IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v240y2020ics037837742030305x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Groundwater vulnerability assessment in different types of aquifers

Author

Listed:
  • Abu-Bakr, Heba Abd el-Aziz

Abstract

The concept of groundwater vulnerability is used in groundwater management and risk assessment. Among the parameters contributing to groundwater vulnerability are: depth to groundwater; net recharge rate; aquifer media; topography; vadose zone; hydraulic conductivity; aquifer thickness; and, pumping density rate in case of over-pumping. Groundwater is considered an important water resource in Egypt. Hence, this valuable source should be evaluated against its vulnerability to all possible pollution risks. In this research, three areas are selected and representing different aquifer types with different hydrogeological characteristics. The first area is Al-Minia governorate to represent the Nile valley region, which is underlain by the Nile valley aquifer. The second area is Wadi Al-Natrun to represent the Nile Delta fringes region, which is underlain by Moghra aquifer. The last area is El Kharga Oasis to represent Western desert region, which is underlain by Nubian Sandstone aquifer. A groundwater vulnerability maps for the three regions are produced using Microsoft Excel, Golden Software Surfer 12 and the analytical hierarchy process method (AHP) for rating and weighting the contributing eight parameters. The main outcome of this research is the vulnerability classification for each region supported by the corresponding vulnerability map. The study indicated that the highest weight is assigned to the depth to groundwater and soil media parameters while the lowest weight was assigned to the topography factor. The results indicated that, for Al-Minia study area, about 85% of the aquifer is classified as medium vulnerability and about 11% is low to medium and 4% is medium to high. For Wadi Al-Natrun study area, about 67% of the aquifer is classified as medium vulnerability and about 3.3% is low to medium and 28.7% is medium to high. For El Kharga Oasis study area, about 48.8% of the aquifer is classified as medium vulnerability and about 51.5% is low to medium.

Suggested Citation

  • Abu-Bakr, Heba Abd el-Aziz, 2020. "Groundwater vulnerability assessment in different types of aquifers," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:240:y:2020:i:c:s037837742030305x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037837742030305X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106275?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. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    2. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    3. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    4. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    6. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    7. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Yakov Ben‐Haim & Marla Downing & Frank Sapio & Marty Siltanen, 2013. "A New Multicriteria Risk Mapping Approach Based on a Multiattribute Frontier Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1694-1709, September.
    8. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    9. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    10. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    11. Jitendar Kumar Khatri & Bhimaraya Metri, 2016. "SWOT-AHP Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing Strategy Selection: A Case of Indian SME," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 17(5), pages 1211-1226, October.
    12. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    13. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    14. Jha, Madan K. & Chowdary, V.M. & Kulkarni, Y. & Mal, B.C., 2014. "Rainwater harvesting planning using geospatial techniques and multicriteria decision analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 96-111.
    15. Om Prakash Mishra & Mahesh Chand & Krishan Kumar & Prashant Mishra, 2023. "Investigating applicability of green supply chain management in manufacturing sectors," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(4), pages 1183-1196, August.
    16. David Han-Min Wang & Quang Linh Huynh, 2013. "Mediating Role of Knowledge Management in Effect of Management Accounting Practices on Firm Performance," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 3(3), pages 1-10, June.
    17. Luis Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Alejandro Alvarado-Iniesta & David Luviano Cruz & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "MOORA under Pythagorean Fuzzy Set for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, April.
    18. Neha Arora & Naresh Kumar, 2021. "Does Financial Inclusion Promote Human Development? Evidence from India," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 10(2), pages 163-184, December.
    19. Hossain, Mohammad Khalid & Meng, Qingmin, 2020. "A fine-scale spatial analytics of the assessment and mapping of buildings and population at different risk levels of urban flood," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.

    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:agiwat:v:240:y:2020:i:c:s037837742030305x. 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.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    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.