. / Ecological Engineering 86 (2016) 146–153
References
Abe, K., Ziemer, R.R., 1991. Effects of tree roots on a shear zone: modelling reinforced
shear stress. Can. J. Forest Res. 21, 1012–1019.
Baudin, C., De Vos, M., Simpson, B., 2000. Some considerations on the use of finite
element methods in the ultimate state design. In: Proceedings of the Interna-
tional Workshop on Limit State Design in Geotechnical Engineering, Melbourne,
p. 16.
Beinsteiner, H., 1981. Waldbauliche Beurteilung der Waldabbrüche im Osttiroler
Katastrophengebiet. Universität für Bodenkultur, Wien, pp. 112 (Dissertation).
Burroughs, E.R., Thomas, B.R., 1977. Declining Root Strength in Douglas-fir After
Felling as a Factor in Slope Stability. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Res., Ogden, UT,
USA (Paper INT-190).
Caine, N., 1980. The rainfall intensity–duration control of shallow landslides and
debris flows. Geogr. Ann. 62A, 23–27.
Cano, A., Navia, R., Amezaga, I., Montalva, J., 2002. Local topoclimate effect on short-
term cutslope reclamation success. Ecol. Eng. 18 (2002), 489–498.
Charlafti, M., 2014. Slope stability and vegetation. J. Archit. Eng. Tech. 3 (4),
http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2168-9717.1000134.
Chok, Y.H., Kaggwa, W.S., Jaksa, M.B., Griffiths, D.V., 2004. Modelling the effects of
vegetation on stability of slopes. In: Proceedings of 9th Australia New Zealand
Conference on Geomechanics, Auckland, pp. 391–397.
Corominas, J., Moya, J., 1999. Reconstructing recent landslide activity in relation to
rainfall in the Llobregat River basin, Eastern Pyrenees, Spain. Geomorphology
30, 79–93.
Dawson, E.M., Roth, W.H., Dresher, A., 2000. Slope stability analysis by strength
reduction. Géotechnique 49, 835–840.
DeGraff, J.W., 1989. Landslide activity resulting from the November 1988 storm
event in the southern Thailand and associated recovery needs. In: Safeguarding
the Future; Restoration and Sustainable Development in the South of Thailand.
National Operation Center, National Economic and Social Development Board
of Thailand and USAID (Report).
Dhakal, A.S., Sidle, R.C., 2002. Long-term modelling of landslides for different forest
management practices. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 28, 853–868.
Gaillard, J.-C., Liamzon, C.C., Villanueva, J.D., 2007. ‘Natural disaster’ A retrospect into
the causes of the late-2004 typhoon disaster in the Eastern Luzon Philippines.
Environ. Hazards, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.env-haz. 2006.11.002.
Genet, M., Stokes, A., Salin, F., Mickovski, S.B., Fourcaud, T., Dumail, J., van Beek, R.,
2005. The influence of cellulose content on tensile strength in tree roots. Plant
Soil 278, 1–9.
Genet, M., Kokutse, N.K., Stokes, A., Fourcaud, T., Cai, X., Ji, J., Mickovski, S., 2007.
Root reinforcement in plantation of Cryptomeria japonica D. Don: effect of tree
age and stand structure on slope stability. Forest Ecol. Manag. (Accepted).
Godwin, R.J., Spoor, G., 1977. Soil failure with narrow tines. J. Agric. Eng. Res. (77),
90044, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-8634.
Gray, D.H., Ohashi, H., 1983. Mechanics of fiber reinforcement in sand. J. Geotech.
Eng. 109 (3), 335–351.
Greenway, D.R., 1987. Vegetation and slope stability. In: Anderson, M.G., Richards,
K.S. (Eds.), Slope Stability. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 187–230.
Griffith, D.V., Lane, P.A., 1999. Slope stability analysis by finite elements. Géotech-
nique 49 (3), 387–403.
Hungr, O., Evans, S.G., Bovis, M., Hutchinson, J.N., 2001. Review of the classification
of landslides of the flow type. Environ. Eng. Geosci. 7 (3), 221–238.
Kokutse, N.K., 2003. Analyse Numérique de L’effet Mécanique de la Végétation Sur
la Stabilité des Sols en Pente. Université de Lomé, Togo, pp. 59 (Mémoire de fin
d’études d’ingénieur civil).
Kokutse, N.K., Fourcaud, T., Kokou, K., Neglo, K., Lac, P., 2006. 3D Numerical modelling
and analysis of the influence of forest structure on hillslopes stability. In: Marui,
H., Marutani, T., Watanabe, N., Kawabe, H., Gonda, Y., Kimura, M., Ochiai, H.,
Ogawa, K., Fiebiger, G., Heumader, J., Rudolf-Miklau, F., Kienholz, H., Mikos, M.
