Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Adaptation and comparison of expert opinion to analytical hierarchy process for landslide susceptibility mapping

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, an attempt was made to re-evaluate and compare landslide susceptibility in a landslide-prone area in the West Black Sea Region of Turkey, using expert opinion and the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). In order to compare the results with a landslide susceptibility study undertaken previously in the same region using the artificial neural network (ANN) method, slope angle, slope aspect, topographical elevation, topographical shape, water conditions and vegetation cover parameters were taken into consideration. Experts were asked to rate their pairwise importance and their feedback was used in the AHP to produce a landslide susceptibility map of the study region. Its validity was tested using relation value (r ij ) and the areal frequency distribution of the actual landslides in the area. The results were satisfactory and similar to those achieved in the previous ANN study. It is concluded that AHP can be a useful methodology in landslide susceptibility assessment.

Résumé

Des experts ont été invités à évaluer d’leurspart l’importance de ces parameters et leur rétroaction a été employée dans l’AHP pour produire une carte de susceptibilité d’éboulement de la région etudiée. Sa validité a été examinée utilisant la valeur de relation (rij) et la distribution de fréquence régionale des éboulements réels dans le secteur. Les résultats étaient satisfaisants et semblables à ceux réalisés dans l’étude précédente. On conclut que le PHA peut être une méthodologie utile dans l’évaluation de susceptibilité d’éboulement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdolmasov B, Obradovic I (1997) Evaluation of geological parameters for landslide hazard mapping. In: Marinos PG, Koukis GC, Tsiambaos GC, Stournaras GC (eds) Proceedings of international symposium on engineering geology and environment, 23–27 June 1997, Athens, Balkema, Greece, pp 471–476

  • Akartuna M (1953) Caycuma–Devrek–Yenice–Kozcagız bolgesinin jeolojisi hakkında rapor (in Turkish). MTA yayinlari, Derleme no. 2059, 44 pp

  • Akgun A, Bulut F (2007) GIS-based landslide susceptibility for Arsin-Yomra (Trabzon, North Turkey) region. Environ Geol 51:1377–1387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58:21–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Marui H, Kano 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 81:432–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barredo JI, Benavides A, Hervas J, Van Westen CJ (2000) Comparing heuristic landslide hazard assessment techniques using GIS in the Trijana basin, Gran Canaria Island, Spain. JAG 2(1):9–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Brabb EE (1984) Innovative approaches to landslide hazard and risk mapping. In: Proceedings of 4th international symposium on landslides, vol 1. Canadian Geotechinacal Society, Toronto, Canada, pp 307–374

  • Can T, Nefeslioglu AH, Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H, Duman TY (2005) Susceptibility assessments of shallow earthflows triggered by heavy rainfall at three catchments by logistic regression analyses. Geomorphology 72(1–4):250–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrara A, Cardinali M, Detti R, Guzzetti F, Pasqui V, Reichenbach P (1991) GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Earth Surf Process Landf 16:427–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cevik E, Topal T (2003) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for a problematic segment of the natural gas pipeline, Hendek (Turkey). Environ Geol 44(8):949–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deveciler E (1986) Alapli–Bartin–Cide (B. Karadeniz) jeoloji raporu (in Turkish). MTA yayinlari, Derleme no. 7938, 58 pp

  • Duman TY, Can T, Emre O, Kecer M, Dogan A, Ates A, Durmaz S (2005) Landslide inventory of northwestern Anatolia, Turkey. Eng Geol 77(1, 2):99–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duman TY, Can T, Gokceoglu C, Nefeslioglu HA, Sonmez H (2006) Application of logistic regression for landslide susceptibility zoning of Cekmece Area, Istanbul, Turkey. Environ Geol 51:241–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eastman JR (2003) IDRISI Kilimanjaro, guide to GIS and image processing, user’s guide (Ver.14). Clark University Press, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • EMRC (Environmental Management Research Center) (2002) Map Window (Ver. 2.7.21). Logan, Utah State University

  • Ercanoglu M (2003) Bulanik mantik ve istatistiksel yontemlerle heyelan duyarlilik haritalarinin uretilmesi: Bati Karadeniz Bolgesi (Kumluca Guneyi-Yenice Kuzeyi) (in Turkish). H.U. Fen Bil. Enst. Doktora Tezi, Ankara, 202 pp

  • Ercanoglu M (2005) Landslide susceptibility assessment of SE Bartin (West Black Sea region, Turkey) by artificial neural networks. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:979–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C (2002) Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (north of Yenice, NW Turkey) by fuzzy approach. Environ Geol 41:720–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C (2004) Use of fuzzy relations to produce landslide susceptibility map of a landslide prone area (West Black Sea Region, Turkey). Eng Geol 75:229–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C, Van Asch Th WJ (2004) Landslide susceptibility zoning of north of Yenice (NW Turkey) by mutivariate statistical techniques. Nat Hazards 32:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Temiz N, Kasmer O (2006) Investigation of the utilization of fuzzy logic and artificial neural networks on producing landslide susceptibility maps (in Turkish). TUBITAK-CAYDAG, Project No: 103Y126, 186 pp

  • Gokceoglu C, Ercanoglu M (2002) An inventory study on the landslides in the north of Yenice region (NW Turkey). In: 9th congress of the international association for engineering geology and the environment, Durban, S. Africa, p 166

  • Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H, Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Can T (2005) The 17 March 2005 Kuzulu landslide (Sivas, Turkey) and landslide-susceptibility map of its near vicinity. Eng Geol 81(1):65–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Carrara A, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999) Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology 31:181–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komac M (2006) A landslide susceptibility model using the analytical hierarchcy process method and multivariate statistics in perialpine Slovenia. Geomorphology 74:17–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore ID, O’Loughlin EM, Burch GJ (1988) A contour-based topographic model for hydrological and ecological applications. Earth Surf Process Landf 14(4):305–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Durmaz S (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of tectonic Kelkit Valley (Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey). Geomorphology 94:401–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15:234–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzen ML, Doyuran V (2004a) Data driven bi-variate landslide susceptibility assesment using geographical information systems: a method and application to Asarsuyu catchment, Turkey. Eng Geol 71(3, 4):303–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzen ML, Doyuran V (2004b) A comparison of the GIS based landslide susceptibility assessment methods: multivariate versus bi-variate. Environ Geol 45(5):665–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timur E, Aksay A, Celik B (1997) Zonguldak F-28 paftasi 1/100000 olcekli jeoloji haritasi. MTA Gn. Md., Jeoloji Etudleri Dairesi (in Turkish)

  • Tunusluoglu MC, Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H, Nefeslioglu HA (2007) An artificial neural network application to produce debris source areas of Barla, Besparmak, and Kapi Mountains (NW Taurids, Turkey). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 7:557–570

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ (1997) Statistical landslide hazard analysis, ILWIS 2.1 for Windows application guide. ITC Publication, Enschede, pp 73–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ (2000) The modelling of landslide hazards using GIS. Surv Geophys 21:241–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varnes DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. In: Schuster RL, Krizek RJ (eds) Landslides analysis and control. Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Special report no.176, pp 12–33

  • Yesilnacar E, Topal T (2005) Landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison of logistic regression and neural networks methods in a medium scale study, Hendek region (Turkey). Eng Geol 79:251–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the experts who have contributed significant to the manuscript; the work being based on their valuable opinions. The authors also would like to thank Assoc. Prof. Dr. Harun Sonmez for his valuable comments and contributions to the manuscript. The authors would like to give their special thanks to GIS Specialist Jill Norton, from Idaho, USA, for her valuable comments and English editing. This research is supported by the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (Project No: 103Y126).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Geological Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Hacettepe University, Beytepe, 06800, Ankara, Turkey

    M. Ercanoglu

  2. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement, General Directorate of Technical Research and Implementation, European Natural Disasters Training Center, Kizilay, Ankara, Turkey

    O. Kasmer

  3. General Directorate of Iller Bank, Ataturk Boulevard, No. 21, Ulus, Ankara, Turkey

    N. Temiz

Authors
  1. M. Ercanoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. O. Kasmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Temiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Ercanoglu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ercanoglu, M., Kasmer, O. & Temiz, N. Adaptation and comparison of expert opinion to analytical hierarchy process for landslide susceptibility mapping. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67, 565–578 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-008-0170-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-008-0170-1

Keywords

Mots clés

Search

Navigation