Comparison of different multi-criteria decision-making methods in flood prioritization of Kashafrood sub-basins

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• Maryam Zare ¹
• Mahmood Azari ²
• Mohsen Rezaei Arefi ³

¹ MSc Student in Watershed Science and Engineering, Department of Range and Watershed Management, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

² Associate Professor in Watershed Science and Engineering, Department of Range and Watershed Management, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

³ Assistant Professor in Geomorphology, Department of Geography Education, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran.

10.22067/geoeh.2024.88777.1498

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Flooding is one of the most destructive environmental phenomena, causing significant human and socioeconomic losses worldwide every year. Over the past two decades, the frequency of floods worldwide has increased by more than 40%. Between 1995 and 2015, approximately 109 million people were affected by floods annually, with damages amounting to 58 billion Euros (75 billion USD) annually (Khosravi et al., 2019). . In Iran, floods are the most dangerous natural phenomenon, causing significant human and financial losses in various parts of the country annually. Historically, floods have been recognized as the most frequent, deadly, and costly natural hazard (Hejazi, Andariani, Almaspour & Mokhtari Asl, 2015).
Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods have been implemented in diverse areas of water management, including evaluating flood management options, optimizing resource allocation, and assessing flood risk potential. Compared to models based on physical watershed characteristics, MCDM methods require less detailed information and generally provide high prediction accuracy (Dou et al., 2015). Therefore, this study aims to assess the flood risk of the Kashafrood River sub-basins using morphometric indices and various MCDM methods.
Material and Methods
The study area is located between 9°E longitude and 35°38´ to 37°N latitude, covering an area of 15,650 square kilometers. This applied research integrates data analysis, geographic information systems (GIS), morphometric parameters, and multi-criteria decision analysis techniques. Data analysis was conducted using ArcGIS and Excel software.
Morphometric data were extracted and analyzed to enable pairwise comparisons for hierarchical and network analysis methods, calculating the relative importance and validity of parameters.
The TOPSIS method, introduced by Yun in 1980 and further developed by Yun and Wang in 1981, is widely used in multi-indicator decision-making. The VIKOR method, first introduced by Aperivik in 1979, focuses on selecting and ranking alternatives based on conflicting criteria (Mardani, Zavadskas, Govindan, Amat Senin & Jusoh, 2016). The ELECTRE method, developed by Bernard Roy in the 1960s, uses dominance relationships to compare alternatives.
Validation of the models was performed using percentage change analysis and recorded flood points in the region.
 
Results and Discussion
The criteria for this research were the morphometric characteristics of the 20 studied sub-basins, extracted using a Digital Elevation Model (DEM). These characteristics were categorized into three groups: linear, surface, and relief parameters.
Linear parameters included watercourse length and branching ratio. Basins with longer watercourses typically produce higher runoff and faster peak flow during rainstorms compared to basins with shorter watercourses (Batt, 2019). Surface parameters included basin area (A), basin length (Lb), basin perimeter (P), shape factor (Ff), drainage density (Dd), roundness ratio (Rc), elongation ratio (Re), texture ratio (Tr), waterway density (Fs), shape index (Bs), and holding constant (C). Relief parameters included basin elevation (Bh), elevation ratio (Rr), and elevation number (Rn). Basin elevation (Bh) indicates slope, waterway gradient, and runoff discharge.
The prominence value of the studied sub-basins ranged from 2247 to 1049 meters, with the highest prominence observed in sub-basins K04, K09, and K13, and the lowest in sub-basins K05, K12, K14, and K17. Among the criteria, basin area (weight: 0.188) was the most significant, while basin prominence (weight: 0.008) was the least significant. The compatibility ratio of the parameters was 0.05, indicating valid comparisons since the value is below the threshold of 0.1.
The percentage change analysis revealed that the ANP method exhibited the lowest variability (25%), while the AHP and TOPSIS methods showed the highest variability. A comparison of observed flood points with model results indicated that the ANP method had the highest correlation with flood points, followed by the AHP method, while the ELECTRE method exhibited the lowest correlation.
Conclusion
To prepare a flood zoning map for the studied sub-basins, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods such as AHP, ANP, TOPSIS, VIKOR, and ELECTRE were employed. Morphometric criteria were utilized to evaluate the performance of these methods.
The sub-basins were classified into five flood risk classes by each method. According to the AHP method, 53.6% of the area was classified as high and very high flood risk. The ANP method classified 50% of the area as high and very high flood risk. The TOPSIS method classified 47.6% of the area as high and very high flood risk. The VIKOR method identified 61.13% of the area as high and very high flood risk, while the ELECTRE method classified 50.75% of the area in this category.
Validation using flood points showed that the ANP method had the highest accuracy. The percentage change analysis also confirmed that the ANP method exhibited the lowest variability.
These findings suggest that morphometric indices and MCDM methods are effective tools for assessing flood risk in watersheds. However, flood risk mapping is an iterative process requiring periodic updates due to changes in land use, weather patterns, and other factors influencing flood dynamics. Regular reassessment and updating of flood risk maps are essential for accurate and effective flood management.
 

