A new approach for forest fire risk modeling using fuzzy AHP and GIS in Hyrcanian forests of Iran

Original Paper
  • 220 Downloads

Abstract

The presented research was performed in order to model the fire risk in a part of Hyrcanian forests of Iran. The fuzzy sets integrated with analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in a decision-making algorithm using geographic information system (GIS) was used to model the fire risk in the study area. The used factors included four major criteria (topographic, biologic, climatic, and human factors) and their 17 sub-criteria. Fuzzy AHP method was used for estimating the importance (weight) of the effective factors in forest fire. Based on this modeling method, the expert ideas were used to express the relative importance and priority of the major criteria and sub-criteria in forest fire risk in the study area. The expert ideas mean was analyzed based on fuzzy extent analysis. Then, the fuzzy weights of criteria and sub-criteria were obtained. The major criteria models and fire risk model were presented based on these fuzzy weights. On the other hand, the spatial data of 17 sub-criteria were provided and organized in GIS to obtain the sub-criteria maps. Each sub-criterion map was converted to raster format and it was reclassified based on risk of its classes to fire occurrence. Then, all sub-criteria maps were converted to fuzzy format using fuzzy membership function in GIS. The fuzzy map of each major criterion (topographic, biologic, climatic, and human criteria) was obtained by weighted overlay of its sub-criteria fuzzy maps considering to major criterion model in GIS. Finally, the fuzzy map of fire risk was obtained by weighted overlay of major criteria fuzzy maps considering to fire risk model in GIS. The actual fire map was used for validation of fire risk model and map. The results showed that the fuzzy estimated weights of human, biologic, climatic, and topographic criteria in fire risk were 0.301, 0.2595, 0.2315, and 0.208, respectively. The results obtained from the fire risk map showed that 38.74% of the study area has very high and high risk for fire occurrence. Results of validation of the fire risk map showed that 80% of the actual fires were located in the very high and high risk areas in fire risk map. It can show the acceptable accuracy of the fire risk model and map obtained from fuzzy AHP in this study. The obtained fire risk map can be used as a decision support system for predicting of the future fires in the study area.

Keywords

Fire risk modeling Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (fuzzy AHP) Geographic information system (GIS) District Three of Neka-Zalemroud (DTNZ) forests 

References

  1. Allgower B, Carlson JD, Wagtendonk JWV (2003) Introduction to fire danger rating and remote sensing-will remote sensing enhance wild land fire danger rating? In: Chuvieco E (ed) Wild land fire danger estimation and mapping, the role of remote sensing data. World Scientific, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso-Betanzos A, Fontenla-Romero O, Guijarro-Berdiñas B, Hernández-Pereira E, Canda E, Jimenez J, Luis Legido J, Muñiz S, Paz-Andrade C, Paz-Andrade MI (2002) A neural network approach for forest fire risk estimation. In: van Harmelen F (ed) Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Lyon, France, 643–647.Google Scholar
  3. Atesoglu A (2014) Forest hazard identifying, mapping using satellite imagery-geographic information system and analytic hierarchy process: Bartin-Turkey. J Environ Prot Ecol 15(2):715–725Google Scholar
  4. Bonazountas M, Kallidromitou D, Kassomenos PA, Passas N (2005) Fire risk analysis. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 11:617–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang DY (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95:649–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen SJ, Hwang CL (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chuvieco E, Agaudo I, Cocero D, Riano D (2003b) Design of an empirical index to estimate fuel moisture content from NOAA-AVHRR analysis in forest fire danger studies. Int J Remote Sens 24:1621–1637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chuvieco E, Aguado I, Jurdao S, Pettinari ML, Yebra M, Salas J, Hantson S, de la Riva J, Ibarra P, Rodrigues M, Echeverria M, Azqueta D, Roman MV, Bastarrika A, Martinez S, Recondo C, Zapico E, Martinez-Vega FJ (2014) Integrating geospatial information into fire risk assessment. Int J Wildland Fire 23:606–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chuvieco E, Allgower B, Salas J (2003a) Integration of physical and human factors in fire danger assessment. In: Chuvieco E (ed) Wild land fire danger estimation and mapping, the role of remote sensing data. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 197–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chuvieco E, Congalton RG (1989) Application of remote sensing and geographic information systems to forest fire hazard mapping. Remote Sens Environ 29:147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cortez PG, Morais A (2007) A data mining approach to predict forest fires using meteorological data. Proceedings of the 13th Portuguese Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Portugal, 512–523.Google Scholar
  12. Cox E (1995) Fuzzy logic for business and industry. Charles River Media.Google Scholar
  13. Dong XU, Li-min D, Guo-fan S, Lei T, Hui W (2005) Forest fire risk zone mapping from satellite images and GIS for Baihe Forestry Bureau, Jilin, China. J For Res 16(3):169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Erten E, Kurgun V, Musaolu N (2005) Forest fire risk zone mapping from satellite imagery and GIS, a case study. Civil Engineering Faculty, Remote Sensing Division, p 7pGoogle Scholar
  15. Eskandari S (2015) Investigation on relationship between climate change and fire in the forests of Golestan forests. Iranian Journal of Forest and Range Protection Research 13(1):1–10Google Scholar
  16. Eskandari S, Chuvieco E (2015) Fire danger assessment in Iran based on geospatial information. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 42:57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eskandari S, Jalilvand H (2012) Climate change and its impact on number and area of fire of forest areas of Eastern Mazandaran. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Climate Change and Tree Chronology, Sari, Iran, 15 p.Google Scholar
  18. Eskandari S, Oladi J, Jalilvand H, Saradjian MR (2013a) Role of human factors on fire occurrence in District Three of Neka Zalemroud forests- Iran. World Applied Sciences Journal 27(9):1146–1150Google Scholar
  19. Eskandari S, Oladi J, Jalilvand H, Saradjian MR (2013b) Detection of fire high-risk areas in Northern forests of Iran using Dong model. World Applied Sciences Journal 27(6):770–773Google Scholar
  20. Eskandari S, Oladi J, Jalilvand H, Saradjian MR (2015) Prediction of future forest fires using the MCDM method. Pol J Environ Stud 24(5):2309–2314Google Scholar
  21. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) (1986) Wild land fire management terminology. FAO Forestry Paper, RomeGoogle Scholar
  22. Goncalves ZJ, Lourenco L (1990) Meteorological index of forest fire risk in the Portuguese mainland territory. Proceedings of the International Conference on Forest Fire Research, Coimbra, Portugal, 1–14.Google Scholar
  23. Hernandez-Leal PA, Arbelo M, Gonzalez-Calvo A (2006) Fire risk assessment using satellite data. Adv Space Res 37:741–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jaiswal RK, Mukherjee S, Raju DK, Saxena R (2002) Forest fire risk zone mapping from satellite imagery and GIS. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 4:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jurdao S, Chuvieco E, Arevalillo JM (2012) Modelling fire ignition probability from satellite estimates of live fuel moisture content. Fire Ecology 8(1):77–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kahraman C, Ruan D, Dogan I (2003) Fuzzy group decision-making for facility location selection. Inf Sci 157:135–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leung LC, Cao D (2001) On the efficacy of modeling multi-attribute decision making problem using AHP and Sinarchy. Eur J Oper Res 132(1):39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lozano FJ, Suárez-Seoane S, Kelly M, Luis E (2008) A multi-scale approach for modeling fire occurrence probability using satellite data and classification trees: a case study in a mountainous Mediterranean region. Remote Sens Environ 112:708–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Malczewski J (1999) GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis. Wiley, NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Malczewski J (2002) Fuzzy screening for land suitability analysis. Geogr Environ Model 6:27–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martinez J, Vega-Garcia C, Chuvieco E (2009) Human-caused wildfire risk rating for prevention planning in Spain. J Environ Manag 90:1241–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maselli F, Romanelli S, Bottai L, Zipoli G (2003) Use of NOAA-AVHRR NDVI images for the estimation of dynamic fire risk in Mediterranean areas. Remote Sens Environ 86:187–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mazandaran Natural Resources Administration (MNRA) (2010) Forestry plan of DTNZ forests. Iran’s Forests, Rangeland and Watershed organization, MazandaranGoogle Scholar
  34. Mazandaran Natural Resources Administration (MNRA) (2014) Statistics and data of fire in 2010 in Mazandaran, sari. Protection unit of MNRA, MazandaranGoogle Scholar
  35. Merrill DF, Alexander ME (1987) Glossary of Forest fire management terms. National Research Council of Canada, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  36. Perry DA (1998) The scientific basis of forestry. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 29:435–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Robinson V (2003) A perspective on the fundamentals of fuzzy sets and their use in geographic information systems. Trans GIS 7:3–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rollins MG, Keane RE, Parsons RA (2004) Mapping fuels and fire regimes using remote sensing, ecosystem simulation and gradient modeling. Ecol Appl 14(1):75–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rothermel RC (1983) How to predict the spread and intensity of forest and range fires. USDA Forest Service.Google Scholar
  40. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting and resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Saaty TL (2000) Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process. RWS, PittsburgGoogle Scholar
  42. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1993) Experiments on rank preservation and reversal in relative measurement. Math Comput Model 17:13–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sakr GE, Elhajj IH (2010) Artificial intelligence for forest fire prediction: a comparative study. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Forest Fire Research, Coimbra, pp 653–661Google Scholar
  44. Satir O, Berberoglu S, Donmez C (2016) Mapping regional forest fire probability using artificial neural network model in a Mediterranean forest ecosystem. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 7(5):1645–1658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sitanggang IS, Yaakob R, Mustapha N, Ainuddin AN (2013) Predictive models for hotspots occurrence using decision tree algorithm and logistic regression. J Appl Sci 13(2):252–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sowmya SV, Somashekar RK (2010) Application of remote sensing and geographical information system in mapping forest fire risk zone at Bhadra wildlife sanctuary, India. J Environ Biol 31(6):969–974Google Scholar
  47. Stolle F, Chomitz KM, Lambin EF, Tomich TP (2003) Human ecological intervention and the role of forest fires in human ecology. For Ecol Manag 179:277–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stolzenburg W (2001) Fire in the rainforest. Nature Conservancy 31:22–27Google Scholar
  49. Taylor SW, Alexander ME (2006) Science, technology and human factors in fire danger rating: the Canadian experience. International Journal of Wild land Fire 15:121–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Teodoro AC, Duarte L (2013) Forest fire risk maps: a GIS open source application—a case study in Norwest of Portugal. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 27(4):699–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vadrevu KP, Eaturu A, Badarinath KVS (2009) Fire risk evaluation using multicriteria analysis, a case study. Environment Monitoring and Assessment 166(1–4):223239 Google Scholar
  52. Vahidnia MH, Alesheikh AA, Alimohammadi A (2009) Hospital site selection using fuzzy AHP and its derivatives. J Environ Manag 90:3048–3056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vakalis D, Sarimveis H, Kiranoudis CT, Alexandridis A, Bafas GV (2004) A GIS based operational system for wildland fire crisis management, I. Mathematical modelling and simulation. Appl Math Model 28(4):389–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Van Wagner CE (1993) Prediction of crown fire behavior in two stands of Jack Pine. Can J For Res 18:818–820Google Scholar
  55. Vasconcelo MJ, Silva S, Tome M, Alvim M, Perelra JMC (2001) Spatial prediction of fire ignition probabilities: comparing logistic regression and neural networks. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 67(1):73–81Google Scholar
  56. Vasilakos C, Kalabokidis K, Hatzopoulos J, Matsinos I (2009) Identifying wildland fire ignition factors through sensitivity analysis of a neural network. Nat Hazards 50(1):125–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Vazquez A, Moreno JM (2001) Spatial distribution of forest fires in Sierra de Gredos (central Spain). For Ecol Manag 147(1):55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wang YM, Elhag TMS, Hau ZS (2006) A modified fuzzy logarithmic least squares method for fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157(23):3055–3071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wu CR, Lin CT, Chen HC (2007) Optimal selection of location for Taiwanese hospitals to ensure a competitive advantage by using the analytic hierarchy process and sensitivity analysis. Build Environ 42:1431–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yanar TA, Akyurek A (2006) The enhancement of the cell-based GIS analyses with fuzzy processing capabilities. Inf Sci 176:1067–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ying MW, Liu J, Elhag TMS (2008) An integrated AHP-DEA methodology for bridge risk assessment. Comput Ind Eng 54(3):513–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Information and Content 8:338–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zumbrunnen T, Pezzattic GB, Menéndezd P, Bugmann H, Bürgia M, Conederac M (2011) Weather and human impacts on forest fires: 100 years of fire history in two climatic regions of Switzerland. For Ecol Manag 261:2188–2199CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forest Research DivisionResearch Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO)TehranIran

Personalised recommendations