Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Developing a new multi-criteria decision-making for flood prioritization of sub-watersheds using concept of D numbers

  • Research Article - Hydrology and Hydraulics
  • Published:
Acta Geophysica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Floods are one of the most dangerous natural disasters that humanity has ever faced. In this study, a modified version of D number technique as a suitable form of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches was proposed to prioritize flooding in the Sad-Kalan watershed of Iran using some flood related criteria. The proposed method can overcome some shortcomings and uncertainties of the existing MCDM methods. In order to evaluate the performance of the method regarding flood prioritization, its results were compared with the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique as mostly frequently used MCDM method. The findings demonstrate that the modified version of D number method provides better results than AHP method. In spite of inherent advantages of D number method, the advantages of the proposed method in relation to existing MCDM are as follows: 1- considering the local and global importance of used criteria, 2- reducing the uncertainty in decision makers’ judgments using employing the concept of Picture fuzzy-AHP, 3- considering the degree of consistency in evaluation of decision makers into calculations. Furthermore, the method is flexible and can be used in any region of the world.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

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

Abbreviations

MCDM:

Multi-criteria decision-making

AHP:

Analytic hierarchy process

EN:

Entropy of drainage network

TCI:

Topographic control index

SPI:

Stream power index

TWI:

Topographic wetness index

Cc:

Compactness coefficient

DEM:

Digital elevation model

CR:

Consistency ratio

RI:

Random index

CI:

Consistency index

PFNs:

Picture fuzzy numbers

PFWG:

PF weighted geometric mean

PF:

Picture fuzzy

PFAHP:

Picture fuzzy‑analytic hierarchy process

SC:

Score

AC:

Accuracy

References

  • Ahmadisharaf E, Kalyanapu AJ, Chung E-S (2016) Spatial probabilistic multi-criteria decision making for assessment of flood management alternatives. J Hydrol 533:365–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akay H, Baduna Koçyiğit M (2020) Flash flood potential prioritization of sub-basins in an ungauged basin in Turkey using traditional multi-criteria decision-making methods. Soft Comput 24:14251–14263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akbari M, Meshram SG, Krishna R, Pradhan B, Shadeed S, Khedher KM, Sepehri M, Ildoromi AR, Alimerzaei F, Darabi F (2021) Identification of the groundwater potential recharge zones using MCDM models: full consistency method (FUCOM), best worst method (BWM) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Water Resour Manag 35(14):4727–4745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barman BK, Rao CUB, Rao KS, Patel A, Kushwaha K, Singh SK (2021) Geomorphic analysis, morphometric-based prioritization and tectonic implications in Chite Lui river, Northeast India. J Geol Soc India 97:385–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broekhuizen H, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, van Til JA, Hummel JM, IJzerman MJ (2015) A review and classification of approaches for dealing with uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis for healthcare decisions. Pharmacoeconomics 33(5):445–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chitsaz N, Banihabib ME (2015) Comparison of different multi criteria decision-making models in prioritizing flood management alternatives. Water Resour Manag 29(8):2503–2525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • da Silva LBL, Humberto JS, Alencar MH, Ferreira RJP, de Almeida AT (2020) GIS-based multidimensional decision model for enhancing flood risk prioritization in urban areas. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 48:101582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng Y (2012) D numbers: theory and applications. J Inf Comput Sci 9(9):2421–2428

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekmekcioğlu Ö, Koc K, Özger M (2021) Stakeholder perceptions in flood risk assessment: a hybrid fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS approach for Istanbul, Turkey. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 60:102327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Fakharany MA, Hegazy MN, Mansour NM, Abdo AM (2021) Flash flood hazard assessment and prioritization of sub-watersheds in Heliopolis basin, East Cairo, Egypt. Arab J Geosci 14(17):1693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández D, Lutz MA (2010) Urban flood hazard zoning in Tucumán Province, Argentina, using GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Eng Geol 111(1–4):90–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigović L, Pamučar D, Bajić Z, Drobnjak S (2017) Application of GIS-interval rough AHP methodology for flood hazard mapping in urban areas. Water 9(6):360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Broekhuizen H, Til JV (2017) Multi-criteria decision analysis to support healthcare decisions. Springer, New York, pp 67–85

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gündoğdu FK, Duleba S, Moslem S, Aydın S (2021) Evaluating public transport service quality using picture fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and linear assignment model. Appl Soft Comput 100:106920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry S, Laroche A-M, Hentati A, Boisvert J (2020) Prioritizing flood-prone areas using spatial data in the Province of New Brunswick, Canada. Geosciences 10(12):478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang H, Chen X, Wang X, Wang X, Liu L (2019) A depression-based index to represent topographic control in urban pluvial flooding. Water 11(10):2115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilderomi AR, Vojtek M, Vojteková J, Pham QB, Kuriqi A, Sepehri M (2022) Flood prioritization integrating picture fuzzy-analytic hierarchy and fuzzy-linear assignment model. Arab J Geosci 15(13):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanani-Sadat Y, Arabsheibani R, Karimipour F, Nasseri M (2019) A new approach to flood susceptibility assessment in data-scarce and ungauged regions based on GIS-based hybrid multi criteria decision-making method. J Hydrol 572:17–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubler S, Derigent W, Voisin A, Robert J, Le Traon Y, Viedma EH (2018) Measuring inconsistency and deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices using the knowledge-based consistency index. Knowl Based Syst 162:147–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlicke C, Seebauer S, Hudson P, Begg C, Bubeck P, Dittmer C, Grothmann T, Heidenreich A, Kreibich H, Lorenz DF (2020) The behavioral turn in flood risk management, its assumptions and potential implications. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Water 7(3):e1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy JK, Hartmann J, Li KW, An Y, Asgary A (2007) Multi-criteria decision support systems for flood hazard mitigation and emergency response in urban watersheds 1. JAWRA J Am Water Resour Assoc 43(2):346–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ligmann-Zielinska A, Jankowski P (2014) Spatially-explicit integrated uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of criteria weights in multicriteria land suitability evaluation. Environ Model Softw 57:235–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Zhang K, Li Z, Liu Z, Wang J, Huang P (2020) A hybrid runoff generation modelling framework based on spatial combination of three runoff generation schemes for semi-humid and semi-arid watersheds. J Hydrol (Amsterdam) 590:125440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linh NTT, Pandey M, Janizadeh S, Bhunia GS, Norouzi A, Ali S, Ahmadi K (2022) Flood susceptibility modeling based on new hybrid intelligence model: Optimization of XGboost model using GA metaheuristic algorithm. Adv Space Res 69(9):3301–3318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luu C, Von Meding J, Kanjanabootra S (2018) Assessing flood hazard using flood marks and analytic hierarchy process approach: a case study for the 2013 flood event in Quang Nam, Vietnam. Nat Hazards 90(3):1031–1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malekinezhad H, Sepehri M, Pham QB, Hosseini SZ, Meshram SG, Vojtek M, Vojteková J (2021) Application of entropy weighting method for urban flood hazard mapping. Acta Geophys 69(3):841–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meshram SG, Ilderomi AR, Sepehri M, Santos CAG (2022) Flood prioritization based on fuzzy best worse multi-criteria decision-making method. Arab J Geosci 15(16):1374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nafchi RF, Pardis Y, Raeisi VH, Ostad-Ali-Askari K, Jafar N, Bizhan M (2022) Correction to: eco-hydrologic stability zonation of dams and power plants using the combined models of SMCE and CEQUALW2. Appl Water Sci 12(4):55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-021-01563-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nasiri Khiavi A, Vafakhah M, Sadeghi SH (2023) Flood-based critical sub-watershed mapping: comparative application of multi-criteria decision making methods and hydrological modeling approach. In: Stochastic environmental research and risk assessment, pp 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-023-02417-0

  • Nawaz F, Asadabadi MR, Janjua NK, Hussain OK, Chang E, Saberi M (2018) An MCDM method for cloud service selection using a Markov chain and the best-worst method. Knowl Based Syst 159:120–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noor-E-Alam M, Lipi TF, Hasin MAA, Ullah AS (2011) Algorithms for fuzzy multi expert multi criteria decision making (ME-MCDM). Knowl Based Syst 24(3):367–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olabode OF, Oluwaniyi OE, Adebayo QA, Asiwaju-Bello YA (2020) Morpho-lithostructural analysis of Ala River basin for flood risk assessment: geospatial techniques intervention. Earth Sci Inf 13:773–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostad-Ali-Askari K (2022a) Developing an optimal design model of furrow irrigation based on the minimum cost and maximum irrigation efficiency. Appl Water Sci 12(7):144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostad-Ali-Askari K (2022b) Review of the effects of the anthropogenic on the wetland environment. Appl Water Sci 12(12):260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pamučar D, Stević Ž, Sremac S (2018) A new model for determining weight coefficients of criteria in MCDM models: full consistency method (FUCOM). Symmetry 10(9):393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pham QB, Ali SA, Bielecka E, Calka B, Orych A, Parvin F, Łupikasza E (2022) Flood vulnerability and buildings’ flood exposure assessment in a densely urbanised city: comparative analysis of three scenarios using a neural network approach. Natural Hazards 113(2):1043–1081

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prasad RN, Pani P (2017) Geo-hydrological analysis and sub watershed prioritization for flash flood risk using weighted sum model and Snyder’s synthetic unit hydrograph. Model Earth Syst Environ 3:1491–1502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J (2015) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53:49–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T (1999) Fundamentals of the analytic network process. University of Pittsburgh, ISAHP, Japan, pp 1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayyad D, Ghasemieh H, Naserianasl Z (2022) Prioritization and spatial analysis of flood potential based on FUZZY-AHP approach (Case study: Ghamsar watershed). J Geogr Environ Hazards. https://doi.org/10.22067/geoeh.2022.76678.1226

  • Sellak H, Ouhbi B, Frikh B (2018) A knowledge-based outranking approach for multi-criteria decision-making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Appl Soft Comput 67:625–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sepehri M, Ildoromi AR, Malekinezhad H, Ghahramani A, Ekhtesasi MR, Cao C, Kiani-Harchegani M (2019) Assessment of check dams’ role in flood hazard mapping in a semi-arid environment. Geomat Nat Haz Risk 10(1):2239–2256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sepehri M, Ghahramani A, Kiani-Harchegani M, Ildoromi AR, Talebi A, Rodrigo-Comino J (2021) Assessment of drainage network analysis methods to rank sediment yield hotspots. Hydrol Sci J 66(5):904–918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanidis S, Stathis D (2013) Assessment of flood hazard based on natural and anthropogenic factors using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Nat Hazards 68(2):569–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart TJ, Durbach I (2016) Multiple criteria decision analysis. Springer, New York, pp 467–496

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Supalla R, Klaus B, Yeboah O, Bruins R (2002) A game theory approach to deciding who will supply instream flow water 1. JAWRA J Am Water Resour Assoc 38(4):959–966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tariq MAUR, Farooq R, van de Giesen N (2020) A critical review of flood risk management and the selection of suitable measures. Appl Sci 10(23):8752

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • UNISDR C (2015) The human cost of natural disasters: A global perspective

  • Vafakhah M, Loor MH, Pourghasemi SH, Katebikord A (2020) Comparing performance of random forest and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system data mining models for flood susceptibility mapping. Arab J Geosci 13:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Valipour M (2015) Retracted: comparative evaluation of radiation-based methods for estimation of potential evapotranspiration. J Hydrol Eng 20(5):04014068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valipour M (2016) Optimization of neural networks for precipitation analysis in a humid region to detect drought and wet year alarms. Meteorol Appl 23(1):91–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickers NJ (2017) Animal communication: when i’m calling you, will you answer too? Curr Biol 27(14):R713–R715

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vojtek M, Vojteková J (2019) Flood susceptibility mapping on a national scale in Slovakia using the analytical hierarchy process. Water 11(2):364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao F (2018) A novel multi-criteria decision making method for assessing health-care waste treatment technologies based on D numbers. Eng Appl Artif Intell 71:216–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang S, Guo Y, Wang Z (2015) Correlation between flood frequency and geomorphologic complexity of rivers network—a case study of Hangzhou China. J Hydrol 527:113–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inform Cont 8(3):338–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng J, Egger C, Lienert J (2016) A scenario-based MCDA framework for wastewater infrastructure planning under uncertainty. J Environ Manag 183:895–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No external funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Watershed Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran

    Mehdi Sepehri & Ali Talebi

  2. Faculty of Natural Sciences, Institute of Earth Sciences, University of Silesia in Katowice, Będzińska Street 60, 41-200, Sosnowiec, Poland

    Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh

  3. Watershed Research Department. Hamedan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Hamedan, Iran

    Hadi Nazri Pouya

  4. Agricultural Engineering Research Department. Hamedan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Hamedan, Iran

    Reza Bahramloo

  5. Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran

    Jalal Sadeghian

  6. Hydrology and Water Resources Development Department, Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran

    Bagher Ghermezcheshme & Hamidreza Peyrovan

  7. Laboratory of Environmental Sciences and Climate Change, Institute for Computational Science and Artificial Intelligence, Van Lang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

    Phong Nguyen Thanh

  8. Faculty of Environment, School of Technology, Van Lang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

    Phong Nguyen Thanh

Authors
  1. Mehdi Sepehri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hadi Nazri Pouya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Reza Bahramloo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jalal Sadeghian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bagher Ghermezcheshme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ali Talebi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hamidreza Peyrovan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Phong Nguyen Thanh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phong Nguyen Thanh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

This manuscript has not been published or presented elsewhere in part or entirety and is not under consideration by another journal. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publish

Not applicable.

Additional information

Edited by Dr. Mohammad Valipour (ASSOCIATE EDITOR) / Dr. Michael Nones (CO-EDITOR-IN-CHIEF).

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sepehri, M., Linh, N.T.T., Pouya, H.N. et al. Developing a new multi-criteria decision-making for flood prioritization of sub-watersheds using concept of D numbers. Acta Geophys. 72, 2027–2039 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-023-01119-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-023-01119-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation