Advertisement

GeoJournal

pp 1–20 | Cite as

The use of subjective–objective weights in GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis for flood hazard assessment: a case study in Mazandaran, Iran

  • Narjes Mahmoody Vanolya
  • Mohammadreza Jelokhani-NiarakiEmail author
Article

Abstract

The assessment of flooding areas and developing flood hazard maps play a key role in prevention of the many social, economic and environmental damages caused by flood. Most parts of Mazandaran, Iran are at risk of flooding caused by heavy rainfall and rivers. In this paper, the flood hazard map of Mazandaran province is assessed using subjective and subjective–objective weights in an Ordered Weighted Averaging-based GIS analysis. Flood hazard maps are produced based on the two types of weights, along the scale ranging from the pessimistic to optimistic decision strategies. The accuracy of the flood hazard maps was evaluated based on: (1) the percentage of historic flood occurrences that are within the flood hazard maps and (2) the assessment ratio, which is the ratio of known flood areas to whole area in a particular class of flood hazard maps. The results indicate that the percentage of flood areas produced by subjective and subjective–objective weights in “Very high class” are the same in the cases of most pessimistic (14.65%) and optimistic strategy (100%). However, in other strategies (0 < ORness < 1), the subjective–objective weights show better values than subjective weights for percentage of flood hazard areas. Similarly, the assessment ratio results show that flood hazard areas produced by subjective and subjective–objective weights in “Very high class” are the same in the most pessimistic (4.47) and optimistic strategies (1.2).

Keywords

Flood hazard assessment GIS MCDA Subjective–objective weights 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by University of Tehran.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical statement

The study does not involve human participants and animals.

References

  1. Ahmadisharaf, E., Kalyanapu, A. J., & Chung, E.-S. (2016). Spatial probabilistic multi-criteria decision making for assessment of flood management alternatives. Journal of Hydrology, 533, 365–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alemi-Ardakani, M., Milani, A. S., Yannacopoulos, S., & Shokouhi, G. (2016). On the effect of subjective, objective and combinative weighting in multiple criteria decision making: A case study on impact optimization of composites. Expert Systems with Applications, 46, 426–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aye, Z. C., Sprague, T., Cortes, V. J., Prenger-Berninghoff, K., Jaboyedoff, M., & Derron, M.-H. (2016). A collaborative (web-GIS) framework based on empirical data collected from three case studies in Europe for risk management of hydro-meteorological hazards. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 15, 10–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bahremand, A., De Smedt, F., Corluy, J., Liu, Y., Poorova, J., Velcicka, L., et al. (2007). WetSpa model application for assessing reforestation impacts on floods in Margecany–Hornad watershed, Slovakia. Water Resources Management, 21(8), 1373–1391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bannari, A., Ghadeer, A., El-Battay, A., Hameed, N. A., & Rouai, M. (2017). Detection of areas associated with flash floods and erosion caused by rainfall storm using topographic attributes, hydrologic indices, and GIS global changes and natural disaster management: Geo-information technologies (pp. 155–174). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Berger, P. A. (2006). Generating agricultural landscapes for alternative futures analysis: A multiple attribute decision-making model. Transactions in GIS, 10(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boroushaki, S., & Malczewski, J. (2008). Implementing an extension of the analytical hierarchy process using ordered weighted averaging operators with fuzzy quantifiers in ArcGIS. Computers & Geosciences, 34(4), 399–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chatterjee, C., Foerster, S., & Bronstert, A. (2008). Comparison of hydrodynamic models of different complexities to model floods with emergency storage areas. Hydrological Processes, 22(24), 4695–4709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen, H., Ito, Y., Sawamukai, M., & Tokunaga, T. (2015). Flood hazard assessment in the Kujukuri Plain of Chiba Prefecture, Japan, based on GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Natural Hazards, 78(1), 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Choubin, B., Moradi, E., Golshan, M., Adamowski, J., Sajedi-Hosseini, F., & Mosavi, A. (2019). An ensemble prediction of flood susceptibility using multivariate discriminant analysis, classification and regression trees, and support vector machines. Science of the Total Environment, 651, 2087–2096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Darabi, H., Choubin, B., Rahmati, O., Haghighi, A. T., Pradhan, B., & Kløve, B. (2019). Urban flood risk mapping using the GARP and QUEST models: A comparative study of machine learning techniques. Journal of Hydrology, 569, 142–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davoudi Moghaddam, D., Pourghasemi, H. R., & Rahmati, O. (2019). Assessment of the contribution of geo-environmental factors to flood inundation in a semi-arid region of SW Iran: Comparison of different advanced modeling approaches. In H. Pourghasemi & M. Rossi (Eds.), Natural hazards GIS-based spatial modeling using data mining techniques (pp. 59–78). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Deng, H., Yeh, C.-H., & Willis, R. J. (2000). Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Computers & Operations Research, 27(10), 963–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Esmaili, R., Jokar, S. E., & Roshan, N. P. (2016). Determining the potential of flooding using TOPSIS method, case study 1011 mazandaran province, galandrud catchment. Journal of Physical Geography, 9(1), 77–87.Google Scholar
  15. Feizizadeh, B., Jankowski, P., & Blaschke, T. (2014). A GIS based spatially-explicit sensitivity and uncertainty analysis approach for multi-criteria decision analysis. Computers & Geosciences, 64, 81–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2013.11.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fernández, D., & Lutz, M. (2010). Urban flood hazard zoning in Tucumán Province, Argentina, using GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Engineering Geology, 111(1), 90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gamper, C., Thöni, M., & Weck-Hannemann, H. (2006). A conceptual approach to the use of cost benefit and multi criteria analysis in natural hazard management. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 6(2), 293–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gashaw, W., & Legesse, D. (2011). Flood hazard and risk assessment using GIS and remote sensing in Fogera Woreda, northwest Ethiopia Nile River Basin (pp. 179–206). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Jahan, A., Mustapha, F., Sapuan, S., Ismail, M. Y., & Bahraminasab, M. (2012). A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 58(1–4), 411–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jayakrishnan, R., Srinivasan, R., Santhi, C., & Arnold, J. (2005). Advances in the application of the SWAT model for water resources management. Hydrological Processes, 19(3), 749–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jelokhani-Niaraki, M. (2018). Knowledge sharing in Web-based collaborative multicriteria spatial decision analysis: An ontology-based multi-agent approach. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 72, 104–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., & Malczewski, J. (2015a). A group multicriteria spatial decision support system for parking site selection problem: A case study. Land Use Policy, 42, 492–508.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.09.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., & Malczewski, J. (2015b). Decision complexity and consensus in web-based spatial decision making: A case study of site selection problem using GIS and multicriteria analysis. Cities, 45, 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., Sadeghi-Niaraki, A., & Choi, S. M. (2018). Semantic interoperability of GIS and MCDA tools for environmental assessment and decision making. Environmental Modelling & Software, 100, 104–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jiang, H., & Eastman, J. R. (2000). Application of fuzzy measures in multi-criteria evaluation in GIS. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 14(2), 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kazakis, N., Kougias, I., & Patsialis, T. (2015). Assessment of flood hazard areas at a regional scale using an index-based approach and analytical hierarchy process: application in Rhodope–Evros region, Greece. Science of the Total Environment, 538, 555–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Khosravi, K., Pham, B. T., Chapi, K., Shirzadi, A., Shahabi, H., Revhaug, I., et al. (2018). A comparative assessment of decision trees algorithms for flash flood susceptibility modeling at Haraz watershed, northern Iran. Science of the Total Environment, 627, 744–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Khosravi, K., Pourghasemi, H. R., Chapi, K., & Bahri, M. (2016). Flash flood susceptibility analysis and its mapping using different bivariate models in Iran: A comparison between Shannon’s entropy, statistical index, and weighting factor models. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 188(12), 656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kia, M. B., Pirasteh, S., Pradhan, B., Mahmud, A. R., Sulaiman, W. N. A., & Moradi, A. (2012). An artificial neural network model for flood simulation using GIS: Johor River Basin, Malaysia. Environmental Earth Sciences, 67(1), 251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kiavarz, M., & Jelokhani-Niaraki, M. (2017). Geothermal prospectivity mapping using GIS-based ordered weighted averaging approach: A case study in Japan’s Akita and Iwate provinces. Geothermics, 70, 295–304.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2017.06.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kiavarz Moghaddam, M., Samadzadegan, F., Noorollahi, Y., Sharifi, M. A., & Itoi, R. (2014). Spatial analysis and multi-criteria decision making for regional-scale geothermal favorability map. Geothermics, 50, 189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kourgialas, N. N., & Karatzas, G. P. (2011). Flood management and a GIS modelling method to assess flood-hazard areas—A case study. Hydrological Sciences Journal-Journal des Sciences Hydrologiques, 56(2), 212–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kourgialas, N. N., & Karatzas, G. P. (2016). A flood risk decision making approach for Mediterranean tree crops using GIS; climate change effects and flood-tolerant species. Environmental Science & Policy, 63, 132–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kui, L., Stella, J. C., Lightbody, A., & Wilcox, A. C. (2014). Ecogeomorphic feedbacks and flood loss of riparian tree seedlings in meandering channel experiments. Water Resources Research, 50(12), 9366–9384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kulkarni, A., Mohanty, J., Eldho, T., Rao, E., & Mohan, B. (2014). A web GIS based integrated flood assessment modeling tool for coastal urban watersheds. Computers & Geosciences, 64, 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lagmay, A. M. F. A., Racoma, B. A., Aracan, K. A., Alconis-Ayco, J., & Saddi, I. L. (2017). Disseminating near-real-time hazards information and flood maps in the Philippines through Web-GIS. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 59, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lai, C., Shao, Q., Chen, X., Wang, Z., Zhou, X., Yang, B., et al. (2016). Flood risk zoning using a rule mining based on ant colony algorithm. Journal of Hydrology, 542, 268–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Li, P., Wu, J., & Qian, H. (2012). Groundwater quality assessment with two multi-criteria decision making methods. International Journal of Geomatics and Geosciences, 2(3), 868.Google Scholar
  39. Liu, Y., Gebremeskel, S., De Smedt, F., Hoffmann, L., & Pfister, L. (2003). A diffusive transport approach for flow routing in GIS-based flood modeling. Journal of Hydrology, 283(1), 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Liu, H.-C., Liu, L., & Wu, J. (2013). Material selection using an interval 2-tuple linguistic VIKOR method considering subjective and objective weights. Materials and Design, 52, 158–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Luu, C., Von Meding, J., & Kanjanabootra, S. (2018). Assessing flood hazard using flood marks and analytic hierarchy process approach: A case study for the 2013 flood event in Quang Nam, Vietnam. Natural Hazards, 90(3), 1031–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mahmoudi, B., Marvie Mohadjer, M., Danehkar, A., & Feghhi, J. (2014). Estimating of forest cover changes in topographic zones in Mazandaran Province. Journal of Natural Environment, 67(3), 333–341.Google Scholar
  43. Malczewski, J. (2004). GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: A critical overview. Progress in Planning, 62(1), 3–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Malczewski, J. (2006). Ordered weighted averaging with fuzzy quantifiers: GIS-based multicriteria evaluation for land-use suitability analysis. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 8(4), 270–277.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2006.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Malczewski, J., & Rinner, C. (2015). Multicriteria decision analysis in geographic information science. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ministry of Energy. (2015). The evaluation of flood damages. http://shaghool.ir/Files/164-n.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept 2018.
  47. Mojaddadi, H., Pradhan, B., Nampak, H., Ahmad, N., & Ghazali, A. H. B. (2017). Ensemble machine-learning-based geospatial approach for flood risk assessment using multi-sensor remote-sensing data and GIS. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 8(2), 1080–1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moore, I. D., Grayson, R., & Ladson, A. (1991). Digital terrain modelling: A review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrological Processes, 5(1), 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Moradnezhadi, M., Jourgholami, M., & Malekian, A. (2015). Prioritization of appropriate sub-basins in order to forest harvesting using HEC-HMS model (case study: Kheyrud Forest). Journal of forest and wood products (JFWP), 68(2), 405–418.Google Scholar
  50. Mukherjee, F., & Singh, D. (2019). Detecting flood prone areas in Harris County: A GIS based analysis. GeoJournal.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-019-09984-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Omidipoor, M., Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., Moeinmehr, A., Sadeghi-Niaraki, A., & Choi, S. M. (2019b). A GIS-based decision support system for facilitating participatory urban renewal process. Land Use Policy, 88, 104150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Omidipoor, M., Jelokhani-Niaraki, M., & Samany, N. N. (2019a). A Web-based geo-marketing decision support system for land selection: A case study of Tehran, Iran. Annals of GIS, 1–15.Google Scholar
  53. Prime, T., Brown, J. M., & Plater, A. J. (2016). Flood inundation uncertainty: The case of a 0.5% annual probability flood event. Environmental Science & Policy, 59, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rahman, M. A., Rusteberg, B., Gogu, R., Ferreira, J. L., & Sauter, M. (2012). A new spatial multi-criteria decision support tool for site selection for implementation of managed aquifer recharge. Journal of Environmental Management, 99, 61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rahmani, M., Oboori, M., & Molaaghajanzade, S. (2015). Flood risk zoning by using overlapping methods of weighted linear combination (WLC) and ordered weighted average (OWA) scenarios: Case study on Sari, Mazandaran, Iran. In Paper presented at the international conference on modern research in agriculture science and environment, Malayzia.Google Scholar
  56. Rahmati, O., Haghizadeh, A., & Stefanidis, S. (2016a). Assessing the accuracy of GIS-based analytical hierarchy process for watershed prioritization; Gorganrood River Basin, Iran. Water Resources Management, 30(3), 1131–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rahmati, O., Pourghasemi, H. R., & Zeinivand, H. (2016b). Flood susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio and weights-of-evidence models in the Golastan Province, Iran. Geocarto International, 31(1), 42–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rashed, T., & Weeks, J. (2003). Assessing vulnerability to earthquake hazards through spatial multicriteria analysis of urban areas. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 17(6), 547–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rozalis, S., Morin, E., Yair, Y., & Price, C. (2010). Flash flood prediction using an uncalibrated hydrological model and radar rainfall data in a Mediterranean watershed under changing hydrological conditions. Journal of Hydrology, 394(1), 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Saaty, T. L. (1990). Decision making for leaders: The analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world. Pittsburgh: RWS publications.Google Scholar
  61. Sadeghi-Pouya, A., Nouri, J., Mansouri, N., & Kia-Lashaki, A. (2017). An indexing approach to assess flood vulnerability in the western coastal cities of Mazandaran, Iran. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 22, 304–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sahoo, M., Sahoo, S., Dhar, A., & Pradhan, B. (2016). Effectiveness evaluation of objective and subjective weighting methods for aquifer vulnerability assessment in urban context. Journal of Hydrology, 541, 1303–1315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sarhadi, A., Soltani, S., & Modarres, R. (2012). Probabilistic flood inundation mapping of ungauged rivers: Linking GIS techniques and frequency analysis. Journal of Hydrology, 458, 68–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1947). The math theory of communica. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  65. Shooshtari, S. J., & Gholamalifard, M. (2015). Scenario-based land cover change modeling and its implications for landscape pattern analysis in the Neka Watershed, Iran. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 1, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Shorabeh, S. N., Firozjaei, M. K., Nematollahi, O., Firozjaei, H. K., & Jelokhani-Niaraki, M. (2019). A risk-based multi-criteria spatial decision analysis for solar power plant site selection in different climates: A case study in Iran. Renewable Energy, 143, 958–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Siahkamari, S., Haghizadeh, A., Zeinivand, H., Tahmasebipour, N., & Rahmati, O. (2018). Spatial prediction of flood-susceptible areas using frequency ratio and maximum entropy models. Geocarto international, 33(9), 927–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Skilodimou, H. D., Bathrellos, G. D., Chousianitis, K., Youssef, A. M., & Pradhan, B. (2019). Multi-hazard assessment modeling via multi-criteria analysis and GIS: A case study. Environmental Earth Sciences, 78(2), 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tehrany, M. S., Pradhan, B., & Jebur, M. N. (2013). Spatial prediction of flood susceptible areas using rule based decision tree (DT) and a novel ensemble bivariate and multivariate statistical models in GIS. Journal of Hydrology, 504, 69–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tehrany, M. S., Pradhan, B., & Jebur, M. N. (2014). Flood susceptibility mapping using a novel ensemble weights-of-evidence and support vector machine models in GIS. Journal of Hydrology, 512, 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tehrany, M. S., Pradhan, B., Mansor, S., & Ahmad, N. (2015). Flood susceptibility assessment using GIS-based support vector machine model with different kernel types. CATENA, 125, 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tucker, C. J. (1979). Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring vegetation. Remote Sensing of Environment, 8(2), 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Van Westen, C. (1997). Statistical landslide hazards analysis, ILWIS 2.1 for Windows application guide. Enschede: ITC Publication.Google Scholar
  74. Walke, N., Obi Reddy, G. P., Maji, A. K., & Thayalan, S. (2012). GIS-based multicriteria overlay analysis in soil-suitability evaluation for cotton (Gossypium spp.): A case study in the black soil region of Central India. Computers & Geosciences, 41, 108–118.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2011.08.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wang, T.-C., & Lee, H.-D. (2009). Developing a fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on subjective weights and objective weights. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(5), 8980–8985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Yager, R. R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 18(1), 183–190.  https://doi.org/10.1109/21.87068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zagonari, F., & Rossi, C. (2013). A heterogeneous multi-criteria multi-expert decision-support system for scoring combinations of flood mitigation and recovery options. Environmental Modelling and Software, 49, 152–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zheng, N., Takara, K., Yamashiki, Y., & Tachikawa, Y. (2009). Assessing vulnerability to regional flood hazard through spatial multi-criteria analysis in the Huaihe River Basin, China. Annual Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 53, 127–132.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Narjes Mahmoody Vanolya
    • 1
  • Mohammadreza Jelokhani-Niaraki
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Remote sensing and GIS, Faculty of GeographyUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations