IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7810-d593274.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geological Approach for Landfill Site Selection: A Case Study of Vršac Municipality, Serbia

Author

Listed:
  • Ivana Carević

    (Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 3/3, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Mikica Sibinović

    (Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 3/3, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Sanja Manojlović

    (Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 3/3, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Natalija Batoćanin

    (Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 3/3, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Aleksandar S. Petrović

    (Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 3/3, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Tanja Srejić

    (Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade, Studentski trg 3/3, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia)

Abstract

One of the biggest problems of environmental protection in Serbia is landfills. It is often a case that the economic interests are predominant in the landfill sitting; thus, most landfills are not located according to standards. This study shows that detailed geological data assets combined with geographical modeling represents a reliable way to define and locate the landfill site. Geological evaluation is discussed in detail with regard to bedrock lithology, quaternary geology, geological structure, hydrogeology, surface runoff patterns, and topography. An approach combining geographical modeling and geology is presented for determining the sites suitable for landfill selection with respect to their geologic favorability. As opposed to numerous research papers on this topic, in the methodological procedure, special importance is devoted to the analysis of the geological criteria. In this way, it is significantly easier to determine the landfill area with the best characteristics due to geological structure and lithology which unequivocally and precisely indicates inadequate territories for candidate sites. The multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) is based on geological criteria upgraded with road (primary, residential, secondary, and tertiary), settlements network, railway, airport, infrastructure, land use, hypsometry aquifer, wetland, and surface water. The score values are divided into four classes, i.e., restricted areas, suitable but avoid, suitable, and most suitable. Combining geographical modeling with geology led to the recognition of two locations to be most favorable for landfill site located in the most suitable area, which represents 25.3% of the study area.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivana Carević & Mikica Sibinović & Sanja Manojlović & Natalija Batoćanin & Aleksandar S. Petrović & Tanja Srejić, 2021. "Geological Approach for Landfill Site Selection: A Case Study of Vršac Municipality, Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7810-:d:593274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7810/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7810/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ashraf Abd El Karim & Mohsen M. Awawdeh, 2020. "Integrating GIS Accessibility and Location-Allocation Models with Multicriteria Decision Analysis for Evaluating Quality of Life in Buraidah City, KSA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Jamie Baxter & John Eyles & Susan Elliott, 1999. "From Siting Principles to Siting Practices: A Case Study of Discord among Trust, Equity and Community Participation," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 501-525.
    3. Erkut, Erhan & Moran, Stephen R., 1991. "Locating obnoxious facilities in the public sector: An application of the analytic hierarchy process to municipal landfill siting decisions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 89-102.
    4. Javed Mallick, 2021. "Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Site Selection Based on Fuzzy-AHP and Geoinformation Techniques in Asir Region Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-29, February.
    5. Curtis L. Stowers & Udatta S. Palekar, 1993. "Location Models with Routing Considerations for a Single Obnoxious Facility," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 350-362, November.
    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. Ji Seong Chae & Chang Hyun Choi & Jeong Hoon Oh & Young Tae Chae & Jae-Weon Jeong & Dongkyu Lee, 2021. "Urban Public Service Analysis by GIS-MCDA for Sustainable Redevelopment: A Case Study of a Megacity in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    2. E D Adamides & P Mitropoulos & I Giannikos & I Mitropoulos, 2009. "A multi-methodological approach to the development of a regional solid waste management system," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(6), pages 758-770, June.
    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. Paul Berglund & Changhyun Kwon, 2014. "Robust Facility Location Problem for Hazardous Waste Transportation," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 91-116, March.
    5. Hunkar Toyoglu & Oya Ekin Karasan & Bahar Yetis Kara, 2011. "Distribution network design on the battlefield," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(3), pages 188-209, April.
    6. Michael P Johnson, 2006. "Decision Models for the Location of Community Corrections Centers," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 33(3), pages 393-412, June.
    7. Jun Zhao & Lixiang Huang, 2019. "Multi-Period Network Design Problem in Regional Hazardous Waste Management Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-27, June.
    8. Nagy, Gabor & Salhi, Said, 2007. "Location-routing: Issues, models and methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(2), pages 649-672, March.
    9. H Briassoulis, 1995. "Land Development in the Vicinity of Hazardous Facilities: A Compromise Assignment Procedure," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 22(5), pages 509-525, October.
    10. Ali Utku Akar & Sukran Yalpir & Suleyman Sisman & Gamze Goktepeli & Esra Yel, 2023. "A deterministic approach in waste management: delineation of potential territories in Turkey for industrial symbiosis of olive pomace, marble wastes and plastics by integrating Fuzzy AHP to GIS," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 5635-5662, June.
    11. Afsana Akther & Tofael Ahamed & Ryozo Noguchi & Takuma Genkawa & Tomohiro Takigawa, 2019. "Site suitability analysis of biogas digester plant for municipal waste using GIS and multi-criteria analysis," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 61-93, February.
    12. Zhao, Jiahong & Ke, Ginger Y., 2017. "Incorporating inventory risks in location-routing models for explosive waste management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 123-136.
    13. Ki-Eun Kang & George C. Homsy, 2020. "Make Me a Better Offer: Developer Threats and Regional Competition for Land Development Projects," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 34(1), pages 21-30, February.
    14. Joséphine Süptitz & Christian Schlereth, 2017. "Fracking: Messung der gesellschaftlichen Akzeptanz und der Wirkung akzeptanzsteigernder Maßnahmen [Fracking: Measuring Social Acceptance and the Effect of Acceptance Increasing Measures]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 405-439, November.
    15. Chunlin Xin & Jie Wang & Ziping Wang & Chia-Huei Wu & Muhammad Nawaz & Sang-Bing Tsai, 2022. "Reverse logistics research of municipal hazardous waste: a literature review," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1495-1531, February.
    16. Romero, Natalia & Nozick, Linda K. & Xu, Ningxiong, 2016. "Hazmat facility location and routing analysis with explicit consideration of equity using the Gini coefficient," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 165-181.
    17. Ghaderi, Abdolsalam & Burdett, Robert L., 2019. "An integrated location and routing approach for transporting hazardous materials in a bi-modal transportation network," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 49-65.
    18. Alina Elena Ionașcu & Shankha Shubhra Goswami & Alexandra Dănilă & Maria-Gabriela Horga & Corina Aurora Barbu & Adrian Şerban-Comǎnescu, 2024. "Analyzing Primary Sector Selection for Economic Activity in Romania: An Interval-Valued Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-38, April.
    19. Tom Kauko, 2004. "Sign Value, Topophilia, and the Locational Component in Property Prices," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(5), pages 859-878, May.
    20. Misagh Rahbari & Alireza Arshadi Khamseh & Yaser Sadati-Keneti & Mohammad Javad Jafari, 2022. "A risk-based green location-inventory-routing problem for hazardous materials: NSGA II, MOSA, and multi-objective black widow optimization," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2804-2840, February.

    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:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7810-:d:593274. 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.