Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a flood vulnerability assessment of watershed using integration of decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory, analytical network process, and fuzzy theories

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Among natural disasters, flood is increasingly recognized as a serious worldwide concern that causes the most damages in parts of agriculture, fishery, housing, and infrastructure and strongly affects economic and social activities. Universally, there is a requirement to increase our conception of flood vulnerability and to outstretch methods and tools to assess it. Spatial analysis of flood vulnerability is part of non-structural measures to prevent and reduce flood destructive effects. Hence, the current study proposes a methodology for assessing the flood vulnerability in the area of watershed in a severely flooded area of Iran (i.e., Kashkan Watershed). First interdependency analysis among criteria (including population density (PD), livestock density (LD), percentage of farmers and ranchers (PFR), distance to industrial and mining areas (DTIM), distance to tourist and cultural heritage areas (DTTCH), land use, distance to residential areas (DTRe), distance to road (DTR), and distance to stream (DTS)) was conducted using the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method. Hence, the cause and effect factors and their interaction levels in the whole network were investigated. Then, using the interdependency relationships among criteria, a network structure from flood vulnerability factors to determine their importance of factors was constructed, and the analytical network process (ANP) was applied. Finally, with the aim to overcome ambiguity, reduce uncertainty, and keep the data variability, an appropriate fuzzy membership function was applied to each layer by analyzing the relationship of each layer with flood vulnerability. Importance analysis indicated that land use (0.197), DTS (0.181), PD (0.180), DTRe (0.140), and DTR (0.138) were the most important variables. The flood vulnerability map produced by the integrated method of DEMATEL-ANP-fuzzy showed that about 19.2% of the region has a high to very high flood vulnerability.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aminyavari S, Saghafian B, Sharifi E (2019) Assessment of precipitation estimation from the NWP models and satellite products for the spring 2019 severe floods in Iran. Remote Sens 11(23):2741

    Google Scholar 

  • Azareh A, Rafiei SE, Choubin B, Barkhori S, Shahdadi A, Adamowski J, Shamshirband S (2019) Incorporating multi-criteria decision-making and fuzzy-value functions for flood susceptibility assessment. Geocarto International 1:21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2019.1695958

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulomytis VTG, Zuffo AC, Imteaz MA (2019) Detection of flood influence criteria in ungauged basins on a combined Delphi-AHP approach. Operations Research Perspectives 6:100116

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger J (1997) Methods for and approaches to evaluating susceptibility of ecological systems to hazardous chemicals. Environ Health Perspect 105:843–848

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Choubin B, Moradi E, Golshan M, Adamowski J, Sajedi-Hosseini F, Mosavi A (2019) An ensemble prediction of flood susceptibility using multivariate discriminant analysis, classification and regression trees, and support vector machines. Sci Total Environ 651:2087–2096

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chung SH, Lee AHL, Pearn WL (2005a) Analytic network process (ANP) approach for product mix planning in semiconductor fabricator. Int J Prod Econ 96:15–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung SH, Lee AHL, Pearn WL (2005b) Analytic network process (ANP) approach for product mix planning in semiconductor fabricator. Int J Prod Econ 96:15–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Connor RF, Hiroki K (2005) Development of a method for assessing flood vulnerability. Water Sci Technol 51(5):61–67

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Costache R, Bui DT (2020) Identification of areas prone to flash-flood phenomena using multiple-criteria decision-making, bivariate statistics, machine learning and their ensembles. Sci Total Environ 712:136492

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Costache R, Pham QB, Sharifi E, Linh NTT, Abba SI, Vojtek M, Vojteková J, Nhi PTT, Khoi DN (2020) Flash-flood susceptibility assessment using multi-criteria decision making and machine learning supported by remote sensing and GIS techniques. Remote Sens 12(1):106

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter SL (1996) Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Prog Hum Geogr 20(4):529–539

    Google Scholar 

  • Davvodi A (2009) On inconsistency of a pairwise comparison matrix. International Journal of Industrial Mathematics 1(4):343–350

    Google Scholar 

  • de Brito MM, Evers M, Höllermann B (2017) Prioritization of flood vulnerability, coping capacity and exposure indicators through the Delphi technique: a case study in Taquari-Antas basin, Brazil. International journal of disaster risk reduction 24:119–128

    Google Scholar 

  • de Brito MM, Evers M, Almoradie ADS (2018) Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 22(1):373–390

    Google Scholar 

  • Demir V, Kisi O (2016) Flood hazard mapping by using geographic information system and hydraulic model: Mert River, Samsun. Turkey Advances in Meteorology

  • Fekete A (2009) Validation of a social vulnerability index in context to river-floods in Germany. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(2):393–403

    Google Scholar 

  • Field CB, Barros VR, Mach K, Mastrandrea M (2014) Climate change 2014–Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability: regional aspects. Cambridge University Press. Contrib Work Gr II to fifth Assess Rep Intergov panel Clim Chang

  • Gabus A, Fontela E (1972) World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland, pp 1–8

  • Geravand F, Hosseini SM, Ataie-Ashtiani B (2020) Influence of river cross-section data resolution on flood inundation modeling: case study of Kashkan river basin in western Iran. J Hydrol 584:124743

    Google Scholar 

  • Getahun YS, Gebre SL (2015) Flood hazard assessment and mapping of flood inundation area of the Awash River basin in Ethiopia using GIS and HEC-GeoRAS/HEC-RAS model. Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering 5(4):1

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo EL, Zhang ZQ, Ren XH et al (2014) Integrated risk assessment of flood disaster based on improved set pair analysis and the variable fuzzy set theory in central Liaoning Province, China.Nat. Hazards Journal 74:947–965

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong H, Tsangaratos P, Ilia I, Liu J, Zhu A-X, Chen W (2018) Application of fuzzy weight of evidence and data mining techniques in construction of flood susceptibility map of Poyang County. China Sci Total Environ 625:575–588

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini FS, Choubin B, Mosavi A, Nabipour N, Shamshirband S, Darabi H, Haghighi AT (2020) Flash-flood hazard assessment using ensembles and Bayesian-based machine learning models: application of the simulated annealing feature selection method. Sci Total Environ 711:135161

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Islam, A.R.M.T., Talukdar, S., Mahato, S., Kundu, S., Eibek, K.U., Pham, Q.B., Kuriqi, A. and Linh, N.T.T., 2020. Flood susceptibility modelling using advanced ensemble machine learning models. Geoscience Frontiers.

  • Jabbari A, Bae D-H (1626) Application of artificial neural networks for accuracy enhancements of real-time flood forecasting in the Imjin Basin. Water 2018:10

    Google Scholar 

  • JAMAB (1999) Comprehensive Assessment of National Water Resources: Karkheh River Basin. JAMAB Consulting Engineers in Association with Ministry of Energy, Iran

  • Joakim E, Doberstein B (2013) Policy Recommendations for reducing vulnerability to disasters in Canada: perspectives from practitioners in Waterloo Region, Ontario. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy 4:274–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Karmaoui A, Balica SF, Messouli M (2016) Analysis of applicability of flood vulnerability index in Pre-Saharan region, a pilot study to assess flood in Southern Morocco. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci Discuss 2:1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellens W, Zaalberg R, Neutens T, Vanneuville W, De Maeyer P (2011) An analysis of the public perception of flood risk on the Belgian coast. Risk Analysis: An International Journal 31(7):1055–1068

    Google Scholar 

  • Khadivi MR, FatemGhomi SMT (2011) Solid waste facilities location using of analytical network process and data envelopment analysis approaches. Waste Manag 32:1258–1265

    Google Scholar 

  • Khosravi K, Pham BT, Chapi K, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Revhaug I, Prakash I, Bui DT (2018) A comparative assessment of decision trees algorithms for flash flood susceptibility modeling at Haraz watershed, northern Iran. Sci Total Environ 627:744–755

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, D., Bhattacharjya, R.K. 2020. Estimation of integrated flood vulnerability index for the Hilly

  • Lee G, Jun KS, Chung ES (2013) Integrated multi-criteria flood vulnerability approach using fuzzy TOPSIS and Delphi technique. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13(5):1293

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim J, Lee K-S (2018) Flood mapping using multi-source remotely sensed data and logistic regression in the heterogeneous mountainous regions in North Korea. Remote Sens 10:1036

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin CT, Lee C, Wu CS (2009) Optimizing a marketing expert decision process for the private hotel. Expert Syst Appl 36:5613–5619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Xu Z, Chen F, Chen F, Zhang L (2019) Flood hazard mapping and assessment on the Angkor World Heritage Site. Cambodia Remote Sens 11:98

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luu C, von Meding J (2018) A Flood Risk Assessment of Quang Nam. Vietnam using spatial multicriteria decision analysis Water 10:461

    Google Scholar 

  • Modarres R, Sarhadi A, Burn DH (2016) Changes of extreme drought and flood events in Iran. Glob Planet Chang 144:67–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Nachappa TG, Piralilou ST, Gholamnia K, Ghorbanzadeh O, Rahmati O, Blaschke T (2020) Flood susceptibility mapping with machine learning, multi-criteria decision analysis and ensemble using Dempster Shafer Theory. Journal of Hydrology, p 125275

  • National Statistics Center of Iran (2016) General Population and Housing Census and Agricultural Census. https://www.amar.org.ir/

  • Ouma YO, Tateishi R (2014a) Urban flood vulnerability and risk mapping using integrated multi-parametric AHP and GIS: methodological overview and case study assessment. Water 6(6):1515–1545

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouma YO, Tateishi R (2014b) Urban flood vulnerability and risk mapping using integrated multi-parametric AHP and GIS: methodological overview and case study assessment. Water 6(6):1515–1545

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozdemir MS (2005) Validity and inconsistency in the analytic hierarchy process. Appl Math Comput 161(3):707–720

    Google Scholar 

  • Patial JP, Savangi A, Singh OP, Singh AK, Ahmad T (2008) Development of a GIS interface for estimation of runoff from watersheds. Water Resour Manag 22(221):1239

    Google Scholar 

  • Petit-Boix A, Sevigne-Itoiz E, Rojas-Gutierrez LA, Barbassa AP, Josa A, Rieradevall J, Gabarrell X (2017) Floods and consequential life cycle assessment: integrating flood damage into the environmental assessment of stormwater Best management practices. J Clean Prod 162:601–608

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Region of Uttarakhand India (n.d.) J Hazard Toxic Radioact Waste 24(4):04020051

  • Saaty, T.L., 2001. Decision making with the analytic network process (ANP) and its super decisions software: the national missile defense (NMD) example. ISAHP 2001 proceedings 2-4.

  • Saaty, T.L., 2005. Theory and applications of the analytic network process: decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA 4922 Ellsworth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.

  • Sadeghi-Pouya A, Nouri J, Mansouri N, Kia-Lashaki A (2017) An indexing approach to assess flood vulnerability in the western coastal cities of Mazandaran, Iran. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 22:304–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahoo S, Dhar A, Kar A (2016) Environmental vulnerability assessment using Grey Analytic Hierarchy Process based model. Environ Impact Assess Rev 56:145–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Sajedi-Hosseini F, Choubin B, Solaimani K, Cerdà A, Kavian A (2018) Spatial prediction of soil erosion susceptibility using FANP: application of the fuzzy DEMATEL approach. Land Degrad Dev. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3058

  • Samanlioglu F, Aya Z (2016) Fuzzy ANP-based PROMETHEE II approach for evaluation of machine tool alternatives. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30:2223–2235

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang X, Li J, Liu M, Liu W, Hong H (2020) Flood susceptibility assessment based on a novel random Naïve Bayes method: a comparison between different factor discretization methods. Catena 190:104536

    Google Scholar 

  • Tehrany MS, Lee M-J, Pradhan B, Jebur MN, Lee S (2014) Flood susceptibility mapping using integrated bivariate and multivariate statistical models. Environ Earth Sci 72:4001–4015

    Google Scholar 

  • Tehrany MS, Pradhan B, Jebur MN (2015) Flood susceptibility analysis and its verification using a novel ensemble support vector machine and frequency ratio method. Stoch Env Res Risk A 29:1149–1165

    Google Scholar 

  • Termeh SVR, Kornejady A, Pourghasemi HR, Keesstra S (2018) Flood susceptibility mapping using novel ensembles of adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system and metaheuristic algorithms. Sci Total Environ 615:438–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Tummala VR, Wan YW (1994) On the mean random inconsistency index of analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Comput Ind Eng 27(1-4):401–404

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR). 2009. Making disaster risk reduction gender sensitive: policy and practical guidelines. http://repo.floodalliance.net/jspui/44111/1124

  • Yang W, Xu K, Lian J, Ma C, Bin L (2018) Integrated flood vulnerability assessment approach based on TOPSIS and Shannon entropy methods. Ecol Indic 89:269–280

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express their gratitude to the National Statistics Center of Iran and the Iranian Water Resource Management Company (IWRMC) for providing required data (mentioned in the paper).

Availability of data and materials

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, S.K.S., upon reasonable request.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Reclamation of Arid and Mountainous Regions Department, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran

    Farzaneh Sajedi Hosseini, Shahram Khalighi Sigaroodi, Ali Salajegheh & Alireza Moghaddamnia

  2. Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Department, West Azarbaijan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Urmia, Iran

    Bahram Choubin

Authors
  1. Farzaneh Sajedi Hosseini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shahram Khalighi Sigaroodi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ali Salajegheh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alireza Moghaddamnia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bahram Choubin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, FSH; data preparation, FSH; formal analysis, FSH, AS, and BC; investigation, FSH, AM, and AS; methodology, FSH and SKS; project administration, FSH and SKS; supervision, SKS; validation, SKS; visualization, FSH and BC; writing (original draft), FSH and BC; and writing (review and editing), SKS and AM

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shahram Khalighi Sigaroodi.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable

Consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues

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

Hosseini, F.S., Sigaroodi, S.K., Salajegheh, A. et al. Towards a flood vulnerability assessment of watershed using integration of decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory, analytical network process, and fuzzy theories. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 62487–62498 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14534-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14534-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation