Advertisement

Natural Hazards

, Volume 65, Issue 3, pp 2105–2128 | Cite as

GIS-multicriteria decision analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping: comparing three methods for the Urmia lake basin, Iran

  • Bakhtiar FeizizadehEmail author
  • Thomas Blaschke
Original Paper

Abstract

The GIS-multicriteria decision analysis (GIS-MCDA) technique is increasingly used for landslide hazard mapping and zonation. It enables the integration of different data layers with different levels of uncertainty. In this study, three different GIS-MCDA methods were applied to landslide susceptibility mapping for the Urmia lake basin in northwest Iran. Nine landslide causal factors were used, whereby parameters were extracted from an associated spatial database. These factors were evaluated, and then, the respective factor weight and class weight were assigned to each of the associated factors. The landslide susceptibility maps were produced based on weighted overly techniques including analytic hierarchy process (AHP), weighted linear combination (WLC) and ordered weighted average (OWA). An existing inventory of known landslides within the case study area was compared with the resulting susceptibility maps. Respectively, Dempster-Shafer Theory was used to carry out uncertainty analysis of GIS-MCDA results. Result of research indicated the AHP performed best in the landslide susceptibility mapping closely followed by the OWA method while the WLC method delivered significantly poorer results. The resulting figures are generally very high for this area, but it could be proved that the choice of method significantly influences the results.

Keywords

Landslide susceptibility Multicriteria evaluation GIS-multicriteria decision analysis Uncertainty analysis Urmia lake basin Iran 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments on earlier versions of the manuscript and the Department of Geoinformatics (Z_GIS) University of Salzburg for partial financial support. We also appreciate the help of Dr. Hasan Ahmadzadeh, University of Tabriz, for his help and in particular for providing rights for Fig. 2. This work was carried out as part of a PhD study funded by the Iranian Ministry of Science, Research and Technology and including a study period at the University of Salzburg.

References

  1. Atkinson PM, Massari R (2011) Autologistic modelling of susceptibility to landsliding in the Central Apennines, Italy. Geomorphology 130:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphology 65:15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Ugawa N (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based weighted linear combination, the case in Tsugawa area of Agano River, Niigata Prefecture, Japan. Landslides 1:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Marui H, Kanno T (2005) Landslides in Sado Island of Japan: part II. GIS-based susceptibility mapping with comparisons of results from two methods and verifications. Eng Geol 81:432–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ayele S (2009) Slope instability and hazard zonation mapping using remote sensing and GIS techniques in Abay Gorg (Gohatsion dejen) central Ethiopia. Faculty of Sciences, University of Addis Ababa, Master thesisGoogle Scholar
  6. Bai S, Lu G, Wang J, Zhou P, Ding L (2011) GIS-based rare events logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping of Lianyungang, China. Environ Earth Sci 62:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Banai R (1993) Fuzziness in geographic information systems: contributions from the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 7(4):315–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barredo JI, Benavides A, Hervas J, Van Westen CJ (2000) Comparing heuristic landslide hazard assessment techniques using GIS in the Tirajana basin, Gran Canaria Island, Spain. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2:9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barzilai J (1998) On the decomposition of value functions. Oper Res Lett 22:159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett DA, Wade GA, Armstrong MP (1999) Exploring the solution space of semi-structured geographical problems using genetic algorithms. Trans GIS 3(1):51–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bodin L, Gass S (2003) On teaching the analytic hierarchy process. Comput Oper Res 30:1487–1497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boroushaki S, Malczewski J (2008) Implementing an extension of the analytical hierarchy process using ordered weighted averaging operators with fuzzy quantifiers in ArcGIS. Comput Geosci 34:399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boroushaki S, Malczewski J (2010) Using the fuzzy majority approach for GIS-based multicriteria group decision-making. Comput Geosci 36:302–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carrara A, Cardinali M, Detti R, Guzzetti F, Pasqui V, Reichenbach P (1991) GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Earth Surf Proc Land 16(5):427–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carrara A, Cardinali M, Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P (1995) GIS technology in mapping landslide hazard. In: Carrara A, Guzzetti F (eds) Geographical information systems in assessing natural hazards. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 135–175Google Scholar
  16. Carver SJ (1991) Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographical information systems. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 5(3):321–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cervi F, Berti M, Borgatti L, Ronchetti F, Manenti F, Corsini A (2010) Comparing predictive capability of statistical and deterministic methods for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study in the northern Apennines (Reggio Emilia Province, Italy). Landslides 7:433–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chauhan S, Sharma M, Arora MK (2010) Landslide susceptibility zonation of the Chamoli region, Garhwal Himalayas, using logistic regression model. Landslides 7:411–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chen SJ, Hwang CL (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chen J, Zhu Q (2010) Uncertainty and decision strategy analysis of GIS-based ordered weighted averaging method. In: International conference on information networking and automation (ICINA)Google Scholar
  21. Chen Y, Khan S, Paydar Z (2009) To retire or expand? A fuzzy GIS-based spatial multi-criteria evaluation framework for irrigated agriculture. Irrig Drain 59(2):174–188Google Scholar
  22. Dai FC, Lee CF (2002) Landslide characteristics and slope instability modelling using GIS, Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology 42:213–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Das I, Sahoo S, van Westen C, Stein A, Hack R (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment using logistic regression and its comparison with a rock mass classification system, along a road section in the northern Himalayas (India). Geomorphology 114:627–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Das S, Stein A, Kerle N, Dadhwal VK (2011) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment using homogeneous susceptible units (HSU) along a national highway corridor in the northern Himalayas, India. Landslides 8:293–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dempster AP (1967) Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. Ann Math Stat 28:325–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Deng H (1999) Multi-criteria analysis with fuzzy pairwise comparisons. Int J Approx Reason 21:215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eastman JR (1997) IDRISI for windows, version 2.0: tutorial exercises. Clark University, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  28. Eastman JR (2001) Guide to GIS and image processing, release 32. Clark Labs, Clark University, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  29. Feick RD, Hall GB (1999) Consensus building in a multi-participant spatial decision support system. URISA J 11(2):17–23Google Scholar
  30. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T (2011) Landslide risk assessment based on gis multi-criteria evaluation: a case study Boston Abad county, Iran. J Earth Sci Eng 1:66–71Google Scholar
  31. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T (2012a) Land suitability analysis for Tabriz County, Iran: a multi-criteria evaluation approach using GIS. J Environ Planning Manag. doi: 10.1080/09640568.2011.646964
  32. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T (2012b) Uncertainty analysis of GIS-based ordered weighted averaging method for landslide susceptibility mapping in Urmia Lake Basin, Iran. In: Paper presented at the seventh International Geographic Information Science conference, September 18–21, Ohio, Columbus, USA, 2012Google Scholar
  33. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T (2012c) Comparing GIS-multicriteria decision analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping for the Urmia lake basin, Iran. In: Paper presented at the IEEE international geoscience and remote sensing symposium, Igarss, 22–27 July, Munich, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  34. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T, Rafiq L (2011) GIS based landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study Bostan abad County, Iran. Paper presented at the International conference Geoinformatics for Disaster Management, 03-08 May 2011, Antalya, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  35. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T, Nazmfar H (2012a) GIS-based ordered weighted averaging and dempster shafer methods for landslide susceptibility mapping in Urmia lake Basin, Iran. Int J Digit Earth (in press)Google Scholar
  36. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T, Rezaei Moghaddam M.H (2012b) Landslide susceptibility mapping for the Urmia Lake basin, Iran: a multi-criteria evaluation approach using GIS. Int J Environ Res (in press)Google Scholar
  37. Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T, Nazmfar Z, Akbari E, Kohbanani (2012c) Monitoring land surface temperature relationship to land use/land cover from satellite imagery in Maraqeh County, Iran. J Environ Planning Manag. doi: 10.1080/09640568.2012.717888
  38. Fell R, Corominas J, Bonnard C, Cascini L, Leroi E, Savage WZ (2008) Guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land-use planning. Eng Geol 102:99–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Forman EH, Selly MA (2001) Decision by objective, how to convince others that you are right. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, SingaporeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gorsevski PV, Jankowski P (2008) Discerning landslide susceptibility using rough sets. Comput Environ Urban Syst 32:53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gorsevski PV, Jankowski P (2010) An optimized solution of multi-criteria evaluation analysis of landslide susceptibility using fuzzy sets and Kalman filter. Comput Geosci 36:1005–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gorsevski PV, Jankowski P, Gessler PE (2006) An heuristic approach for mapping landslide hazard by integrating fuzzy logic with analytic hierarchy process. Control Cybern 35:21–141Google Scholar
  43. Gorsevski PV, Donevska KR, Mitrovski CD, Frizado JD (2012) Integrating multi-criteria evaluation techniques with geographic information systems for landfill site selection: a case study using ordered weighted average. Waste Manag (Oxford) 32:287–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Cardinali M, Galli M, Ardizzone F (2005) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale. Geomorphology 72:272–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Intarawichian N, Dasananda S (2010) Analytical hierarchy process for landslide susceptibility mapping in lower Mae Chem watershed, Northern Thailand. Suranaree J Sci Technol 17(3):277–292Google Scholar
  46. Iranian Census Centre (2007) Iranian cities population. Online available at, http://www.amar.org.ir
  47. Jankowski P, Nyerges T (2001a) Geographic information systems for group decision-making: towards a participatory geographic information science. Taylor & Francis, New York, p 273Google Scholar
  48. Jankowski P, Nyerges T (2001b) GIS-supported collaborative decision-making: results of an experiment. Ann As Am Geogr 91(1):48–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Jankowski P, Richard L (1994) Integration of GIS-based suitability analysis and multicriteria evaluation in a spatial decision support system for route selection. Environ Planning 21(3):326–339Google Scholar
  50. Jankowski P, Nyerges TL, Smith A, Moore TJ, Horvath E (1997) Spatial group choice: a SDSS tool for collaborative spatial decision-making. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 11(6):577–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Jiang H, Eastman JR (2000) Application of fuzzy measures in multi-criteria evaluation in GIS. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 14:173–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Joerin F, Theriault M, Musy A (2001) Using GIS and outranking multicriteria analysis for land-use suitability assessment. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 15:153–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Komac M (2006) A landslide susceptibility model using the analytical hierarchy process method and multivariate statistics in perialpine Slovenia. Geomorphology 74(1–4):17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kritikos T, Davies TRH (2011) GIS-based Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping at northern Evia, Greece. Z dt Ges Geowiss 162:421–434Google Scholar
  55. Kyem PAK (2004) On intractable conflicts participatory GIS applications: the search for consensus amidst competing claims and institutional demands. Ann As Am Geogr 94(1):37–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lee S, Choi J (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and the weight of-evidence model. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 18:789–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lei Z, Jing-feng H (2006) GIS-based logistic regression method for landslide susceptibility mapping in regional scale. J Zhejiang Univ Sci A 7(2):2007–2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Leskinen P (2000) Measurement scales and scale independence in the analytic hierarchy process. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 9:163–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lootsma FA (1993) Scale sensitivity in the multiplicative AHP and SMART. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 2:87–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Makropoulos C, Butler D, Maksimovic C (2003) A fuzzy logic spatial decision support system for urban water management. J Water Resour Planning Manag 129(1):69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Malczewski J (1996) A GIS-based approach to multiple criteria group decision- making. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 10(8):955–971Google Scholar
  62. Malczewski J (1999) GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Wiley, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  63. Malczewski J (2000) On the use of weighted linear combination method in GIS: common and best practice approaches. Trans GIS 4(1):5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Malczewski J (2004) GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview. Prog Planning 62(1):3–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Malczewski J (2006a) GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 20(7):703–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Malczewski J (2006b) Multicriteria decision analysis for collaborative GIS. In: Balram S, Dragicevic S (eds) Collaborative Geographic Information Systems. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, pp 167–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Malczewski J, Rinner C (2005) Exploring multi-criteria decision strategies in GIS with linguistic quantifiers: a case study of residential quality evaluation. J Geogr Syst 7(2):249–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Malczewski J, Chapman T, Flegel C, Walters D, Shrubsole D, Healy MA (2003) GIS-multi-criteria evaluation with ordered weighted averaging (OWA): a case study of developing watershed management strategies. Environ Planning 35:1769–1784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. MANR Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (2008) Land use land cover mapping for Iran, Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  70. Marinoni O (2004) Implementation of the analytical hierarchy process with VBA in ArcGIS. Comput Geosci 30(6):637–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Meng Y, Malczewski J, Boroushaki S (2011) A GIS-Based multicriteria decision analysis approach for mapping accessibility patterns of housing development sites: a case study in Canmore, Alberta. J Geogr Inform Syst 3:50–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mikhailov L (2003) Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgements. Fuzzy Sets Syst 134:365–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. MNR, Ministry of Natural Resources, East Azerbaijan Province (2010) Landslide event report, Tabriz, IranGoogle Scholar
  74. Nyerges TL, Montejano R, Oshiro C, Dadswell M (1997) Group-based geographic information systems for transportation improvement site selection. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 5(6):349–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Oh HJ, Pradhan P (2011) Application of a neuro-fuzzy model to landslide-susceptibility mapping for shallow landslides in a tropical hilly area. Comput Geosci 37(9):1264–1276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Park NW (2011) Application of Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence to GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis. Environ Earth Sci 62:367–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Phua M, Minowa M (2005) A GIS-based multi-criteria decision making approach to forest conservation planning at a landscape scale: a case study in the Kinabalu Area, Sabah, Malaysia. Landsc Urban Planning 71:207–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Prakash TN (2003) Land suitability analysis for agricultural crops: A fuzzy multicriteria decision making approach. MSc thesis, ITC, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  79. Robinson TP, van Klinken DR, Metternicht G (2010) Comparison of alternative strategies for invasive species distribution modelling. Ecol Model 221:2261–2269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15:231–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 437Google Scholar
  82. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1991) Prediction, projection and forecasting. Kluwer, Dordrecht, p 251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Sener S, Sener E, Karaguzel R (2010) Solid waste disposal site selection with GIS and AHP methodology: a case study in Senirkent-Uluborlu (Isparta) Basin, Turkey. J Environ Monit Assess 10:1010–1023Google Scholar
  84. Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  85. Starr MK, Zeleny M (1977) MCDM—state and future of the arts. In: Starr MK, Zeleny M (eds) Multiple criteria decision-making. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 5–29Google Scholar
  86. Thanh LN (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping of the mountainous area in a Luoi District, Thua thien hue province, Vietnam, PhD Thesis, Department of Hydrology & Hydraulic Engineering, University of BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  87. Vaidya OS, Kumar S (2006) Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res 169:1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Van Westen CJ, Soeters R, Sijmons K (2000) Digital geomorphological landslide hazard mapping of the Alpago area, Italy. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2:51–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Van Westen CJ, van Asch TWJ, Soeters R (2006) Landslide hazard and risk zonation-why is it still so difficult? Bull Eng Geol Environ 65:167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Van Westen CJ, Castellanos E, Kuriakose SL (2008) Spatial data for landslide susceptibility, hazard, and vulnerability assessment: an overview. Eng Geol 102(3–4):112–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Vargas LG (1990) An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. Eur J Oper Res 48:2–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Varnes DJ (1984) International association of engineering geology comm. on landslides and other mass movements on slopes: landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice, UNESCO Band 63, ParisGoogle Scholar
  93. Voogd H (1983) Multi-criteria evaluations for urban and regional planning. Princeton University, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  94. Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 8:183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Yager RR (1996) Quantifier guided aggregation using OWA operation. Int J Intell Syst 2(1):49–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Yager RR (1997) On the inclusion of importances in OWA aggregation. In: Yager RR, Kacprzyk J (eds) The ordered weighted averaging operators: theory and applications. Kluwer, Boston, pp 41–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Yahaya S, Ilori C, Whanda JS, Edicha J (2010) Land fill site selection for municipal solid waste management using geographic information system and multicriteria evaluation. Am J Sci Res 10:34–49Google Scholar
  98. Yalcin A (2008) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using analytical hierarchy process and bivariate statistics in Ardesen (Turkey): comparisons of results and confirmations. Catena 72:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physical Geography, Centre for Remote Sensing and GISUniversity of TabrizTabrizIran
  2. 2.Department of Geoinformatics (Z_GIS)University of SalzburgSalzburgAustria

Personalised recommendations