The Application of Fuzzy SAW and AHP Decision-making Techniques to Determine the Production of the Potential Semi-arid Watershed Runoff Regions

Authors

10.22052/6.16.93

Abstract

One of the most important issues in watershed management is to determine priority for implementing managerial activities. According to the management and decision-making for selecting appropriate locations to implement watershed management projects and also, due to the cost and duration of watershed operations, using decision making methods are very useful. In this study, by using fuzzy SAW and AHP decision models, Parchin’s sub-basins of Tehran province have been prioritized based on eight criteria including area, average slope, form factor, time of concentration, average CN, drainage density, t average annual precipitation and elevation. The obtained results showed that according to the above-mentioned methods, the highest priority is for basin 7 among all the sub-basins. In Fuzzy SAW method, sub-basin 7 with 1.86 has the highest score while sub-basin 9 with 1.69 was in the second order. Likewise, in AHP method, sub-basin 7 with the score of 0.2102 has the first weighted priority and sub-basin 9 has the second priority. According to comparison of two methods, it can be said that the first and second priorities of both models are similar in the study, but in other sub-basins, priorities are varied.

Keywords


1. Aşchilean I., Badea G.h., Giurcab I., Naghiu G.S., Iloaie F.G. 2017. Choosing the optimal technology to rehabilitate the pipes in water distribution systems using the AHP method. Energy Procedia 112 page 19 – 26. 2. Asgharpour, M, c., 2009. multi-criteria decision making. Publishing Tehran University, Institute of the printed publication.pp: 400. 3. Asgharpour, M, c., 2010. multi-criteria decision making. Tehran University, (7), 323-321 and 339-332. 4. Assimacopolous, D., 2005. An integrated Decision Support System for Evaluation of Water Management Strategies, Journal of Water Practice & Technology, 11(1)., pp:15-32. 5. Auger, PS., Charles, M, Viala and JC Poggiale., 2000. Aggregation and em Ergence in ecological modelling: integration of ecological levels, Ecological Modelling, 127: 11-20. 6. Bozorgi, b., 2007. Sustainable Management of Flood Risk Management approach. PhD thesis Khajeh Nasir University, Tehran, Iran. 7. Chen S, Hwang C., 1992. Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York, VOL 375. 8. Chen, Ting-Yu,. 2012. Comparative analysis of SAW and TOPSIS based on interval-valued fuzzy sets:Discussions on score functions and weight constraints. Elsevier, Volume 39, Issue 2, 1 February, Pages 1848–1861. 9. Djordjevic, B., Bruck S., 1998. System approach to the selection of priority areas of erosion control with emphasis on the implications of the water resources subsystem, Proc. 4th In. Sym. River Sedimentation, Beijing, China, 1547-1554. 10. GhodsiPour, Q, H., 2009. Analytical Hierarchy Process. Amir Kabir University Press, Sixth Edition. 11. Halil, M, Gh., Sadodin, A., Mosaedi A., SalmanMahini A., 2009. Fuzzy multicriteria decision making for surface water resources management in Bustan Dam-Golestan Province. J. of Water and Soil Conservation, Vol. 16(4), www.gau.ac.irljournals. 12. Hwang, C.,Yoon, K., 1981. ''Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications'', Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, New York, Chapman & Hall, pp.243-253. 13. Kangas, J., 1992. Multiple-use planning of forest resource by using the analytic hierarchy process, Scand. J. For. Res, 7: 259-268. 14. Kheirkhah Zarkesh, M., 2005. Decision support system for floodwater spreading site selection in Iran, PhD, Thesis, Wagening University, the Netherlands, 259p. 15. Lee, H., Lee, S., Park, Y., 2008. Selection of Technology Acquisition Mode using the Analytic Network Process, Elsevier, pp. 1274-1282. 16. Makhdoom, M., 2000. First experience Of modeling Both the organization of geographic information), Geomatics Conference, National Cartographic, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian). 17. Malczewski, J., 2004. GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview), Journal of Progress in Planning, 62: 3-65. 18. Marinoni, O., 2004. Implementation of the Analytical Hierarchy Process with VBA in ArcGIS, Journal of Computers and Geosciences, 30(6), pp: 637-646. 19. Memariani, AS., Azar, AS., 1996. AHP new Tmnymy for group decision-making. Knowledge Management, Issue 22, pp. 32-28. 20. Najafinejad, AS., 1998. Studies and watershed planning. Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, page 260. 21. Saaty TL. 1994, How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process, Interfaces, 6(24): 19-43. 22. Saaty TL. 2000, ''Decision Making for leaders'', RWS publications, pjttsburgh, PA, 323 pp. 23. Saaty, T., 1996. ''Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: the Analytic Network Process'', RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, Pa. 24. Sarangi, A., Madramootoo, CA., and Cox C., 2004. A decision support system for soil and water conservation measures on agricultural watersheds, Land Degradation and Development. Land Degradation and Development, 63-49: ( 49)15. 25. Semih, O., Selin Soner, K., Elif I., 2009. Long Term Supplier Selection Using a Combined Fuzzy MCDM Approach: A Case Study for a Telecommunication Company), journal of Expert Systems with Applications 36, P. 3887–3895. 26. Simanaviciene, R., Ustinovichius L., 2010. Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods: TOPSIS and SAW, Elsevier, pp.7743-7744. 27. Yilmaz, B., and Harmancioglu, NB., 2010. An indicator based assessment for water resources management in Gediz River Basin, Turkey,Water Resources Management, 24: 15.4359-4379. 28. Zahedi, TL., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process; A Survey of The Method and its Applications, Interfaces; Vol., No. 4, pp. 96-108. 29. Zehtabian, GR., 2001. Alavipanah, SK and Hamedpanah R., Determination of an appropriate area for flood water spreading by remote sensing data and GIS, In: Proceedings of the International Conference on New Technology for a New Century, Seoul, Korea, 1-6. 30. Zeleny, M., 1982. ''Multiple Criteria Decision Making'', McGraw-H ill, New York.