IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i11p1868-d1517155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of the Analytic Network Process for Sub-Watershed Prioritization in the Huehuetan River Basin, Chiapas, Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Adolfo López-Pérez

    (Posgrado de Hidrociencias, Colegio de Postgraduados, Campus Montecillo, Texcoco 56264, Mexico)

  • Gerardo Colín-García

    (Centro de Investigación Regional Pacifico Sur, Campo Experimental Centro de Chiapas, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP), Ocozocoautla de Espinosa 29140, Mexico)

  • Héctor Moya

    (Centro Regional de Investigación e Innovación para la Sostenibilidad de la Agricultura y los Territorios Rurales (CERES), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Quillota 2260000, Chile)

  • Martín Alejandro Bolaños-González

    (Posgrado de Hidrociencias, Colegio de Postgraduados, Campus Montecillo, Texcoco 56264, Mexico)

  • Demetrio Salvador Fernández-Reynoso

    (Posgrado de Hidrociencias, Colegio de Postgraduados, Campus Montecillo, Texcoco 56264, Mexico)

  • Angel Saul Cruz-Ramírez

    (Centro Nacional de Investigación Disciplinaria en Conservación y Mejoramiento de Ecosistemas Forestales, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP), Ciudad de México 04010, Mexico)

Abstract

Sub-watershed prioritization is essential for developing watershed management plans that maximize impact with minimal resources. This study used a multicriteria decision-making approach to rank sub-watersheds by degradation status in the Huehuetan River Basin, Chiapas, Mexico. The eight sub-watersheds in the basin were classified using the Analytic Network Process (ANP) model, evaluating morphometry, hydrology, hillslope stability, soil water saturation, land-use change, and socioeconomic factors. The results identified hydrology and land-use change as the most influential criteria, with weights of 20.62% and 19.82%, respectively, driven mainly by surface runoff and deforestation. Swtr 08 and Swtr 07 were identified as the highest-priority sub-watersheds, covering 24.31% of the basin area, with 55.31% of Swtr 08 classified as unstable and showing a combined high-vegetation loss of 16.46 km 2 . The entire watershed showed an annual vegetation loss rate of 146 ha year −1 . Increasing the weighting by 50% resulted in greater variability in priority rankings, with runoff and low vegetation showing maximum global ranges of −44.33% and 30.25%, respectively, instability decreasing by 33.94%, and peak flow increasing by 18.20%. These findings emphasize the need for focused interventions in the vulnerable subwatersheds of the upper basin to manage runoff, curb deforestation, and reduce soil instability.

Suggested Citation

  • Adolfo López-Pérez & Gerardo Colín-García & Héctor Moya & Martín Alejandro Bolaños-González & Demetrio Salvador Fernández-Reynoso & Angel Saul Cruz-Ramírez, 2024. "Application of the Analytic Network Process for Sub-Watershed Prioritization in the Huehuetan River Basin, Chiapas, Mexico," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1868-:d:1517155
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1868/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1868/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrés Calizaya & Oliver Meixner & Lars Bengtsson & Ronny Berndtsson, 2010. "Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in the Lake Poopo Basin, Bolivia," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(10), pages 2267-2289, August.
    2. Sarita Gajbhiye Meshram & Ehsan Alvandi & Chandrashekhar Meshram & Ercan Kahya & Ayad M. Fadhil Al-Quraishi, 2020. "Application of SAW and TOPSIS in Prioritizing Watersheds," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(2), pages 715-732, January.
    3. Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Chi-Yo Huang, 2012. "Combined DEMATEL technique with hybrid MCDM methods for creating the aspired intelligent global manufacturing & logistics systems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 159-190, August.
    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. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    2. Afsaneh Afzali & Soheil Sabri & M. Rashid & Jamal Mohammad Vali Samani & Ahmad Ludin, 2014. "Inter-Municipal Landfill Site Selection Using Analytic Network Process," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(8), pages 2179-2194, June.
    3. José Ribas, 2014. "An Assessment of Conflicting Intentions in the Use of Multipurpose Water Reservoirs," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(12), pages 3989-4000, September.
    4. Lo, Huai-Wei & Liou, James J.H. & Huang, Chun-Nen & Chuang, Yen-Ching & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2020. "A new soft computing approach for analyzing the influential relationships of critical infrastructures," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 28(C).
    5. Kefan Xie & Zimei Liu, 2019. "Factors Influencing Escalator-Related Incidents in China: A Systematic Analysis Using ISM-DEMATEL Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Yuqian Shi & Sheng Yu & Jie Mei, 2025. "Strategic Decision-Making Enhancement through Graph-Optimized DEMATEL-AHP with Pruning," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 105-133, February.
    7. Gao, Hongchao & Wei, Tong & Lou, Inchio & Yang, Zhifeng & Shen, Zhenyao & Li, Yingxia, 2014. "Water saving effect on integrated water resource management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 50-58.
    8. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    9. Patanjal Kumar & Sachin Kumar Mangla & Yigit Kazancoglu & Ali Emrouznejad, 2023. "A decision framework for incorporating the coordination and behavioural issues in sustainable supply chains in digital economy," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 721-749, July.
    10. Erik Porse & Samuel Sandoval-Solis & Belize Lane, 2015. "Integrating Environmental Flows into Multi-Objective Reservoir Management for a Transboundary, Water-Scarce River Basin: Rio Grande/Bravo," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(8), pages 2471-2484, June.
    11. Bach, Vanessa & Finogenova, Natalia & Berger, Markus & Winter, Lisa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2017. "Enhancing the assessment of critical resource use at the country level with the SCARCE method – Case study of Germany," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 283-299.
    12. Andrej Bregar, 2019. "Application of a hybrid Delphi and aggregation–disaggregation procedure for group decision-making," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(1), pages 3-32, May.
    13. Jagannath Roy & Dragan Pamučar & Samarjit Kar, 2020. "Evaluation and selection of third party logistics provider under sustainability perspectives: an interval valued fuzzy-rough approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 669-714, October.
    14. Hung, Chih-Young & Lee, Wen-Yi, 2016. "A proactive technology selection model for new technology: The case of 3D IC TSV," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 191-202.
    15. José Antonio, Palomero-González & Vicent, Almenar-Llongo & Ramón, Fuentes-Pascual, 2022. "A composite indicator index as a proxy for measuring the quality of water supply as perceived by users for urban water services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    16. Yushi Jiang & Syed Imran Zaman & Sobia Jamil & Sharfuddin Ahmed Khan & Li Kun, 2024. "A triple theory approach to link corporate social performance and green human resource management," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(6), pages 15733-15776, June.
    17. Arthur Jin Lin & Hai-Yen Chang, 2019. "Business Sustainability Performance Evaluation for Taiwanese Banks—A Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-26, April.
    18. Upreti, Naveen & Sunder, Raju Ganesh & Dalei, Narendra N. & Garg, Sandeep, 2018. "Challenges of India's power transmission system," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 129-141.
    19. Dong-Shang Chang & Wen-Sheng Wang & Rouwen Wang, 2018. "Identifying Critical Factors of Sustainable Healthcare Institutions’ Indicators Under Taiwan’s National Health Insurance System," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 287-307, November.
    20. Nomeda Dobrovolskienė & Anastasija Pozniak, 2021. "Simple Additive Weighting versus Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution: which method is better suited for assessing the sustainability of a real estate project," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 8(4), pages 180-196, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1868-:d:1517155. 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.