IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i7p1274-d105191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Modelling of Urban Physical Vulnerability to Explosion Hazards Using GIS and Fuzzy MCDA

Author

Listed:
  • Yasser Ebrahimian Ghajari

    (GIS Department, Malek Ashtar University of Technology, Tehran 15875-1774, Iran)

  • Ali Asghar Alesheikh

    (GIS Department, Khaje Nasiroddin Toosi University of Technology, Tehran 19967-15433, Iran)

  • Mahdi Modiri

    (GIS Department, Malek Ashtar University of Technology, Tehran 15875-1774, Iran)

  • Reza Hosnavi

    (GIS Department, Malek Ashtar University of Technology, Tehran 15875-1774, Iran)

  • Morteza Abbasi

    (GIS Department, Malek Ashtar University of Technology, Tehran 15875-1774, Iran)

Abstract

Most of the world’s population is concentrated in accumulated spaces in the form of cities, making the concept of urban planning a significant issue for consideration by decision makers. Urban vulnerability is a major issue which arises in urban management, and is simply defined as how vulnerable various structures in a city are to different hazards. Reducing urban vulnerability and enhancing resilience are considered to be essential steps towards achieving urban sustainability. To date, a vast body of literature has focused on investigating urban systems’ vulnerabilities with regard to natural hazards. However, less attention has been paid to vulnerabilities resulting from man-made hazards. This study proposes to investigate the physical vulnerability of buildings in District 6 of Tehran, Iran, with respect to intentional explosion hazards. A total of 14 vulnerability criteria are identified according to the opinions of various experts, and standard maps for each of these criteria have been generated in a GIS environment. Ultimately, an ordered weighted averaging (OWA) technique was applied to generate vulnerability maps for different risk conditions. The results of the present study indicate that only about 25 percent of buildings in the study area have a low level of vulnerability under moderate risk conditions. Sensitivity analysis further illustrates the robustness of the results obtained. Finally, the paper concludes by arguing that local authorities must focus more on risk-reduction techniques in order to reduce physical vulnerability and achieve urban sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Yasser Ebrahimian Ghajari & Ali Asghar Alesheikh & Mahdi Modiri & Reza Hosnavi & Morteza Abbasi, 2017. "Spatial Modelling of Urban Physical Vulnerability to Explosion Hazards Using GIS and Fuzzy MCDA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-29, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:7:p:1274-:d:105191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/7/1274/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/7/1274/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    2. Milad Moradi & Mahmoud Reza Delavar & Behzad Moshiri, 2017. "A GIS-based multi-criteria analysis model for earthquake vulnerability assessment using Choquet integral and game theory," 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. 87(3), pages 1377-1398, July.
    3. Bakhtiar Feizizadeh & Stefan Kienberger, 2017. "Spatially explicit sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for multicriteria-based vulnerability assessment," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(11), pages 2013-2035, November.
    4. Kermanshah, A. & Derrible, S., 2016. "A geographical and multi-criteria vulnerability assessment of transportation networks against extreme earthquakes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 39-49.
    5. Ahamd Radmehr & Shahab Araghinejad, 2015. "Flood Vulnerability Analysis by Fuzzy Spatial Multi Criteria Decision Making," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(12), pages 4427-4445, September.
    6. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    7. Murat Köksalan & Jyrki Wallenius & Stanley Zionts, 2011. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making:From Early History to the 21st Century," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 8042.
    8. Alexandru Banica & Lucian Rosu & Ionel Muntele & Adrian Grozavu, 2017. "Towards Urban Resilience: A Multi-Criteria Analysis of Seismic Vulnerability in Iasi City (Romania)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, February.
    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. Quntao Yang & Shuliang Zhang & Qiang Dai & Rui Yao, 2020. "Assessment of Community Vulnerability to Different Types of Urban Floods: A Case for Lishui City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Sandra L. Cobos-Mora & José Guamán-Aucapiña & Jonathan Zúñiga-Ruiz, 2023. "Suitable site selection for transfer stations in a solid waste management system using analytical hierarchy process as a multi-criteria decision analysis: a case study in Azuay-Ecuador," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 1944-1977, February.
    3. Gricelda Herrera-Franco & F. Javier Montalván & Andrés Velastegui-Montoya & Jhon Caicedo-Potosí, 2022. "Vulnerability in a Populated Coastal Zone and Its Influence by Oil Wells in Santa Elena, Ecuador," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Ramezani, Abouzar & Malek, MohammadReza & Sahami, Habib & Hosnavi, Reza, 2018. "Developing a spatial methodology to reduce the vulnerability of critical infrastructures against intelligent air-based threats," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 126-138.
    5. Seyed Mohammad Haghighi Fard & Naciye Doratli, 2022. "Evaluation of Resilience in Historic Urban Areas by Combining Multi-Criteria Decision-Making System and GIS, with Sustainability and Regeneration Approach: The Case Study of Tehran (IRAN)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-21, February.
    6. Andrzej Biłozor & Szymon Czyża & Tomasz Bajerowski, 2019. "Identification and Location of a Transitional Zone between an Urban and a Rural Area Using Fuzzy Set Theory, CLC, and HRL Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Karim Solaimani & Fatemeh Shokrian & Shadman Darvishi, 2023. "An Assessment of the Integrated Multi-Criteria and New Models Efficiency in Watershed Flood Mapping," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 37(1), pages 403-425, January.
    8. Ghazaleh Ahmadi & Reza Tavakkoli-Moghaddam & Armand Baboli & Mehdi Najafi, 2022. "A decision support model for robust allocation and routing of search and rescue resources after earthquake: a case study," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 1039-1081, April.
    9. Mrówczyńska, M. & Skiba, M. & Sztubecka, M. & Bazan-Krzywoszańska, A. & Kazak, J.K. & Gajownik, P., 2021. "Scenarios as a tool supporting decisions in urban energy policy: The analysis using fuzzy logic, multi-criteria analysis and GIS tools," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).

