Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

AHP and TOPSIS based flood risk assessment- a case study of the Navsari City, Gujarat, India

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Flooding is one of the major natural catastrophic disasters that causes massive environmental and socioeconomic destruction. The magnitude of losses due to floods has prompted researchers to focus more on robust and comprehensive modeling approaches for alleviating flood damages. Recently developed multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods are being widely used to construct decision-making process more participatory, rational, and efficient. In this study, two statistical MCDM approaches, namely the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), have been employed to generate flood risk maps together with hazard and vulnerability maps in a GIS framework for Navsari city in Gujarat, India, to identify the vulnerable areas that are more susceptible to inundation during floods. The study area was divided into 10 sub areas (i.e., NC1 to NC10) to appraise the degree of flood hazard, vulnerability and risk intensities in terms of areal coverage and categorized under 5 intensity classes, viz., very low, low, moderate, high, and very high. A total of 14 flood indicators, seven each for hazard (i.e., elevation, slope, drainage density, distance to river, rainfall, soil, and flow accumulation) and vulnerability (i.e., population density, female population, land use, road network density, household, distance to hospital, and literacy rate) were considered for evaluating the flood risk. Flood risk coverage evaluated from the two approaches were compared with the flood extent computed from the actual flood data collected at 36 random locations. Results revealed that the TOPSIS approach estimated more precise flood risk coverage than the AHP approach, yielding high R2 values, i.e., 0.78 to 0.95 and low RMSE values, i.e., 0.95 to 0.43, for all the 5 risk intensity classes. The sub areas identified under “very high” and “high” risk intensity classes (i.e., NC1, NC4, NC6, NC7, NC8, and NC10) call for immediate flood control measures with a view to palliate the extent of flood risk and consequential damages. The study demonstrates the potential of AHP and TOPSIS integrated with GIS towards precise identification of flood-prone areas for devising effective flood management strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in [USGS] at [https:/ earthexplorer.usgs.gov/].

Code availability

The software, ArcGIS that supports the findings of this study is openly available at [https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/get-started/install-and-sign-in-to-arcgis-pro.htm].

References

  • Abdelkarim, A., Al-Alola, S. S., Alogayell, H. M., Mohamed, S. A., & Alkadi, I. I. (2020). Integration of GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis and analytic hierarchy process to assess flood hazard on the Al-Shamal train Pathway in Al-Qurayyat Region. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Water (switzerland), 12, 1702. https://doi.org/10.3390/W12061702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdrabo, K. I., Kantoush, S. A., Saber, M., et al. (2020). Integrated methodology for urban flood risk mapping at the microscale in ungauged regions: A case study of Hurghada. Egypt. Remote Sensing, 12, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12213548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdulkareem, J. H., Pradhan, B., Sulaiman, W. N. A., & Jamil, N. R. (2018). Review of studies on hydrological modelling in Malaysia. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 4, 1577–1605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdulrazzak, M., Elfeki, A., Kamis, A. S., Kassab, M., Alamri, N., Noor, K., & Chaabani, A. (2018). The impact of rainfall distribution patterns on hydrological and hydraulic response in arid regions: Case study Medina. Saudi Arabia. Arabian Journal of Geosciences11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-4043-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asgher, M. S., Kumar, N., & Kumari, M. (2022). Groundwater potential mapping of Tawi River basin of Jammu District, India, using geospatial techniques. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-09841-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, M. (2016). A Service of zbw Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Application of TOPSIS Method for Analysis of Sustainable Development in European Union Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen. Toruń: Institute of Economic Research (IER).

  • Bhola, P. K., Leandro, J., & Disse, M. (2019). Hazard maps with differentiated exceedance probability for flood impact assessment. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences Discussions1-22. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2019-158

  • Brunner, G. W. (2016). Combined 1D and 2D Modeling with HEC-RAS. US Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Hydrologic Engineering Center. World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2015: Floods, Droughts, and Ecosystems - Proceedings of the 2015 World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 1432–1443. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479162.141

  • Chabok, M., Asakereh, A., Bahrami, H., & Jaafarzadeh, N. O. (2020). Selection of MSW landfill site by fuzzy-AHP approach combined with GIS: Case study in Ahvaz. Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08395-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, S., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2019). Assessing flood risk using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and geographical information system (GIS): Application in Coochbehar district of West Bengal, India. Natural Hazards, 99, 247–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03737-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danesh, G., Monavari, S. M., & Omrani, G. A. (2019). Compilation of a model for hazardous waste disposal site selection using GIS-based multi-purpose decision-making models. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7243-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Brito, M. M., & Evers, M. (2016). Multi-criteria decision-making for flood risk management: A survey of the current state of the art. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 16, 1019–1033. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-1019-2016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Paiva, R. C. D., Buarque, D. C., & Collischonn, W. (2013). Large-scale hydrologic and hydrodynamic modeling of the Amazon River basin. Water Resources Research, 49, 1226–1243. https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekmekcioğlu, Ö., & Koc, K., & Özger, M. (2021). Stakeholder perceptions in flood risk assessment : A hybrid fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS approach for Istanbul, Turkey. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 60, 102327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsheikh, R., & Ouerghi, S. (2015). Flood risk map based on GIS, and multi criteria techniques (case study Terengganu Malaysia). Journal of Geographic Information System, 7, 348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farooq, M., Shafique, M., & Khattak, M. (2019). Flood hazard assessment and mapping of River Swat using HEC-RAS 2D model and high-resolution 12-m TanDEM-X DEM (WorldDEM). Natural Hazards 97, 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03638-9.

  • Fekete, A. (2009). Validation of a social vulnerability index in context to river-floods in Germany. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9(2), 393–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández, D. S., & Lutz, M. A. (2010). Urban flood hazard zoning in Tucumán Province, Argentina, using GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Engineering Geology, 111(1–4), 90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.12.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, V. (2011). Integrating Multicriteria Analysis and Geographic Information Systems: A survey and classification of the literature. 74th Meeting of the European Working Group Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding.

  • Ghosh, A., & Kar, S. K. (2018). Application of analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for flood risk assessment: a case study in Malda district of West Bengal, India. Natural Hazards, 94(1), 349–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, R. E. (1945). Erosional development of stream and their drainage basin: Hydrogeological approach to quantitative morphology. Bulletin of Geological Society of America, 56, 275–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • https://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/340-navsari.html

  • Hu, S., Cheng, X., & Zhou, D. Z. H. (2017). GIS-based flood risk assessment in suburban areas: A case study of the Fangshan District, Beijing. Natural Hazards, 87, 1525–1543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2828-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, W., Zhang, H., Zhu, L., et al. (2020). In-situ study of the spatiotemporal variability of sediment erodibility in a microtidal estuary. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2019.106530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutter, G. (2006). Strategies for flood risk management–A process perspective. In Flood risk management: Hazards, vulnerability and mitigation measures (pp. 229-246). Springer, Dordrecht.

  • Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. pp 58–191.

  • Ishizaka, A., & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 14336–14345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Javadnejad, F., Waldron, B., & Hill, A. (2017). LITE Flood: Simple GIS-based mapping approach for real-time redelineation of multifrequency floods. Natural Hazards Review, 18, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jozaghi, A., Alizadeh, B., Hatami, M., Flood, I., Khorrami, M., Khodaei, N., & Ghasemi Tousi, E. (2018a). A comparative study of the AHP and TOPSIS techniques for dam site selection using GIS: A case study of Sistan and Baluchestan Province. Iran. Geosciences (switzerland), 8(12), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8120494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jozaghi, A., Alizadeh, B., Hatami, M., et al. (2018b). A comparative study of the AHP and TOPSIS techniques for dam site selection using GIS: A case study of Sistan and Baluchestan Province. Iran. Geosciences (switzerland), 8, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8120494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafle, M. R., & Shakya, N. M. (2018). Multi-criteria decision making approach for flood risk and sediment management in Koshi Alluvial Fan. Nepal. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 10, 596–619. https://doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.2018.106034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karamouz, M., Taheri, M., Khalili, P., & Chen, X. (2019). Building infrastructure resilience in coastal flood risk management. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 145, 04019004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazakis, N. (2015). Assessment of flood hazard areas at a regional scale using an index-based approach and analytical hierarchy process: Application in Rhodope-Evros. Science of the Total Environment, 538, 555–563.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Khattak, M. S., Anwar, F., & Saeed, T. U. (2016). Floodplain mapping using HEC-RAS and ArcGIS: A case study of Kabul River. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 41, 1375–1390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-015-1915-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, F., Wang, L., & Zhao, Y. (2017). Evolvement rules of basin flood risk under low-carbon mode. Part II: Risk assessment of flood disaster under different land use patterns in the Haihe basin. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-6102-4.

  • Luu, C., von Meding, J., & Mojtahedi, M. (2019). Analyzing Vietnam’s national disaster loss database for flood risk assessment using multiple linear regression-TOPSIS. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 40.

  • Maddahi, Z., Jalalian, A., Zarkesh, M. K., & Honarjo, N. (2017). Land suitability analysis for rice cultivation using a GIS-based fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach: Central part of Amol district. Iran. Soil and Water Research, 12(1), 29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Memon, N., Patel, D. P., Bhatt, N., & Patel, S. B. (2020). Integrated framework for flood relief package ( FRP ) allocation in semiarid region : A case of Rel River flood. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meral, A., & Eroğlu, E. (2021). Evaluation of flood risk analyses with AHP, Kriging, and weighted sum models: Example of Çapakçur, Yeşilköy, and Yamaç microcatchments. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09282-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meshram, S. G., Alvandi, E., Meshram, C., Kahya, E., & Al-Quraishi, A. (2020a). Application of SAW and TOPSIS in prioritizing watersheds. Water Resources Management, 34(2), 715–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-019-02470-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meshram, S. G., Alvandi, E., & Meshram, C. (2020b). Application of SAW and TOPSIS in prioritizing watersheds. Water Resources Management, 34, 715–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-019-02470-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moghadas, M., Asadzadeh, A., Vafeidis, A., Fekete, A., & Kötter, T. (2019a). A multi-criteria approach for assessing urban flood resilience in Tehran. Iran. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 35, 101069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moghadas, M., Asadzadeh, A., & Vafeidis, A. (2019b). A multi-criteria approach for assessing urban flood resilience in Tehran. Iran. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 35, 101069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mojtahedi, S. M. H., & Oo, B. L. (2016). Coastal buildings and infrastructure flood risk analysis using multi-attribute decision-making. Journal of Flood Risk Management, 9, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/JFR3.12120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morshedi, H., & Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process Want more papers like this?. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process.

  • Mulliner, E., Malys, N., & Maliene, V. (2016). Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability. Omega, 59, 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nasiri, H., Boloorani, A. D., & Sabokbar, H. A. F. (2013). Determining the most suitable areas for artificial groundwater recharge via an integrated PROMETHEE II-AHP method in GIS environment (case study: Garabaygan Basin, Iran). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 185, 707–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-012-2586-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, H. X., Nguyen, A. T., Ngo, A. T., & Phan, V. T. (2020). applied sciences A hybrid approach using GIS-based fuzzy AHP – TOPSIS Assessing Flood Hazards along the. 1–21.

  • Nuthammachot, N., & Stratoulias, D. (2021). Multi-criteria decision analysis for forest fire risk assessment by coupling AHP and GIS: Method and case study. Environment, Development and Sustainability1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01394-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyimbili, P. H., Erden, T., & Karaman, H. (2018). Integration of GIS, AHP and TOPSIS for earthquake hazard analysis. Natural Hazards, 92, 1523–1546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3262-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papaioannou, et al. (2015). Multi-criteria analysis framework for potential flood prone areas mapping. Water Resources Management, 29, 399–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11269-014-0817-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, A., Singh, M. M., Singh, S. K., Kushwaha, K., & Singh, R. (2022). AHP and TOPSIs based sub-watershed prioritization and tectonic analysis of Ami River Basin, Uttar Pradesh. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 98(3), 423–430. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12594-022-1995-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pathan, A. I., & Agnihotri, P. G. (2020). 2-D Unsteady flow modelling and inundation mapping for lower region of purna basin using HEC-RAS.

  • Pathan, A. I., Agnihotri, P. G., Patel, D. P., & Prieto, C. (2021). Identifying the efficacy of tidal waves on flood assessment study—A case of coastal urban flooding. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 14(20), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-08538-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pathan, A. I., Agnihotri, P. G., Patel, D. P., & Prieto, C. (2022). Mesh grid stability and its impact on flood inundation through (2D) hydrodynamic HEC-RAS model with special use of Big Data platform—A study on Purna River of Navsari city. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 15(7), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-09813-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patrikaki, O. (2018). Assessing flood hazard at river basin scale with an index-based approach: The case of Mouriki, Greece. Geosciences (Switzerland) 8.

  • Pirdavani, A., Brijs, T., & Wets, G. (2010). A multiple criteria decision-making approach for prioritizing accident hotspots in the absence of crash data. Transport Reviews, 30, 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640903279345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahmati, O., Zeinivand, H., & Besharat, M. (2016). Flood hazard zoning in Yasooj region, Iran, using GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 7, 1000–1017. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2015.1045043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangari, V. A., & Umamahesh, N. V. B. C. (2019). Assessment of inundation risk in urban floods using HEC RAS 2D. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 5, 1839–1851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-019-00641-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, R. (2007). Decision making in the manufacturing environment: Using graph theory and fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods.

  • Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical, 15, 234–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: planning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahoo, S. N., & Sreeja, P. (2017). Development of flood inundation maps and quantification of flood risk in an urban catchment of brahmaputra river. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part a: Civil Engineering3. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJRUA6.0000822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ShahiriParsa, A., Noori, M., Heydari, M., & Rashidi, M. (2016). Floodplain zoning simulation by using HEC-RAS and CCHE2D models in the Sungai Maka river. Air, Soil and Water Research, 9, 55–62. https://doi.org/10.4137/ASWR.S36089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shao, Z., Jahangir, Z., & Yasir, Q. M. (2020). Identification of potential sites for a multi-purpose dam using a dam suitability stream model. Water (switzerland)12. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12113249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirani. K., & Zakerinejad, R. (2021). Watershed prioritization for the identification of spatial hotspots of flood risk using the combined TOPSIS-GIS based approach: A case study of the Jarahi-Zohre catchment in Southwest Iran. AUC GEOGRAPHICA 56:120–128. https://doi.org/10.14712/23361980.2021.6.

  • Sutrisno, D., Rahadiati, A., & Rudiastuti, A. W. D. R. (2020). Urban coastal flood-prone mapping under the combined impact of tidal wave and heavy rainfall: A proposal to the existing national standard. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9, 525. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9090525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, et al. (2018). Assessment of flood susceptible areas using spatially explicit, probabilistic multi-criteria decision analysis. Journal of Hydrology, 558, 114–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tehrany, S., et al. (2017). GIS-based spatial prediction of flood prone areas using standalone frequency ratio, logistic regression, weight of evidence and their ensemble techniques. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 8, 1538–1561. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2017.1362038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaidya, O. (2006). Research SK-EJ of operational, undefined analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. Elsevier.

  • Vignesh, K. S., Anandakumar, I., Ranjan, R., & Borah, D. (2020). Flood vulnerability assessment using an integrated approach of multi-criteria decision-making model and geospatial techniques. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 7, 767–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-020-00997-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, Z., Liu, S., Zhong, G., & Cai, Y. (2017). Flood disaster and flood control measurements in Shanghai. Natural Hazards Review, 18, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, F., & Zhong, P. A. S. Y. (2018). Coastal buildings and infrastructure flood risk analysis using multi-attribute decision-making. Journal of Flood Risk Management, 100, 236–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zolekar, R. B., & Bhagat, V. S. (2015). Multi-criteria land suitability analysis for agriculture in hilly zone: Remote sensing and GIS approach. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 118, 300–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou, Q., Zhou, J., Zhou, C., et al. (2013). Comprehensive flood risk assessment based on set pair analysis-variable fuzzy sets model and fuzzy AHP. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 27, 525–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00477-012-0598-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge anonymous reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions that have greatly enhanced the quality of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat, Gujarat, India

    Azazkhan Ibrahimkhan Pathan & Prasit Girish Agnihotri

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Aligarh Muslim University, Uttar Pradesh, Aligarh, India

    Saif Said

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, Pandit Deena Dayal Energy University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India

    Dhruvesh Patel

Authors
  1. Azazkhan Ibrahimkhan Pathan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prasit Girish Agnihotri
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saif Said
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dhruvesh Patel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Azazkhan Ibrahimkhan Pathan.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Hereby, I, Azazkhan Ibrahimkhan Pathan, consciously assure that for the manuscript titled “AHP and TOPSIS Based Flood Risk Assessment- A Case Study of the Navsari City, Gujarat, India” the following is fulfilled: (1) This material is the authors’ own original work, which has not been previously published elsewhere. (2) The paper reflects the authors’ own research and analysis in a truthful and complete manner.

Consent to participate

This study does not require any consent to participate since it does not involve any human related subject like human transplantation etc.

Consent for publication

I, the undersigned, give my consent for the publication of identifiable details, which can include photograph(s) and/or videos and/or case history and/or details within the text (“Material”) to be published in the above Journal and Article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pathan, A.I., Girish Agnihotri, P., Said, S. et al. AHP and TOPSIS based flood risk assessment- a case study of the Navsari City, Gujarat, India. Environ Monit Assess 194, 509 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10111-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10111-x

Keywords