Keywords

• Flood Risk Assessment
• Morphometric Analysis
• Multi-Criteria Analysis
• Kashafrood Watershed
• Khorasan Razavi
• Watershed Management and Prioritization

Main Subjects

• Geomorphic-hydrological hazards

---

References

Aher, P. D., Adinarayana, J., & Gorantiwar, S. D. (2014). Quantification of morphometric characterization and prioritization for management planning in semi-arid tropics of India: a remote sensing and GIS approach. Journal of Hydrology, 511, 850-860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.02.028

Ahmed, N., Hoque, M. A. A., Howlader, N., & Pradhan, B. (2022). Flood risk assessment: role of mitigation capacity in spatial flood risk mapping. Geocarto International, 37(25), 8394-8416. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2021.2002422

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 Computing, 24, 14251-14263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-04792-0

Alam, A., Ahmed, B., & Sammonds, P. (2021). Flash flood susceptibility assessment using the parameters of drainage basin morphometry in SE Bangladesh. Quaternary International, 575, 295-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2020.04.047

Al-Saady, Y. I., Al-Suhail, Q. A., Al-Tawash, B. S., & Othman, A. A. (2016). Drainage network extraction and morphometric analysis using remote sensing and GIS mapping techniques (Lesser Zab River Basin, Iraq and Iran). Environmental Earth Sciences, 75, 1243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6038-y

Aouragh, M. H., & Essahlaoui, A. (2018). A TOPSIS approach-based morphometric analysis for sub-watersheds prioritization of high Oum Er-Rbia basin, Morocco. Spatial Information Research, 26, 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41324-018-0169-z

Arab Ameri, A., Pour Ghasemi, H. R., Rezaei, K., & Sohrabi, M. (2019). Morphometric prioritization of watersheds for optimal water and soil resources management. Iranian Jouranl of Watershed Management Science, 13(45),87-96. [In Persian] http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.20089554.1398.13.45.11.5

Bhat, M. S., Alam, A., Ahmad, S., Farooq, H., & Ahmad, B. (2019). Flood hazard assessment of upper Jhelum basin using morphometric parameters. Environmental Earth Sciences, 78, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-019-8046-1

Bisht, S., Chaudhry, S., Sharma, S., & Soni, S. (2018). Assessment of flash flood vulnerability zonation through Geospatial technique in high altitude Himalayan watershed, Himachal Pradesh India. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 12, 35-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2018.09.001

Chandrashekar, H., Lokesh, K. V., Sameena, M., & Ranganna, G. (2015). GIS–based morphometric analysis of two reservoir catchments of Arkavati River, Ramanagaram District, Karnataka. Aquatic Procedia, 4, 1345-1353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.175