    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. Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Daniel Schatz & Rabih Bashroush, 0. "Economic valuation for information security investment: a systematic literature review," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    3. Sahar Validi & Arijit Bhattacharya & P. J. Byrne, 2020. "Sustainable distribution system design: a two-phase DoE-guided meta-heuristic solution approach for a three-echelon bi-objective AHP-integrated location-routing model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 191-222, July.
    4. Certa, Antonella & Hopps, Fabrizio & Inghilleri, Roberta & La Fata, Concetta Manuela, 2017. "A Dempster-Shafer Theory-based approach to the Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) under epistemic uncertainty: application to the propulsion system of a fishing vessel," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 69-79.
    5. Bertomeu, M. & Romero, C., 2001. "Managing forest biodiversity: a zero-one goal programming approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 197-213, June.
    6. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    7. Hong, Liu & Ye, Bowen & Yan, Han & Zhang, Hui & Ouyang, Min & (Sean) He, Xiaozheng, 2019. "Spatiotemporal vulnerability analysis of railway systems with heterogeneous train flows," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 725-744.
    8. Sunita Guru & Jitendra Nenavani & Vipul Patel & Nityesh Bhatt, 2020. "Ranking of perceived risks in online shopping," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 47(2), pages 137-152, June.
    9. Nitidetch Koohathongsumrit & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2022. "An integrated FAHP–ZODP approach for strategic marketing information system project selection," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1792-1809, September.
    10. Dianfa Wu & Zhiping Yang & Ningling Wang & Chengzhou Li & Yongping Yang, 2018. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model and AHP Weighting Uncertainty Analysis for Sustainability Assessment of Coal-Fired Power Units," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, May.
    11. Hsin-Chieh Wu & Toly Chen & Chin-Hau Huang, 2020. "A Piecewise Linear FGM Approach for Efficient and Accurate FAHP Analysis: Smart Backpack Design as an Example," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-18, August.
    12. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    13. Hartvigsen, David, 2005. "Representing the strengths and directions of pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 357-369, June.
    14. Weiliang Qiao & Yu Liu & Xiaoxue Ma & Yang Liu, 2020. "Human Factors Analysis for Maritime Accidents Based on a Dynamic Fuzzy Bayesian Network," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 957-980, May.
    15. Seunghoo Jeong & Byeong Je Kim & Young‐Joo Lee & Ji‐Bum Chung & Sung‐Han Sim, 2020. "Individual Disaster Assistance For Socially Vulnerable People: Lessons Learned From the Pohang Earthquake in the Republic of Korea," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2373-2389, November.
    16. Mohamed Hanine & Omar Boutkhoum & Abderrafie El Maknissi & Abdessadek Tikniouine & Tarik Agouti, 2016. "Decision making under uncertainty using PEES–fuzzy AHP–fuzzy TOPSIS methodology for landfill location selection," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 351-367, December.
    17. Min Li & Tsung-Chih Hsiao & Chih-Cheng Chen, 2020. "Exploring the Factors of Cooperation between Artists and Technologists in Creating New Media Art Works: Based on AHP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-22, September.
    18. 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).
    19. X Li & P Beullens & D Jones & M Tamiz, 2009. "An integrated queuing and multi-objective bed allocation model with application to a hospital in China," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(3), pages 330-338, March.
    20. Walter J. Gutjahr & Alois Pichler, 2016. "Stochastic multi-objective optimization: a survey on non-scalarizing methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(2), pages 475-499, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:7:p:1274-:d:105191. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.