IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/oprepe/v6y2019ics2214716018302951.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Detection of flood influence criteria in ungauged basins on a combined Delphi-AHP approach

Author

Listed:
  • Boulomytis, V.T.G.
  • Zuffo, A.C.
  • Imteaz, M.A.

Abstract

The prediction of areas susceptible to floods is essential for the protection of the population living in vulnerable conditions. It is only possible when the main contributing factors are pointed out. It is very challenging for hydrologists to run models when the input data are not representative. Alternative methods, such as the multicriteria decision analysis, represent a good solution for the simulation of future scenarios. However, the criteria selection affects the accuracy of the further modelling process. The purpose of the current study was to select and attribute scores to all the feasible criteria that contribute to flood susceptibility in the coastal plains of the Juqueriquere river basin, Brazil. First, the Delphi method was employed in the expert-based survey. Then, the root square judgement scale was adapted to an extended Analytic Hierarchy Process approach for the final allocation of priority values. Even though the initially ranked scores were within a limited range, the proposed methodology could adequately redistribute these scores in the final scale from 1 to 10. The consistency and sensitivity analyses revealed that the findings were coherent, providing the weight vector of the achievable criteria that affect the flood likelihood in the study area.

Suggested Citation

  • Boulomytis, V.T.G. & Zuffo, A.C. & Imteaz, M.A., 2019. "Detection of flood influence criteria in ungauged basins on a combined Delphi-AHP approach," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:oprepe:v:6:y:2019:i:c:s2214716018302951
    DOI: 10.1016/j.orp.2019.100116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214716018302951
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.orp.2019.100116?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Terrados, J. & Almonacid, G. & Pérez-Higueras, P., 2009. "Proposal for a combined methodology for renewable energy planning. Application to a Spanish region," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 2022-2030, October.
    2. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    3. Ferretti, Valentina, 2016. "From stakeholders analysis to cognitive mapping and Multi-Attribute Value Theory: An integrated approach for policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(2), pages 524-541.
    4. Keeney, Ralph L., 1996. "Value-focused thinking: Identifying decision opportunities and creating alternatives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 537-549, August.
    5. Patrick T. Harker & Luis G. Vargas, 1987. "The Theory of Ratio Scale Estimation: Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1383-1403, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Yinuo & Xie, Shuyi & Tian, Zhigang, 2022. "Risk assessment of buried gas pipelines based on improved cloud-variable weight theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    2. Majumdar, Abhijit & Tiwari, Manoj Kumar & Agarwal, Aastha & Prajapat, Kanika, 2021. "A new case of rank reversal in analytic hierarchy process due to aggregation of cost and benefit criteria," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    3. Hassan Darabi & Hadis Kordani & Ardeshir JamshidAbadi, 2022. "Flood anticipation, reality, and uncertainty, the 2019 flood in Khuzestan, Iran," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 113(1), pages 365-381, August.
    4. Babak Zolghadr-Asli & Omid Bozorg-Haddad & Maedeh Enayati & Xuefeng Chu, 2021. "A review of 20-year applications of multi-attribute decision-making in environmental and water resources planning and management," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14379-14404, October.
    5. Chun-Chieh Tseng & Jun-Yi Zeng & Min-Liang Hsieh & Chih-Hung Hsu, 2022. "Analysis of Innovation Drivers of New and Old Kinetic Energy Conversion Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Model in the Post-COVID-19 Era: A Chinese Case," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(20), pages 1-25, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    2. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    3. Paweł Karczmarek & Witold Pedrycz & Adam Kiersztyn, 2021. "Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in a Graphical Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 463-481, April.
    4. Eliküçük, Seval & Polat, Zeynel Abidin, 2021. "Identifying key factors affecting foreigners' choice on real estate acquisition: The case of İzmir City, Turkey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Parreiras, R.O. & Kokshenev, I. & Carvalho, M.O.M. & Willer, A.C.M. & Dellezzopolles, C.F. & Nacif, D.B. & Santana, J.A., 2019. "A flexible multicriteria decision-making methodology to support the strategic management of Science, Technology and Innovation research funding programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 725-739.
    6. Mäntymaa, Erkki & Tyrväinen, Liisa & Juutinen, Artti & Kurttila, Mikko, 2021. "Importance of forest landscape quality for companies operating in nature tourism areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    7. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
    8. Muhammad Ikram & Qingyu Zhang & Robert Sroufe, 2020. "Developing integrated management systems using an AHP‐Fuzzy VIKOR approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2265-2283, September.
    9. Gordana Milentijević & Blagoje Nedeljković & Milena Lekić & Zoran Nikić & Ivica Ristović & Jelena Djokić, 2016. "Application of a Method for Intelligent Multi-Criteria Analysis of the Environmental Impact of Tailing Ponds in Northern Kosovo and Metohija," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, November.
    10. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2016. "Managing corporate social responsibility strategies of airports: The case of Taiwan’s Taoyuan International Airport Corporation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 338-348.
    11. P Ji & R Jiang, 2003. "Scale transitivity in the AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(8), pages 896-905, August.
    12. Majid Eskafi & Reza Fazeli & Ali Dastgheib & Poonam Taneja & Gudmundur F. Ulfarsson & Ragnheidur I. Thorarinsdottir & Gunnar Stefansson, 2020. "A value-based definition of success in adaptive port planning: a case study of the Port of Isafjordur in Iceland," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(3), pages 403-431, September.
    13. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    14. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    15. Carmone, Frank J. & Kara, Ali & Zanakis, Stelios H., 1997. "A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(3), pages 538-553, November.
    16. Paul J. Componation & Dawn R. Utley & Robert L. Armacost, 1999. "Prioritizing components of concurrent engineering programs to support new product development," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 168-176.
    17. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Influence of aggregation and measurement scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 700-710, April.
    18. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    19. Mirakyan, Atom & Guio, R.D., 2014. "A methodology in innovative support of the integrated energy planning preparation and orientation phase," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 916-927.
    20. Krista Danielle S. Yu & Kathleen B. Aviso & Michael Angelo B. Promentilla & Joost R. Santos & Raymond R. Tan, 2016. "A weighted fuzzy linear programming model in economic input–output analysis: an application to risk management of energy system disruptions," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 183-195, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:oprepe:v:6:y:2019:i:c:s2214716018302951. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/operations-research-perspectives .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.