Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A new approach to use AHP in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study at Yenice (Karabuk, NW Turkey)

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the parameter effects in preparing landslide susceptibility maps with a data-driven approach and to adapt this approach to analytical hierarchy process (AHP). For this purpose, at the first stage, landslide inventory of an area located in the Western Black Sea region of Turkey covering approximately 567 km2 was prepared, and a total of 101 landslides were mapped. In order to assess the landslide susceptibility, a total of 13 parameters were considered as the input parameters: slope, aspect, plan curvature, topographical elevation, vegetation cover index, land use, distance to drainage, distance to roads, distance to structural elements, distance to ridges, stream power index, sediment transport capacity index, and wetness index. AHP was selected as the major assessment methodology since the adapted approach and AHP work in data pairs. Adapted to AHP, a similarity relation–based approach, namely landslide relation indicator (LRI) for parameter selection method, was also proposed. AHP and parametric effect analyses were performed by the proposed approach, and seven landslide susceptibility maps were produced. Among these maps, the best performance was gathered from the landslide susceptibility map produced by 9 parameter combinations using area under curve (AUC) approach. For this map, the AUC value was calculated as 0.797, while the others ranged between 0.686 and 0.771. According to this map, 38.3 % of the study area was classified as having very low, 8.5 % as low, 15.0 % as moderate, 20.3 % as high, and 17.9 % as very high landslide susceptibility, respectively. Based on the overall assessments, the proposed approach in this study was concluded as objective and applicable and yielded reasonable results.

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
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abella EAC, Van Westen CJ (2008) Qualitative landslide susceptibility assessment bymulticriteria analysis: a case study from San Antonio del Sur, Guantánamo, Cuba. Geomorphology 94:453–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at İzmir, Turkey. Landslides 9:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgün A, Türk N (2010) Landslide susceptibility mapping for Ayvalik (Western Turkey) and its vicinity by multicriteria decision analysis. Environ Earth Sci 61:595–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgün A, Sezer EA, Nefeslioglu HA, Gokceoglu C, Pradhan B (2012) An easy-to-use MATLAB program (MamLand) for the assessment of landslide susceptibility using a Mamdani fuzzy algorithm. Comp Geosci 38(1):23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgün A, Dağ S, Bulut F (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a landslide-prone area (Findikli, NE of Turkey) by likelihood-frequency ratio and weighted linear combination models. Environ Geol 54:1127–1143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58:1–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander D (1993) Natural disasters. UCL Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphology 65:15–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Marui H, Kanno T (2005) Landslides in Sado Island of Japan: Part II. GIS-based susceptibility mapping with comparisons of results from two methods and verifications. Eng Geol 81:432–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bai SB, Wang J, Lü GN, Zhou PG, Hou SS, Xu SN (2009) GIS-based and data-driven bivariate landslide-susceptibility mapping in the three gorges area, China. Pedosphere 19(1):14–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barredo JI, Benavides A, Hervas J, Van Westen CJ (2000) Comparing heuristic landslide hazard assessment techniques using GIS in the Trijana basin, Gran Canaria Island, Spain. JAG 2(1):9–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrol Sci Bull 24:43–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bui DT, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Hoa Binh province (Vietnam) using an adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system and GIS. Comp Geosci. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2011.10.031

    Google Scholar 

  • Can T, Nefeslioglu HA, Gökçeoğlu C, Sönmez H, Duman TY (2005) Susceptibility assessments of shallow earthflows triggered by heavy rainfall at three catchments by logistic regression analyses. Geomorphology 72:250–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cascini L (2008) Applicability of landslide susceptibility and hazard zoning at different scales. Eng Geol 102:164–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corominas J, Copons R, Vilaplana JM, Altimir J, Amigó J (2003) Integrated landslide susceptibility analysis and hazard assessment in the principality of Andorra. Nat Haz 30:421–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruden DM, Varnes DJ (1996) Landslide types and processes. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides: investigation and mitigation. Transportation research board, Special report 247. National Academy Press, Washington, pp 36–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastman JR (2009) Idrisi Taiga, guide to GIS and image processing, user’s guide (Ver. 15). Clark University Press, USA, 328 pp

  • Ercanoglu M (2005) Landslide susceptibility assessment of SE Bartin (West Black Sea region, Turkey) by artificial neural networks. Nat Haz Earth Sys Sci 5:979–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gökçeoğlu C (2002) Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (north of Yenice, NW Turkey) by fuzzy approach. Env Geol 41:720–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gökçeoğlu C (2004) Use of fuzzy relations to produce landslide susceptibility map of a landslide prone area (West Black Sea Region, Turkey). Eng Geol 75:229–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Temiz FA (2011) Application of logistic regression and fuzzy operators to landslide susceptibility assessment in Azdavay (Kastamonu, Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 64:949–964

    Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gökçeoğlu C, Van Asch ThWJ (2004) Landslide susceptibility zoning north of Yenice (NW Turkey) by multivariate statistical techniques. Nat Haz 32:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Kaşmer Ö, Temiz N (2008) Adaptation and comparison of expert opinion to analytical hierarchy process for landslide susceptibility mapping. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:565–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ermini L, Catani F, Casagli N (2005) Artificial neural networks applied to landslide susceptibility assessment. Geomorphology 66:327–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fell R, Corominas J, Bonnard C, Cascini L, Leroi E, Savage WZ (2008) Guidelines for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land use planning. Eng Geol 102:85–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glade T, Crozier MJ (2005) Landslide hazard and risk: concluding comment and perspectives. In: Glade T, Anderson M, Crozier M (eds) Landslide hazard and risk. Wiley, Chichester, pp 767–774

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez H, Kavzoğlu T (2005) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural networks in Jabonosa River Basin, Venezuela. Eng Geol 78:11–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Ardizzone F, Cardinali M, Galli M, Reichenbach P, Rossi M (2008) Distribution of landslides in the Upper Tiber River basin, central Italy. Geomorphology 96:105–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasekiogullari GD (2010) Assessment of parameter effects in producing landslide susceptibility maps. Hacettepe University Geological Engineering Department, MSc Thesis, Ankara (in Turkish) http://tumas.meteoroloji.gov.tr. Accessed 03 January 2009

  • Huang PH, Tsai JS, Lin WT (2010) Using multiple-criteria decision-making technique for eco-environmental vulnerability assessment: a case study on the Chi-Jia-Wan Stream watershed, Taiwan. Environ Monit Assess 168:141–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Sarkar S, Gupta RP (2006) A comparative study of conventional, ANN black box, fuzzy and combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedures for landslide susceptibility zonation in Darjeeling Himalayas. Eng Geol 85:347–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komac M (2006) A landslide susceptibility model using analytical hierarchy process method and multivariate statistics in perialpine Slovenia. Geomorphology 74:17–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Talib JA (2005) Probabilistic landslide susceptibility and factor effect analysis. Environ Geol 47:982–990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Ryu JH, Won JS, Park HJ (2004) Determination and application of the weights for landslide susceptibility mapping using an artificial neural network. Eng Geol 71:289–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meusburger K, Alewell C (2008) Impacts of anthropogenic and environmental factors on the occurrence of shallow landslides in an alpine catchment (Urseren Valley, Switzerland). Nat Haz Earth Syst Sci 8:509–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore ID, Wilson JP (1992) Length–slope factors for the revised universal soil loss equation: simplified method for estimation. J Soil Wat Cons 47:423–428

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore ID, Grayson RB, Ladson AR (1991) Digital terrain modeling: a review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydro Proc 5:3–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreiras SM (2005) Landslide susceptibility zonation in the Rio Mendoza Valley, Argentina. Geomorphology 66:345–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MTA (2002) 1/25000 scale geological database (in Turkish)

  • Nandi A, Shakoor A (2009) A GIS-based landslide susceptibility evaluation using bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses. Eng Geol 110:11–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Durmaz S (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of tectonic Kelkit Valley (Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey). Geomorphology 94:401–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh JJ, Pradhan B (2011) Application of a neuro-fuzzy model to landslide susceptibility mapping in a tropical hilly area. Comp Geosci 37(9):1264–1276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poudyal CP, Chang C, Oh HJ, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility maps comparing frequency ratio and artificial neural networks: a case study from the Nepal Himalaya. Environ Earth Sci 61:1049–1064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2010a) Landslide susceptibility mapping of a catchment area using frequency ratio, fuzzy logic and multivariate logistic regression approaches. J Ind Soc Rem Sens 38(2):301–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2010b) Remote sensing and GIS-based landslide hazard analysis and cross-validation using multivariate logistic regression model on three test areas in Malaysia. Advncs Space Res 45(10):1244–1256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2010c) Application of an advanced fuzzy logic model for landslide susceptibility analysis. Int J Comp Int Sys 3(3):370–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2011) Use of GIS based fuzzy relations and its cross application to produce landslide susceptibility maps in three test areas in Malaysia. Environ Earth Sci 63(2):329–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Buchroithner MF (2010) Comparison and validation of landslide susceptibility maps using an artificial neural network model for three test areas in Malaysia. Environ Eng Geosci 2:107–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment and factor effect analysis: backpropagation artificial neural networks and their comparison with frequency ratio and bivariate logistic regression modelling. Environ Model Soft 25:747–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Pirasteh P (2010) Comparison between prediction capabilities of neural network and fuzzy logic techniques for landslide susceptibility mapping. Distr Advncs 3(2):26–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S, Buchroithner MF (2009) Use of geospatial data and fuzzy algebraic operators to landslide-hazard mapping. Appl Geomat 1:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S, Buchroithner MF (2010a) Remote sensing and GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis and its cross-validation in three test areas using a frequency ratio model. Photogramm Fernerkundung Geoinformation 1:17–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Sezer E, Gokceoglu C, Buchroithner MF (2010b) Landslide susceptibility mapping by neuro-fuzzy approach in a landslide prone area (Cameron Highland, Malaysia). IEEE Trans Geosci Rem Sens 48(12):4164–4177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross TJ (1995) Fuzzy logic with engineering applications. Mc-Graw-Hill, New Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse JW, Haas RH, Deering DW, Schell JA, Harlan JC (1974) Monitoring the vernal advancement and retrogradation (Green Wave Effect) of natural vegetation, NASA/GSFC Type III Final Report, Greenbelt

  • Ruff M, Czurda K (2008) Landslide susceptibility analysis with a heuristic approach in the Eastern Alps (Vorarlberg, Austria). Geomorphology 94:314–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15:234–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL, Vargas GL (2001) Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Kluwer, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sezer E, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2011) Manifestation of an adaptive neuro-fuzzy model on landslide susceptibility mapping: Klang valley, Malaysia. Exp Systms App 38(7):8208–8219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soeters R, Van Westen CJ (1996) Slope instability recognition, analysis and zonation. In: Turner AK, Schuster R (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation. Transportation Research Board Special report, 247. National Academy Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Strahler AN (1957) Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Trans Am Geophys Union 38:913–920

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiery Y, Malet JP, Sterlacchini S, Puissant A, Maquaire O (2007) Landslide susceptibility assessment by bivariate methods at large scales: application to a complex mountainous environment. Geomorphology 92:38–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuysuz O, Aksay A, Yiğitbaş E (2004) Batı Karadeniz Bölgesi litostratigrafi birimleri. Stratigrafi Komitesi litostratigrafi birimleri serisi-1. MTA Genel Müdürlüğü Eğitim Serisi, Ankara (in Turkish)

  • Van Westen CJ (2000) The modelling of landslide hazards using GIS. Surv Geophys 21:241–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ, Castellanos E, Kuriakose SL (2008) Spatial data for landslide susceptibility, hazard, and vulnerability assessment: an overview. Eng Geol 102:112–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang WD, Xie CM, Du XG (2009) Landslides susceptibility mapping based on geographical information system, GuiZhou, south-west China. Environ Geol 58:33–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalçın A (2008) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using analytical hierarchy process and bivariate statistics in Ardesen (Turkey): comparisons of results and confirmations. Catena 72:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalçın A, Bulut F (2007) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and digital photogrammetric techniques: a case study from Ardesen (NE-Turkey). Nat Haz 41:201–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeşilnacar E, Topal T (2005) Landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison of logistic regression and neural networks methods in a medium scale study, Hendek region (Turkey). Eng Geol 79:251–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yılmaz I (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and their comparison: a case study from Kat landslides (Tokat-Turkey). Comp Geosci 35(6):1125–1138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yılmaz I (2010) Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping methodologies for Koyulhisar, Turkey: conditional probability, logistic regression, artificial neural networks, and support vector machine. Environ Earth Sci 61:821–836

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is supported by the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (Project No: 108Y034). The authors would like to thank the Editor and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, which highly increased the quality of the paper. The authors would also like to thank Ms. Sibel Doğanay for her kind help and suggestions in English editing process.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Geological Engineering Department, Hacettepe University, 06800, Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey

    Gökçe Deniz Hasekioğulları & Murat Ercanoglu

Authors
  1. Gökçe Deniz Hasekioğulları
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Murat Ercanoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Murat Ercanoglu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hasekioğulları, G.D., Ercanoglu, M. A new approach to use AHP in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study at Yenice (Karabuk, NW Turkey). Nat Hazards 63, 1157–1179 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0218-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0218-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation