A comparison of GIS-based landslide susceptibility assessment of the Satuk village (Yenice, NW Turkey) by frequency ratio and multi-criteria decision methods

  • Deniz ArcaEmail author
  • Hulya Keskin Citiroglu
  • Ismail Kerem Tasoglu
Original Article


Landslide is one of the most influential natural disasters that cause losses of life and property on a large scale. To identify the landslide susceptible areas, the layers of data showing different characteristics of the earth must be evaluated together. In the course of evaluating data layers together, the emerging technology of geographical information systems (GIS) allows the collection, processing and analysis of data. The purpose of this study is to produce a landslide susceptibility map of the Satuk village in the Yenice district of the province of Karabuk in the Western Black Sea Region where landslides causing frequent loss of life and property occur frequently. In the area, the slope, lithology, aspect, elevation, distance to river and distance to road parameters were considered as the parameters causing the landslides. All of the parameters were standardized in a common scale using fuzzy membership functions. Then, the contributions of each of these parameters for the landslide occurrence were investigated by frequency ratio, and GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis, and the weight values of the parameters were calculated. The generated landslide susceptibility map is divided into five classes. Additionally, the landslide inventory map was compared to the obtained landslide susceptibility maps to find out how well the constructed models fit the reality. An overlap of 81.56% was found based on the multi-criteria decision analysis method and an overlap of 89.96% was found based on the frequency ratio method. The results showed that the frequency ratio method provides better results than the multi-criteria decision analysis method considering the data used for the study area.


Landslides susceptibility GIS Frequency rate method Multi-criteria decision method Satuk village 



  1. ADNKS (2017) Address based population registration system (ABPRS) results. Accessed 20 Dec 2017
  2. AFAD (2018) Law. Prime ministry disaster and emergency management authority (AFAD). Accessed 25 Oct 2018
  3. Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic regression, multicriteria decision and likelihood ratio methods: case study at Izmir, Turkey. Landslides 9(1):93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Akgün A, Bulut F (2007) GIS-based landslide susceptibility for Arsin-Yomra (Trabzon, North Turkey) region. Environ Geol 51:1377–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Akgun A, Dag S, Bulut F (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a landslide-prone area (Findikli, NE of Turkey) by likelihood frequency ratio and weighted linear combination models. Environ Geol 54(6):1127–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Akinci H, Dogan S, Kilicoglu C, Kececi SB (2010) Production of landslide susceptibility map of Samsun province center. Electr J Map Technol 2(3):13–27Google Scholar
  7. Alan I, Aksay A (2002) 1:100 000 scale geological map of Turkey Zonguldak F-28 sections no: 29. Geological Studies Office, General Directorate of Mineral Research, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  8. Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58:21–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Alkevli T, Ercanoglu M (2011) Assessment of ASTER satellite images in landslide inventory mapping: Yenice-Gokcebey (Western Black Sea Region, Turkey). Bull Eng Geol Environ 70:607–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Anavberokhai IO (2008) Introducing GIS and multi-criteria analysis in road path planning process in Nigeria: a case study of Lokoja, Kogi State, Ph.D. Thesis, University of GavleGoogle Scholar
  11. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Ugawa N (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based weighted linear combination, the case in Tsugawa area of Agano River, Niigata Prefecture, Japan. Landslides 1:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Marui H, Kanno T (2005) Landslides in Sado Island of Japan Part II. GIS-based susceptibility mapping with comparisons of results from two methods and verifications. Eng Geol 81:432–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Baeza C, Corominas J (2001) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility by means of multivariate statistical techniques. Earth Surf Proc Land 26:1251–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bai SB, Lu GN, Wang JA, Zhou PG, Ding LA (2011) GIS-based rare events logistic regression for landslide-susceptibility mapping of Lianyungang, China. Environ Earth Sci 62:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Barnard PL, Owen LA, Sharma MC, Finkel RC (2001) Natural and human induced landsliding in the Garhwal Himalaya of Northern India. Geomorphology 40:21–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Boroushaki S, Malczewski J (2008) Implementing an extension of the analytical hierarchy process using ordered weighted averaging operators with fuzzy quantifiers in Arcgis. Comput Geosci 34:399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brabb EE (1984) Innovative approaches to landslide hazard and risk mapping. In: Proceedings of fourth international symposium on landslides, vol 1. Canadian Geotechnical Society, Toronto, Canada, pp 307–324Google Scholar
  18. Can E (2014) Investigation of landslide potential parameters on Zonguldak-Ereğli highway and adverse effects of landslides in the region. Environ Monit Assess 186:2435–2447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cevik E, Topal T (2003) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for a problematic segment of the natural gas pipeline, Hendek (Turkey). Environ Geol 44:949–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chang SK, Lee DH, Wu JH, Juang CH (2011) Rainfall based criteria for assessing slump rate of mountainous highway slopes: a case study of slopes along Highway 18 in Alishan Taiwan. Eng Geol 118:63–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Choubey VD, Chaudhari S, Litoria PK (1992) Landslide hazard zonation in Uttarkashi and Tehri Districts P. Himalaya, India. In: Proceeding of 6th international symposium on landslides, Christchurch, pp 911–917Google Scholar
  22. Chung CF, Fabbri AG (1999) Probabilistic prediction models for landslide hazard mapping. Photogramm Eng Remote Sen 65(12):1388–1399Google Scholar
  23. Dag S, Bulut F, Akgun A (2006) Assessment of landslides in Cayeli (Rize) and its surroundings with two variable statistical analysis methods. In: 1st landslide symposium, Trabzon, p 84Google Scholar
  24. Dai FC, Lee CF (2001) Terrain-based mapping of landslide susceptibility using a geographical ınformation system: a case study. Can Geotech J 38:911–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dai FC, Lee CF (2002) Landslide characteristics and slope instability modeling using GIS. Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology 42:213–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Demir A, Ibisoglu Y, Artas A, Tutak M (1965) Geological survey report of Satuk village. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement General Directorate of Disaster Affairs Department of Disaster Research and Damage Assessment, Ankara (unpublished) Google Scholar
  27. Demir G, Aytekin M, Akgun A, Ikizler SB, Tatar O (2013) A comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping of the eastern part of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (Turkey) by likelihood-frequency ratio and analytic hierarchy process methods. Nat Hazards 65(3):1481–1506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dragicevic S, Lai T, Balram S (2015) GIS-based multicriteria evaluation with multiscale analysis to characterize urban landslide susceptibility in data-scarce environments. Habitat Int 45(2):114–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Drobne S, Lisec A (2009) Multi-attribute decision analysis in GIS: weighted linear combination and ordered weighted averaging. Informatica 33:459–474Google Scholar
  30. Eker R, Aydin A (2014) Assessment of forest road conditions in terms of landslide susceptibility: a case study in Yıgılca Forest Directorate (Turkey). Turk J Agric For 38(2):281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ercanoglu M (2005) Landslide susceptibility assessment of SE Bartin (West Black Sea region, Turkey) by artificial neural Networks. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:979–992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ercanoglu M, Temiz FA (2011) Application of logistic regression fuzzy operators to landslide susceptibility assessment in Azdavay (Kastamonu, Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 64(4):949–964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C, Asch THWJ (2004) Landslide susceptibility zoning north of Yenice (NW Turkey) by multivariate statistical techniques. Nat Hazards 32:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ercanoglu M, Kasmer O, Temiz N (2008) Adaptation and comparison of expert opinion to analytical hierarchy process for landslide susceptibility mapping. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:565–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Erener A, Duzgun HBS (2013) A regional scale quantitative risk assessment for landslides: case of Kumluca watershed in Bartin, Turkey. Landslides 10(1):55–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Erener A, Şebnem H, Düzgün B (2010) Improvement of statistical landslide susceptibility mapping by using spatial and global regression methods in the case of more and Romsdal (Norway). Landslides 7:55–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fell R, Corominas J, Bonnard C, Cascini L, Leroi E, Savage WZ (2008) Guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land use planning. Eng Geol 102:85–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Fernandez CI, Del Castillo TF, El Hamdouni R, Montero JC (1999) Verification of landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study. Earth Surf Proc Land 24:537–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fu WJ, He YR (2010) Landslide susceptibility evaluation based on fuzzy support vector machine. In: Sixth international symposium on digital earth: data processing and applications, p 7841.
  40. Gómez H, Kavzoglu T (2005) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural networks in Jabonosa River Basin, Venezuela. Eng Geol 78:11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Guillande R, Gelugne P, Bardintzeff JM, Brousse R, Chorowich J, Deffontaines B, Parrot JF (1993) Cartographie automatique de zones a aleas de mouvement de terrain sur ı’ile de Tahiti a partir de donnees digitales. Bull Soc Geol Fr 164(4):577–583Google Scholar
  42. Guzzetti F, Carrara A, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999) Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and the ir application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology 31:181–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hasekiogullari GD, Ercanoglu M (2012) A new approach to use AHP in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study at Yenice (Karabuk, NW Turkey). Nat Hazards 63:1157–1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kavzoglu T, Colkesen I (2009) A kernel functions analysis for support vector machines for land cover classification. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 11(5):352–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. KavzogluT, Sahin EK, Collkesen I (2010) Gis-based landslide susceptibility mapping using multicriteria decision analysis method: the case of Trabzon Province, 3. In: Remote sensing and geographic information systems symposium, Gebze, KocaeliGoogle Scholar
  46. Kavzoglu T, Sahin EK, Colkesen I (2012) Assessment of landslide susceptibility using regression trees: the case of Trabzon province. J Map 147:21–33Google Scholar
  47. Lee S, Min K (2001) Statistical analyses of landslide susceptibility at Yongin, Korea. Environ Geol 40(9):1095–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lee S, Chwae U, Min K (2003) Landslide susceptibility mapping by correlation between topography and geological structure: the Janghung Area, Korea. Geomorphology 46:9–162Google Scholar
  49. Lee S, Choi J, Min K (2004) Landslide hazard mapping using GIS and remote sensing data at Boun, Korea. Int J Remote Sens 25:2037–2052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lin HM, Chang SK, Wu JH, Juang CH (2008) Neural network based model for assessing failure potential of highway slopes in the Alishan Taiwan area: pre-and post-earthquake investigation. Eng Geol 104:280–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Luzi L, Pergalani F (1999) Slope instability in static and dynamic conditions for urban planning: the “Oltre Po Pavese” case history (Region Lombardia-Italy). Nat Hazards 20:57–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Malczewski J (1999) GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Malczewski J, Chapman T, Flegel C, Walters D, Shrubsole D, Healy MA (2003) GIS-multicriteria evaluation with ordered weighted averaging (OWA): case study of developing watershed management strategies. Environ Plan 35:1769–1784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mazman T (2005) Landslide susceptibility assessment in Kumluca (se Bartın) watershed by geographic information systems and statistical analysis methods. MSc. Thesis, Department of Geologıcal Engıneerıng Instıtute of Natural and Applıed Scıences Unıversıty of Çukurova, Adana, p 102Google Scholar
  55. Mejia-Navarro M, Wohl EE (1994) Geological hazard and risk evaluation using GIS: methodology and model applied to medellin, Colombia. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 31(4):459–481Google Scholar
  56. Nagarajan R, Roy A, Vinod Kumar R, Mukherjee A, Khire MV (2000) Landslide hazard susceptibility mapping based on terrain and climatic factors for tropical monsoon regions. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58:275–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Nefeslioglu HA, Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H (2008) An assessment on the use of logistic regression and artificial neural networks with different sampling strategies for the preparation of landslide susceptibility maps. Eng Geol 97:171–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ozdemir A, Altural T (2013) A comparative study of frequency ratio, weights of evidence and logistic regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping: Sultan Mountains, SW Turkey. J Asian Earth Sci 64:187–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ozturk K (2002) Landslips and the effects of these on Turkey. GUJGEF 22(2):35–50Google Scholar
  60. Peloquin S, Gwyn QHJ (2000) Using remote sensing, GIS and artificial ıntelligence to evaluate landslide susceptibility levels: application in the Bolivian Andes. In: 4th International conference on integrated GIS environment modules, Canada, pp 26–37Google Scholar
  61. Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Nat Hazards 63(2):965–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pradhan B (2013) A comparative study on the predictive ability of the decision tree support vector machine and neuro-fuzzy models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Comput Geosci 51:350–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pradhan B, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment and factor effect analysis: backpropagation artificial neural networks and their comparison with frequency ratio and bivariate logistic regression modelling. Environ Model Softw 25(6):747–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Raja NB, Cicek I, Turkoglu N, Aydin O, Kawasaki A (2017) Landslide susceptibility mapping of the Sera River Basin using logistic regression model. Nat Hazards 85(3):1323–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Reis S, Yalcın A, Atasoy M, Nişancı R, Bayrak T, Sancar C, Ekercin S (2009) Production of landslide susceptibility maps with GIS and Remote Sensing Techniques: Example of Rize, the National Association of Turkey Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing V. In: Technical symposium, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  66. Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in a hierarchical structure. J Math Psychol 15:234–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Saral A, Musaoglu N (2011) Flood Risk analysis with multi-criteria decision and information diffusion methods. Chamber of Map and Cadastre Engineers, 13. Turkey Scientific map and Technical Congress, pp 18–22, April 2011, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  68. Sayin A (1992) Geological survey report of Satuk village, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement General Directorate of Disaster Affairs Department of Disaster Research and Damage Assessment, Ankara (unpublished) Google Scholar
  69. Sayin A (1993) Geological survey report of Satuk village, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement General Directorate of Disaster Affairs Department of Disaster Research and Damage Assessment, Ankara (unpublished) Google Scholar
  70. Sivari G, Ozsan S (2005) Geological survey report of Satuk village, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement General Directorate of Disaster Affairs Department of Disaster Research and Damage Assessment, Ankara (unpublished) Google Scholar
  71. Suzen ML, Doyuran V (2004) Data driven bivariate landslide susceptibility assessment using geographical information systems: a method and application to Asarsuyu catchment, Turkey. Eng Geol 71(3–4):303–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tasoglu IK (2013) Examine the mass movements of Kelemen Valley (NE Yenice Karabük). Dissertation, Bulent Ecevit University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Geological Engineering, p 221Google Scholar
  73. Tasoglu IK, Keskin Citiroglu H, Mekik C (2016) GIS-based landslide susceptibility assessment: a case study in Kelemen Valley (Yenice—Karabuk, NW Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 75:1291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Usluogullari OF, Temugan A, Duman ES (2016) Comparison of slope stabilization methods by three dimensional finite element analyses. Nat Hazards 81(2):1027–1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Vivas L (1992) Los andes venezolanos. Caracas: Academia Nacional de La Historia, Universidad de Los Andes, Corporación Merideña de Turismo, Gobernación del Estado Mérida, Corporación de Los AndesGoogle Scholar
  76. Voogd H (1983) Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning. Pion Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  77. Wang WD, Xie CM, Du XG (2009) Landslides susceptibility mapping based on geographical information system, Guizhou, South-West China. Environ Geol 58:33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wu Y, Li W, Wang Q, Liu Q, Yang D, Xing M, Pei Y, Yan S (2016) Landslide susceptibility assessment using frequency ratio, statistical index and certainty factor models for the Gangu County, China. Arab J Geosci 9:84. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Yalcin A, Reis S, Aydinoglu AC, Yomralioglu T (2011) A GIS-based comparative study of frequency ratio, analytical hierarchy process, bivariate statistics and logistics regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping in Trabzon, NE Turkey. CATENA 85(3):274–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Yao X, Tham LG, Dai FC (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on support vector machine: a case study on natural slopes of Hong Kong, China. Geomorphology 101:572–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Yenice Municipality (2017) Yenice. Accessed 18 June 2017
  82. Yergok AF, Akman U, Tekin F, Karabalık N, Arbas A, Akat U, Armağan F, Erdoğan K, Kaymakçı H (1987) Geologic Report of Western Black Sea Region II, Report No: 8848. General Directorate of MTA, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  83. Yigit E, Koc E (1985) Geological survey report of Satuk village, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement General Directorate of Disaster Affairs Department of Disaster Research and Damage Assessment, Ankara (unpublished) Google Scholar
  84. Yigit HI, Ozkan F (1998) Geological survey report of Satuk village, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement General Directorate of Disaster Affairs Department of Disaster Research and Damage Assessment, Ankara (unpublished) Google Scholar
  85. Yildirim V, Yomralıoglu T (2013) Route optimization in linear engineering structures with geographic information systems: the case of natural gas transmission pipeline. AKU J Sci Eng 13:1–10Google Scholar
  86. Yilmaz I (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and their comparison: a case study from Kat landslides (Tokat-Turkey). Comput Geosci 35(6):1125–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Yilmaz C, Topal T, Suzen ML (2012) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using bivariate statistical analysis in Devrek (Zonguldak-Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 65(7):2161–2178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zeng B, Xiang W, Rohn J, Ehret D, Chen X (2017) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using an artificial neural network in Enshi region China. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zeng-wang X (2001) GIS and ANN model for landslide susceptibility mapping. J Geogr Sci 11(3):374–381 (1009-637X(2001)03-0374-08) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Zhao QS, Huang Q, Guo J, Zhu H (2008) Integrated risk assessment of hazardous chemical installations using GIS and AHP. In: 4th International conference on wireless communications. Networking and mobile computing, pp 1–5Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Izmir Vocational SchoolDokuz Eylul UniversityIzmirTurkey
  2. 2.Investment Monitoring and Coordination Presidency, YIKOBAydınTurkey
  3. 3.Provincial Directorate of Environment and Urban PlanningEskisehirTurkey

Personalised recommendations