Chaulagain, D., Rimal, P. R., Ngando, S. N., Nsafon, B. E. K., Suh, D., & Huh, J. S. (2023). Flood susceptibility mapping of Kathmandu metropolitan city using GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis. Ecological Indicators, 154, 110653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110653

Chorley, R. J., Malm, D. E. G., & Pogorzelski, H. A. (1957). A New Standard for Estimating Drainage Basin Shape. American Journal Science, 255, 138-141. https://doi.org/10.2475/ajs.255.2.138

Christopher, O., Idowu, A., & Olugbenga, A. (2010). Hydrological analysis of Onitsha North East drainage Basin using geoinformatic techniques. World Applied Sciences Journal, 11(10), 1297-1302.

De Brito, M. M., Evers, M., & Almoradie, A. D. S. (2018). Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22(1), 373-390. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-373-2018

Dehghan, P., Hosseinpour Moghadam, M., Lashkaripour, G., & Ghafouri, M. (2012). Investigating the geomorphological forms of the Kashf River watershed in northeastern Iran. Paper presented of the 8th Conference of the Iranian Association of Engineering Geology and the Environment papers, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, 1659-1666. [In Persian] https://civilica.com/doc/233175

Dou, J., Yamagishi, H., Pourghasemi, H. R., Yunus, A. P., Song, X., Xu, Y., & Zhu, Z. (2015). An integrated artificial neural network model for the landslide susceptibility assessment of Osado Island, Japan. Natural Hazards, 78, 1749-1776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1799-2

Ganjirad, M., & Delavar, M. R. (2023). Flood risk mapping using random forest and support vector machine. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 10, 201-208. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-X-4-W1-2022-201-2023

Ghorbanzade, M., Azarakhshi, M., Mosaedi, A., & Rostami Khalaj, M. (2017). Evaluation of the efficiency of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to specify the areas with urban flood risk potential, case study: the central part of Torbat Heydarieh. Physical Geography Research, 49(4), 645-656. [In Persian]  https://doi.org/10.22059/jphgr.2018.231371.1007037

Hamdan, A. M. (2020). Hydro-morphometric analysis using geospatial technology: A case study of Wadi Gabgaba and Wadi Allaqi watersheds, southern Egypt-northern Sudan. Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 10(3), 190. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.2.2020.103.190.212

Hejazi, A., Andariani, S., Almaspour, F., & Mokhtari Asl, A. (2015). Using Multi Criteria Decision Making and Remote Sensing Techniques in GIS Environment for Flood Susceptible Zones Assessment in Lighvan Chai Catchment. Hydrogeomorphology, 2(3), 61-80. [In Persian]  https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.23833254.1394.2.3.4.5

Horton, R. E. (1945). Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 56(3), 275-370. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1945)56[275:EDOSAT]2.0.CO;2

Hosseinzadeh, M. M., Salehi Milani, A. R., & Rezaian Zarandini, F. (2023). Zoning of the sensitivity of the sub-basins of Nekarood basin to flooding, Neka-Mazandaran. Hydrogeomorphology, 10(34), 100-75. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22034/hyd.2023.52132.1646

Khosravi, K., Shahabi, H., Pham, B. T., Adamowski, J., Shirzadi, A., Pradhan, B., ... & Prakash, I. (2019). A comparative assessment of flood susceptibility modeling using multi-criteria decision-making analysis and machine learning methods. Journal of Hydrology, 573, 311-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.03.073

Mardani, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Govindan, K., Amat Senin, A., & Jusoh, A. (2016). VIKOR technique: A systematic review of the state of the art literature on methodologies and applications. Sustainability, 8(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8010037

Mir Ghafouri, H., Asadian Ardakani, F., & Azizi, F. (2013). Multi-indicator decision making methods (along with the introduction of application software).Tehran: Academic Jihad Publications. [In Persian]

Moghimi, A., Mousavi Harami, S. R., Moatamed, A. & Ahmadi, H. (2010). The study of the effect of morph metric variables on maximum debi of flood in Chalus drainge basin using statistical methods and mathematical models. Journal of Earth and Resources, 2(1), 65-80. [In Persian]

Msabi, M. M., & Makonyo, M. (2021). Flood susceptibility mapping using GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis: A case of Dodoma region, central Tanzania. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 21, 100445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2020.100445

Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G. H. (2007). Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 514-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.020

Parvaresh, E., Mahdavi, R., Malekian, A., Esmaeilipoor, Y., & Holisaz, A. (2018). Prioritizing of effective factors in flooding potential using Electre IIIMethod and Flood Flow Coefficient (Case study: Sarkhoon Subwatersheds of Bandarabbas). Journal of Arid Biome, 8(1), 75-87. [In Persian]  https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.2008790.1397.8.1.7.4

Rahaman, S. A., Ajeez, S. A., Aruchamy, S., & Jegankumar, R. (2015). Prioritization of sub watershed based on morphometric characteristics using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process and geographical information system–A study of Kallar Watershed, Tamil Nadu. Aquatic Procedia, 4, 1322-1330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.172

Rahimpour, T., Rezaei Moghaddam, M. H., Hejazi, S., & Valizadeh Kamran, K. (2023). Analysis of hydrogeomorphic characteristics of sub-basins in terms of erosion sensitivity (Case study: Aland Chai basin, northwest of Iran). Researches in Earth Sciences, 14(3), 112-131. [In Persian]  https://doi.org/10.48308/esrj.2023.103507

Razavizadeh, S., & Shahedi, K. (2015). Combination of AHP and TOPSIS methods to prioritize of flooding in Taleghan sub watersheds. Natural Ecosystems of Iran, 7(4), 33-46. [In Persian] https://sanad.iau.ir/fa/Journal/nei/Article/983174

Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2006). Decision making with the analytic network process (Vol. 282). Berlin, Germany: Springer Science+ Business Media, LLC. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-33987-6

Schumm, S. A. (1956). Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badlands at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Geological society of America bulletin, 67(5), 597-646. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1956)67[597:EODSAS]2.0.CO;2

Sharifi kia, M., Shayan, S., Yamani, M., & Arab Ameri, A. (2018). Classification of Necarod watershed sub-basins using multi-criteria decision-making models, TOPSIS, SAW and VIKOR. Ecohydrology, 5(1), 69-83. [In Persian]  https://doi.org/10.22059/ije.2017.231263.550

Sharifi, F. (2002). Study of flood prevention, containment and control in Golestan Province with watershed management operations and restoration of forests and pastures.Paper presented of the first Seminar on mitigate and prevent flooding. [In Persian] https://civilica.com/doc/115846/

Smith, K. (1950). Standards for Grading Textures of Erosional Topography. American Journal of Science, 248, 655-668. http://dx.doi.org/10.2475/ajs.248.9.655

Tehrany, M. S., Pradhan, B., & Jebur, M. N. (2013). Spatial prediction of flood susceptible areas using rule based decision tree (DT) and a novel ensemble bivariate and multivariate statistical models in GIS. Journal of Hydrology, 504, 69-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.09.034

Teimouri, M., & Alvandi, E. (2022). Comparison of Models TOPSIS, SAW, ELECTRE and VIKOR in order to the prioritization of sedimentation and flood hazard of watersheds. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 24(2), 79- 99. [In Persian]  https://doi.org/10.30495/jest.2022.45404.4731

Zare, H., & Zamzam, F. (2022). Multi-criteria decision making, methods and applications. Yazd: Yazd University Press. [In Persian]

Zzaman, R. U., Nowreen, S., Billah, M., & Islam, A. S. (2021). Flood hazard mapping of Sangu River basin in Bangladesh using multi‐criteria analysis of hydro‐geomorphological factors. Journal of Flood Risk Management, 14(3), e12715. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12715