Analytic Hierarchy Process in Geospatial Analysis

  • Ronald C. Estoque


Owing to the increasing demand for land, forests, waterways, and other depleting resources brought about by increasing population growth, there is an urgent need for a scheme that can promote their sustainable utilization. The best use of these resources must be selected so that they remain available to the generations to come. Natural disasters like earthquakes, landslides, and floods have been major concerns in many countries. This makes it necessary for planners to design sound risk-management contingencies to prepare for such disasters. Most of the time, however, decision makers have different and conflicting priorities, concerns, knowledge, and expertise in dealing with these problems. This reality complicates the decision-making process on how a particular resource should be utilized, and on how an analysis of the susceptibility of a particular area to a certain disaster risk hazard should be carried out. In recognition of the complexity, magnitude, and importance of these problems, a decision-making technique that is responsive, transparent, and acceptable to the decision makers and other stakeholders is needed. Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM), or multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), is a decision-making technique that helps decision makers who are confronted with conflicting priorities to come up with an acceptable decision using a transparent decision-making process. It has been one of the fastest growing problem-resolving approaches in the past decades (Triantaphyllou 2000).


Analytical Hierarchy Process Landslide Susceptibility Consistency Ratio Analytical Hierarchy Process Method Weighted Linear Combination 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Banai R (1989) A new method for site suitability analysis: the analytic hierarchy process. Environ Manag 13:685–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banai R (1993) Fuzziness in geographical information systems: contribution from the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 7:315–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carmone FJ Jr, Kara A, Zanakis SH (1997) A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pair-wise comparison matrices in AHP. Eur J Oper Res 102:538–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carver SJ (1991) Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographical information systems. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 5:321–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chakhar S, Martel JM (2003) Enhancing geographical information systems capabilities with multi-criteria evaluation functions. J Geogr Inform Decis Anal 7:47–71Google Scholar
  6. Church RL, Loban SR, Lombard K (1992) An interface for exploring spatial alternatives for a corridor location problem. Comput Geosci 8:1095–1105Google Scholar
  7. Cowen D (1988) GIS versus CAD versus DBMS: what are the differences. Photogramm Eng Rem Sens 54:1551–1555Google Scholar
  8. Coyle G (2004) The analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Practical strategy. Open Access Material. Retrieved on January 11, 2011 from
  9. Diamond JT, Wright JR (1988) Design of an integrated spatial information system for multi-objective land-use planning. Environ Plann 15:205–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eastman JR (1999) IDRISI 32: user’s guide. Clark University, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  11. Eastman JR (2006) IDRISI Andes tutorial. Clark University, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  12. Eastman JR (2009) IDRISI Taiga: guide to GIS and image processing. Clark University, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  13. Eastman JR, Jin W, Kyem PAK, Toledano J (1992) Participatory procedures for multi-criteria evaluation in GIS. In: Proceedings, Chinese professionals in GIS’92, NCGIA, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, pp 281–288Google Scholar
  14. Eastman JR, Jin W, Kyem PAK, Toledano J (1995) Raster procedures for multi-criteria/multi-objective decisions. Photogramm Eng Rem Sens 61:539–547Google Scholar
  15. Eastman JR, Kyem PAK, Toledano J, Jin W (1993) GIS and decision making. UNITAR, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  16. Estoque RC, Murayama Y (2010) Suitability analysis for beekeeping sites in La Union, Philippines, using GIS and multi-criteria evaluation techniques. Res J Appl Sci 5:242–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Feick RD, Hall BG (2004) A method for examining the spatial dimension of multicriteria weight sensitivity. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 18:815–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fernandez DS, Lutz MA (2010) Urban flood hazard zoning in Tucumán Province, Argentina, using GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Eng Geol 111:90–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Forman E, Peniwati K (1998) Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 108:165–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Forman EH, Gass SI (2001) The analytic hierarchy process: an exposition. Oper Res 49:469–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Geldermann J, Rentz O (2007) Multi-criteria decision support for integrated technique assessment. In: Kropp JP, Scheffran J (eds) Advanced methods for decision making and risk management in sustainability science. Nova, New York, pp 257–273Google Scholar
  22. Guiqin W, Li Q, Guoxue L, Lijun C (2009) Landfill site selection using spatial information technologies and AHP: a case study in Beijing, China. J Environ Manag 90:2414–2421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heywood I, Oliver J, Tomlinson S (1995) Building an exploratory multi-criteria modeling environment for spatial decision support. In: Fisher P (ed) Innovations in GIS 2. Taylor & Francis, BristolGoogle Scholar
  24. Hossain MS, Chowdhury SR, Das NG, Sharifuzzaman SM, Sultana A (2009) Integration of GIS and multicriteria decision analysis for urban aquaculture development in Bangladesh. Landsc Urban Plann 90:119–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hutchinson CF, Toledano J (1993) Guidelines for demonstrating geographical information ­systems based on participatory development. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 7:453–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Islam R, Abdulla NA (2006) Management decision-making by the analytic hierarchy process: a proposed modification for large-scale problems. J Int Bus Entrepren Dev 3:18–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Itami RM, MacLaren GS, Hirst KM (2000) Integrating the analytical hierarchy process with GIS to capture expert knowledge for land capability assessment. In: Proceedings of the 4th conference on integrating GIS and environmental modeling, BanffGoogle Scholar
  28. Jankowski P (1995) Integrating geographical information systems and multiple criteria decision making methods. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 9:251–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jankowski P, Richard L (1994) Integration of GIS-based suitability analysis and multicriteria evaluation in a spatial decision support system for route selection. Environ Plann Plann Des 21:323–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Janssen R, Rietveld P (1990) Multicriteria analysis and geographical information systems: an ­application to agricultural land use in The Netherlands. In: Scholten HJ, Stillwell JCH (eds) Geographical information systems for urban and regional planning. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  31. Johnson CR (1980) Constructive critique of a hierarchical prioritization scheme employing paired comparisons. In: Proceedings of the international conference of cybernetics and society of the IEE (Institute of Electrical Engineers), CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Kamp U, Growley BJ, Khattak GA, Owen LA (2008) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for the 2005 Kashmir earthquake region. Geomorphology 101:631–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Khoi DD, Murayama Y (2010) Delineation of suitable cropland areas using a GIS based multi-criteria evaluation approach in the Tam Dao National Park Region, Vietnam. Sustainability 2:2024–2043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kim SC, Min KJ (2004) Determining multi-criteria priorities in the planning of electric power generation: the development of an analytic hierarchy process for using the opinions of experts. Int J Manag 21:186–193Google Scholar
  35. Laaribi A, Chevallier JJ, Martel JM (1996) A spatial decision aid: a multicriterion evaluation approach. Comput Environ Urban Syst 20:351–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Malczewski J (1999) GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Malczewski J (2004) GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview. Prog Plan 62:3–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Malczewski J (2006) GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 20:703–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marinoni O (2004) Implementation of the analytical hierarchy process with VBA in ArcGIS. Comput Geosci 30:637–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mendoza GA (1997) Introduction to analytic hierarchy process: theory and applications to natural resources management. In: American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 1997 ACSM/ASPRS/RT convention, vol 4, Resource Technology, Bethesda, pp 130–139Google Scholar
  41. Mendoza GA, Martins H (2006) Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: a critical review of methods and new modeling paradigms. For Ecol Manag 230:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Moeinaddini M, Khorasani N, Danehkar A, Darvishsefat AA, Zienalyan M (2010) Siting MSW landfill using weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methodology in GIS environment (case study: Karaj). Waste Manag 30:912–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nekhay O, Arriaza M, Guzmán-Álvarez JR (2009) Spatial analysis of the suitability of olive plantations for wildlife habitat restoration. Comput Electron Agr 65:49–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nyerges TL, Jankowski P (2010) Regional and urban GIS: a decision support approach. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Pereira JMC, Duckstein L (1993) A multiple criteria decision-making approach to GIS-based land suitability evaluation. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 7:407–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Radiarta IN, Saitoh SI, Miyazono A (2008) GIS-based multi-criteria evaluation models for identifying suitable sites for Japanese scallop (Mizuhopecten yessoensis) aquaculture in Funka Bay, southwestern Hokkaido, Japan. Aquaculture 284:127–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rao M, Sastry SVC, Yadar PD, Kharod K, Pathan SK, Dhinwa PS, Majumdar KL, Kumar DS, Patkar VN, Phatak VK (1991) A Weighted index model for urban suitability assessment: a GIS approach. Bombay Metropolitan Regional Development Authority, BombayGoogle Scholar
  48. Robbins SP (1994) Management. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  49. Saaty TL (2001) Fundamentals of the analytic hierarchy process. In: Schmoldt DL, Kangas J, Mendoza GA, Pesonen M (eds) The analytic hierarchy process in natural resources and environmental decision making. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  50. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. Saaty TL (1988) Multi-criteria decision making: the analytical hierarchy process. RWS Publications, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  52. Saaty TL (1994a) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 24:19–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saaty TL (1994b) Fundamentals of decision making. RWS Publications, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  54. Saaty TL (2008a) Decision making for leaders: the analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world. RWS Publications, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  55. Saaty TL (2008b) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Services Sci 1:83–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Samani KM, Hosseiny SA, Lotfalian M, Najafi M (2010) Planning road network in mountain forests using GIS and Analytic Hierarchical Process (AHP). Caspian J Environ Sci 8:151–162Google Scholar
  57. Schmoldt DL, Kangas J, Mendoza GA, Pesonen M (eds) (2001) The analytic hierarchy process in natural resources and environmental decision making. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  58. Sener S, Sener E, Nas B, Karagüzel R (2010) Combining AHP with GIS for landfill site selection: a case study in the Lake Beysehir catchment area (Konya, Turkey). Waste Manag 30:2037–2046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Siddiqui MZ, Everett JW, Vieux BE (1996) Landfill siting using geographic information systems: a demonstration. J Environ Eng 122:515–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Suárez-Vega R, Santos-Peñate DR, Dorta-González P, Rodríguez-Díaz M (2011) A multi-criteria GIS based procedure to solve a network competitive location problem. Appl Geogr 31:282–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sugumaran R, Bakker B (2007) GIS-based site suitability decision support system for planning confined animal feeding operations in Iowa. In: Hilton BN (ed) Emerging spatial information systems and applications. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, pp 219–238Google Scholar
  62. Teknomo K (2006) Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) tutorial. Retrieved on January 11, 2011 from
  63. Thapa RB, Murayama Y (2008) Land evaluation for peri-urban agriculture using analytical hierarchical process and geographic information system techniques: a case study of Hanoi. Land Use Policy 25:225–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Thill JC (1999) Multicriteria decision-making and Analysis: a geographic information sciences approach. Ashgate, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  65. Triantaphyllou E (2000) Multi-criteria decision making: a comparative study. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  66. Tudes S, Yigiter ND (2010) Preparation of land use planning model using GIS based on AHP: case study Adana-Turkey. Bull Eng Geol Environ 69:235–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vaidya OS, Kumar S (2006) Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res 169:1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vargas LG (1990) An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. Eur J Oper Res 48:2–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vizarri M (2011) Spatial modelling of potential landscape quality. Appl Geogr 31:108–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Voogd H (1983) Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning. Pion, LondonGoogle Scholar
  71. Wu CH, Chen SC (2009) Determining landslide susceptibility in Central Taiwan from rainfall and six site factors using the analytical hierarchy process method. Geomorphology 112:190–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Xiang XN, Whitley D (1994) Weighting land suitability factors by the PLUS method. Environ Plann Plann Des 21:273–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Yalcin A (2008) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using an analytical hierarchy process and bivariate statistics in Ardesen (Turkey): comparisons of results and confirmations. Catena 72:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yang J, Shi P (2002) Applying an analytic hierarchy process in a firm’s overall performance evaluation: a case study in China. Int J Bus 7:29–46Google Scholar
  75. Ying X, Guang-Ming Z, Gui-Qiu C, Lin T, Ke-Lin W, Dao-You H (2007) Combining AHP with GIS in a synthetic evaluation of eco-environment quality: a case study of Hunan Province, China. Ecol Model 209:97–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zahedi F (1986) The analytic hierarchy process: a survey of the method and its applications. Interfaces 16:96–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Spatial Information Science, Graduate School of Life and Environmental SciencesUniversity of TsukubaTsukubaJapan
  2. 2.Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State UniversityBacnotanPhilippines

Personalised recommendations