153
(Eds.), Interpraevent 2006, Disaster Mitigation of Debris Flows, Slope Failure and
Landslides. September 25–27, 2006, Niigata, Japan. Universal Academy Press,
Inc., Tokyo, Japan, pp. 561–567 (ISBN 4-946443-98-3).
Kokutse, N.K., 2008. Modélisation du Renforcement des Sols et Analyse Numérique
de L’impact de la Structure des Peuplements Forestiers Sur la Stabilité des Pentes.
Université Bordeaux 1, pp. 155 (Applications à l’éco-ingénierie, Thèse de doc-
torat).
Matsui, T., San, K.-C., 1992. Finite element slope stability analysis by shear strength
reduction technique. Soils Found. 32 (1), 59–70.
Medicus, G., 2009. Massenbewegungen und Vegetationsbedeckung. University of
Innsbruck, Innsbruck, pp. 110 (Diploma–Thesis, unpublished).
Nilaweera, N.S., Nutalaya, P., 1999. Role of tree roots in slope stabilisation. Bull. Eng.
Geol. Environ. 57, 337–342.
O’Loughlin, C.L., 1974. The effects of timber removal on slope stability of forest soils.
J. Hydrol. 12, 121–134 (New Zealand).
Operstein, V., Frydman, S., 2000. The influence of vegetation on soil strength. Ground
Improv. 4, 81–89.
Pretzsch, H., Biber, P., Schütze, G., Uhl, E., Rötzer, Th., 2014. Forest stand growth
dynamics in Central Europe have accelerated since 1870’. Nat. Commun. 5, 4967,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5967.
Pretzsch, H., 2010. Forest Dynamics, Growth and Yield: From Measurement to Model.
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 670.
Pretzsch, H., Biber, P., Dursky, J., 2002. The single tree-based stand simulator SILVA:
construction, application and evaluation. Forest Ecol. Manag. 162 (1), 3–21.
Rienstenberg, M.M., 1987. Anchoring of Thin Colluvium on Hillslopes by Roots of
Sugar Maple and White Ash. University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH (PhD Dis-
sertation).
Riestenberg, M.M., Sovonick-Dunford, S., 1983. The role of woody vegetation on
stabilising slopes in the Cincinnati area. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 94, 506–518.
Rocscience Inc., 2001. Application of the finite elements methods to slope stability.
Toronto, 35.
Sommers, L., Loehr, J.E., Bowders, J.J., 2000. Construction methods for slope sta-
bilization with recycled plastic pins. In: Proceedings of the Mid-Continent
Transportation Symposium, pp. 254–258.
Stokes, A., Atger, C., Bengough, A.G., Fourcaud, T., Sidle, R.C., 2009. Desirable plant
root traits for protecting unstable slopes against landslides. Plant Soil 324, 1–30,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-0159-y.
Swanston, D.N., 1974. Slope stability problems associated with timber harvesting
in mountainous regions of western United States. USDA, Forest Research Paper,
USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-21, 14.
Terzaghi, K., 1950. Mechanism of landslides. In: Engineering Geology (Berkel) Vol-
ume. Ed. The Geological Society of America, New York.
Van Beek, L.P.H., Wint, J., Cammeraat, L.H., Edwards, J.P., 2005. Observation and sim-
ulation of root reinforcement on abandoned Mediterranean slopes. Plants Soil
278, 55–74.
Waldron, L.J., 1977. The shear resistance of root permeated homogeneous and strat-
ified soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 41 (3), 843–849.
Waldron, L.J., Dakessian, S., 1981. Soil reinforcement by roots: calculation of
increased soil shear resistance from roots properties. Soil Sci. 132 (6), 427–435.
Wu, T.H., McKinell, W.P., Swanston, D.N., 1979. Strength of tree roots and landslides
on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. Can. Geotech. J. 16, 19–33.
Wu, T.H., MacOmber, R.M., Erb, R.T., Beal, P.E., 1988. Study of soil root interaction. J.
Geotech. Eng. 114, 1351–1375.
Wu, T.H., 1995. Slope stabilization. In: Morgan, R.P.C., Rickson, R.J. (Eds.), Slope Sta-
bilization and Erosion Control—A Bioengineering Approach. Chapman and Hall,
University Press, Cambridge, pp. 221–264.
Wu, W., Sidle, R.C., 1995. A distributed slope stability model for steep forested
hillslopes. Water Resour. Res. 31, 2097–2110.
Xie, M., Esaki, T., Cai, M., 2004. A GIS-based method for locating the critical 3D slip
surface in a slope. Comput. Geotech. 31 (2004), 267–277.