Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The optimal dam site selection using a group decision-making method through fuzzy TOPSIS model

  • Published:
Environment Systems and Decisions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The complex and controversial task of selecting a dam site in a river basin can be successfully achieved using science-informed multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques. In this paper, we describe the application of the group fuzzy TOPSIS model for optimal ranking of the case study of Kandoleh dam sites in Kermanshah province, Iran, involving 18 input criteria. In this study, decision-making committee was made up of 20 involved decision makers. The comments of four non-biased, external experts in dam site selection were also used. The triangular fuzzy numbers were used to apply experts’ opinions on the selection criteria. In total, four alternative sites were assessed based on the technical, economic, social and environmental considerations and the data were analyzed using fuzzy TOPSIS MCDM model. Ranking results were compared with multi-criteria decision-making models, including the ELimination and Choice Expressing the REality and simple additive weighting. This logical, open and transparent framework provides a science-informed decision-making approach for complex problems such as optimal dam site selection. Finally, using sensitivity analysis, local studies and group discussions, we demonstrated the multiple benefits of the proposed novel method for a science-informed, open and transparent method for optimal ranking of the dam site candidates.

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+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(reproduced with the permission from Kahraman et al. 2003)

Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Afshari A, Mojahed M, Yusuff RM (2010) Simple additive weighting approach to personnel selection problem. Int J Innov Manag Technol 1(5):511

    Google Scholar 

  • Atieh M, Gharabaghi B, Rudra R (2015) Entropy-based neural networks model for flow duration curves at ungauged sites. J Hydrol 529(3):1007–1020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atieh M, Taylor G, Sattar AM, Gharabaghi B (2017) Prediction of flow duration curves for ungauged basins. J Hydrol 545:383–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benayoun R, Roy B, Sussman N (1966) Manual de reference du programme ELECTRE. Note de synthese et Formation, No. 25, Direction Scientifique SEMA, Paris, France

  • Cegan JC, Filion AM, Keisler JM, Linkov I (2017) Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: literature review. Environ Syst Decis 37:123–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen CT (2000) Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst 114(1):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen JK, Chen IS (2010) Using a novel conjunctive MCDM approach based on DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP, and TOPSIS as an innovation support system for Taiwanese higher education. Expert Syst Appl 37(3):1981–1990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen SJ, Hwang CL (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Figuera J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis, state of the art surveys. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gazendam E, Gharabaghi B, McBean E, Whiteley H, Kostaschuk R (2009) Ranking of waterways susceptible to adverse stormwater effects. Can Water Resour J 34(3):205–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multi-attribute decision making: methods and applications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman C, Cebeci U, Ulukan Z (2003) Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logist Inf Manag 16(6):382–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman C, Onar S, Oztaysi B (2015) Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making: a literature review. Int J Comput Intell Syst 8(4):637–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kodikara PN, Perera BJC, Kularathna MDUP (2010) Stakeholder preference elicitation and modelling in multi-criteria decision analysis: a case study on urban water supply. Eur J Oper Res 206(1):209–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurth MH, Larkin S, Keisler JM, Linkov I (2017) Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis: use in government agencies. Environ Syst Decis 37:134–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon KR (1968) Decisionmaking among multiple-attribute alternatives: a survey and consolidated approach (No. RM-4823-ARPA). RAND CORP SANTA MONICA CA

  • Minatour Y, Khazaie J, Ataei M (2013) Earth dam site selection using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP): a case study in the west of Iran. Arab J Geosci 6(9):3417–3426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minatour Y, Bonakdari H, Zarghami M, Bakhshi M (2015a) Water supply management using an extended group fuzzy decision-making method: a case study in north-eastern Iran. Appl Water Sci 5(3):291–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minatour Y, Khazaie J, Ataei M, Javadi AA (2015b) An integrated decision support system for dam site selection. Sci Iran Transa A Civ Eng 22(2):319

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi S, Makoui A, Raissi S, Mojtahedi S (2012) A multi-criteria decision-making approach with interval numbers for evaluating project risk responses. Int J Eng 25(2):121–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Netto OC, Parent E, Duckstein L (1996) Multicriterion design of long-term water supply in southern France. J Water Res Plan Manag 122(6):403–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemczynowicz J (1999) Urban hydrology and water management—present and future challenges. Urban Water 1(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okeola OG, Sule BF (2012) Evaluation of management alternatives for urban water supply system using Multicriteria Decision Analysis. J King Saud Univ Eng Sci 24(1):19–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2002) Multicriteria planning of post-earthquake sustainable reconstruction. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 17(3):211–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podvezko V (2011) The comparative analysis of MCDA methods SAW and COPRAS. Inzinerine Ekonomika Eng Econ 22(2):134–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers M, Bruen M (1998) A new system for weighting environmental criteria for use within ELECTRE III. Eur J Oper Res 107(3):552–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roghanian E, Rahimi J, Ansari A (2010) Comparison of first aggregation and last aggregation in fuzzy group TOPSIS. Appl Math Model 34(12):3754–3766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1996) Decision making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Satty TL (1980) The analytical hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon CE (2001) A mathematical theory of communication. ACM Sigmobile Mob Comput Commun Rev 5(1):3–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srdjevic B, Medeiros YD (2008) Fuzzy AHP assessment of water management plans. Water Resour Manag 22(7):877–894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tecle A, Fogel M, Duckstein L (1988) Multicriterion selection of wastewater management alternatives. J Water Res Plan Manag 114(4):383–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tzimopoulos C, Balioti V, Evangelides C (2013). Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method for dam selection. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on environmental science and technology, CEST Athens, Greece

  • Wang TC, Chang TH (2007) Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment. Expert Syst Appl 33(4):870–880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang YJ, Lee HS (2007) Generalizing TOPSIS for fuzzy multiple-criteria group decision-making. Comput Math Appl 53(11):1762–1772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang JW, Cheng CH, Huang KC (2009) Fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS for supplier selection. Appl Soft Comput 9(1):377–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weng SQ, Huang GH, Li YP (2010) An integrated scenario-based multi-criteria decision support system for water resources management and planning: a case study in the Haihe River Basin. Expert Syst Appl 37(12):8242–8254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon KP, Hwang CL (1995) Multiple attribute decision making: an introduction, vol 104. Sage Publications, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann HJ (2001) Fuzzy set theory and its applications. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zyoud SH, Fuchs-Hanusch D (2017) A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques. Expert Syst Appl 78:158–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran

    Amir Noori & Hossein Bonakdari

  2. Environmental Research Center, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran

    Khosro Morovati

  3. School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada

    Bahram Gharabaghi

Authors
  1. Amir Noori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hossein Bonakdari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Khosro Morovati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bahram Gharabaghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hossein Bonakdari.

Appendices

Appendix 1: TFNs of experts’ opinion about the criteria importance

See Table 15.

Table 15 TFNs of experts’ opinion about the criteria importance
Full size table

Appendix 2: TFNs of experts’ opinion for evaluation of the alternatives in relation to criteria

See Table 16.

Table 16 TFNs of experts’ opinion for evaluation of the alternatives in relation to criteria
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Noori, A., Bonakdari, H., Morovati, K. et al. The optimal dam site selection using a group decision-making method through fuzzy TOPSIS model. Environ Syst Decis 38, 471–488 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9673-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9673-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation