Determination of Van Basin Groundwater Potential by GIS Based, AHP and Fuzzy-AHP Methods

Abstract

Global warming and climate change put excessive pressure on the use of groundwater resources. As the demand for water consumption in fields such as agriculture and industry increases worldwide, the need for the modeling and evaluation of groundwater potential and quality efficiency increases accordingly. Nowadays, methods based on multi-criteria decision-making techniques such as geographic information systems (GIS), analytical hierarchy process (AHP), fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (F-AHP) and ELECTRE have begun to be used rapidly in the field of groundwater. These methods are of great importance because they reveal information faster. They are also a tool for the communication and meaning of information. In the light of this information, this study was carried out in order to model and evaluate the groundwater potential and quality of Van, Türkiye. In order to evaluate the groundwater potential of the Van province basin, remote sensing data with AHP and Fuzzy AHP methods, which are GIS-based MCDM programs, were used. Eight thematic maps such as precipitation, slope, soil texture, land use/land cover, geology, geomorphology, drainage density, drainage density and fault density were created. These thematic parameters were graded and weighted in the AHP method according to their effects on the groundwater potential. Then, five different groundwater recharge potential regions were classified as very good (8%), good (17%), moderate (43.37%), poor (23.03%) and very poor (9.6%). The evidence obtained by validating the results is in line with flow calculation studies showing that groundwater flows from the south to the northeast, middle and north to the southwest of the basin. The evidence obtained by validating the results is consistent with the flow calculation values showing that the groundwater basin flows from south to northeast, center and north to southwest of the study area. The validation shows that the method applied for the study area gives a meaningful and reliable result.

Keywords

• AHP
• Fuzzy-AHP
• GIS
• Groundwater Potential
• MCDM

References

1. Ahirwar R, Malik M S, Ahirwar S, & Shukla J P (2021). Groundwater potential zone mapping of Hoshangabad and Budhni industrial area, Madhya Pradesh, India. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 14, 100631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2021.100631
2. Akter A, Uddin A M H, Wahid K B & Ahmed S (2020). Predicting groundwater recharge potential zones using geospatial technique. Sustainable Water Resources Management, 6(2): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-020-00384-w
3. Aslan V & Celik R (2021). Integrated gis-based multi-criteria analysis for groundwater potential mapping in the euphrates’s sub-basin, harran basin, turkey. Sustainability, 13(13): 7375. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137375
4. Chai W Y & Wei B C (2001). Compactness measurement u sing fuzzy multicriteria decision making for redistricting. In Proceedings of IEEE Region 10 International Conference on Electrical and Electronic Technology. TENCON 2001 (Cat. No. 01CH37239) (Vol. 1, pp. 459-465). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/Tencon.2001.949635
5. Chaudhry A K, Kumar K & Alam M A (2021). Mapping of groundwater potential zones using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and geospatial technique. Geocarto International 36(20): 2323-2344. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2019.1695959
6. Chowdhury A, Jha M K & Chowdary V M (2010). Delineation of groundwater recharge zones and identification of artificial recharge sites in West Medinipur district, West Bengal, using RS, GIS and MCDM techniques. Environmental Earth Sciences, 59(6): 1209-1222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-009-0110-9
7. Das S & Pardeshi S D (2018). Morphometric analysis of Vaitarna and Ulhas river basins, Maharashtra, India: using geospatial techniques. Applied Water Science, 8(6): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-018-0801-z
8. Di Bona G, Silvestri A, Forcina A & Falcone D (2017). AHP‐IFM target: an innovative method to define reliability target in an aerospace prototype based on analytic hierarchy process. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 33(8): 1731-1751. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2140

9. Dilekoglu M F & Aslan V (2022). Determination of groundwater potential distribution of Ceylanpinar Plain (Turkey) in Upper Mesopotamia by using geographical information techniques and Fuzzy-AHP with MCDM. Water Supply 22(1): 372-390. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2021.268
10. DSI (State Hydraulic Works) (2015). 17. Regional Directorate Activity Report. Ankara: Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs.
11. Erdogan S (2017). An Evaluation on the Relationship between the Menua (Samram) Canal and the Garden of Tariria. Yuzuncu Yil University Journal of Social Sciences Institute 36: 11-24, https://dergipark.org.tr
12. Fattahi R & Khalilzadeh M (2018). Risk evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on FMEA, extended MULTIMOORA, and AHP methods under fuzzy environment. Safety science, 102: 290-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.018
13. Fedrizzi M, Giove S & Predella N (2018). Rank reversal in the AHP with consistent judgements: A numerical study in single and group decision making. In Soft Computing Applications for Group Decision-making and Consensus Modeling (pp. 213-225). Springer, Cham. Doi:10.1007/978-3-319-60207-3_14
14. Hossain M K & Thakur V (2020). Benchmarking health-care supply chain by implementing Industry 4.0: a fuzzy-AHP-DEMATEL approach. Benchmarking: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/bij-05-2020-0268
15. Jesiya N P & Gopinath G (2020). A fuzzy based MCDM–GIS framework to evaluate groundwater potential index for sustainable groundwater management-A case study in an urban-periurban ensemble, southern India. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 11: 100466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2020.100466
16. Kaplan S & Arikan F (2012). Evaluatıon Of Equıpment Investment Projects In Aır Defence Sector By Fuzzy Analytıc Hıerarchy Process. Journal of Aeronautics and Space Technologies, 5(3): 23-33. https://search.trdizin.gov.tr
17. Konyar E, Genç B, Avcı C & Tan A (2019). Excavations at the Old City, Fortress, and Mound of Van: Work in 2018. Anatolia Antiqua. International Journal of Anatolian Archeology, (XXVII), 169-183. DOI: 10.4000/anatoliaantiqua.1076
18. Kumar P, Herath S, Avtar R & Takeuchi K (2016). Mapping of groundwater potential zones in Killinochi area, Sri Lanka, using GIS and remote sensing techniques. Sustainable Water Resources Management, 2(4): 419-430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-016-0072-5
19. Li C H & Li H M (2009). Developing a model to evaluate the safety management performance of construction projects. In 2009 International Conference on Management and Service Science (pp. 1-5). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/ICMSS.2009.5304613.
20. Ly P T M, Lai W H, Hsu C W & Shih F Y (2018). Fuzzy AHP analysis of Internet of Things (IoT) in enterprises. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.016
21. Machiwal D, Jha M K & Mal B C (2011). Assessment of groundwater potential in a semi-arid region of India using remote sensing, GIS and MCDM techniques. Water resources management 25(5): 1359-1386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9749-y
22. Mallick J, Al-Wadi H, Rahman A & Ahmed M (2014). Landscape dynamic characteristics using satellite data for a mountainous watershed of Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Environmental earth sciences, 72(12): 4973-4984. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3408-1
23. Mallick J, Khan R A, Ahmed M, Alqadhi S D, Alsubih M, Falqi I& Hasan M A (2019). Modeling groundwater potential zone in a semi-arid region of Aseer using fuzzy-AHP and geoinformation techniques. Water 11(12): 2656. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11122656
24. Manap M A, Nampak H, Pradhan B, Lee S, Sulaiman W N A & Ramli M F (2014). Application of probabilistic-based frequency ratio model in groundwater potential mapping using remote sensing data and GIS. Arabian Journal of Geosciences 7(2): 711-724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-012-0795-z
25. Munier N & Hontoria E (2021). Uses and Limitations of the AHP Method. Springer International Publishing. Naghibi S A, Pourghasemi H R, Pourtaghi Z S & Rezaei A (2015). Groundwater qanat potential mapping using frequency ratio and Shannon’s entropy models in the Moghan watershed, Iran. Earth Science Informatics 8(1): 171-186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-5049-6
26. Ozder E H, Alakas H M, Ozcan E & Eren T (2021). Shift scheduling solution with hybrid approach in a power plant. Alexandria Engineering Journal 60(6): 5687-5701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2021.03.076
27. Ozler H M (2005). Hydrogeology of Van aquifer and causes of salinization. https://dergipark.org.tr
28. Pathak D (2017). Delineation of groundwater potential zone in the Indo-gangetic plain through GIS analysis. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology, 22(1): 104-109. https://doi.org/10.3126/jist.v22i1.17760
29. Patra S, Pulak M & Subhash CM (2018). Delineation of groundwater potential zone for sustainable development: A case study from Ganga Alluvial Plain covering Hooghly district of India using remote sensing, geographic information system and analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Cleaner Production 172: 2485-2502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.161
30. Pinto D, Shrestha S, Babel M S & Ninsawat S (2017). Delineation of groundwater potential zones in the Comoro watershed, Timor Leste using GIS, remote sensing and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique. Applied Water Science 7(1): 503-519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-015-0270-6
31. 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
32. Rahmati O, Nazari Samani A, Mahdavi M, Pourghasemi H R & Zeinivand H (2015). Groundwater potential mapping at Kurdistan region of Iran using analytic hierarchy process and GIS. Arabian Journal of Geosciences 8(9): 7059-7071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-014-1668-4
33. Saaty T L (2000). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process (Vol. 6). RWS publications. https://Saaty TL (2000)
34. Senanayake I P, Dissanayake D M D O K, Mayadunna B B & Weerasekera W L (2016). An approach to delineate groundwater recharge potential sites in Ambalantota, Sri Lanka using GIS techniques. Geoscience Frontiers, 7(1), 115-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2015.03.002
35. Sener E, Sener Ş & Davraz A (2018). Groundwater potential mapping by combining fuzzy-analytic hierarchy process and GIS in Beyşehir Lake Basin, Turkey. Arabian Journal of Geosciences 11(8): 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-3510-x
36. Senko S, Kurttila M & Karjalainen T (2018). Prospects for Nordic intensive forest management solutions in the Republic of Karelia. https://erepo.uef.fi/handle/123456789/7429
37. Shekhar S & Pandey A C (2015). Delineation of groundwater potential zone in hard rock terrain of India using remote sensing, geographical information system (GIS) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) techniques. Geocar Int 30(4): 402–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2014.894584
38. Singh V K, Kumar D, Singh S K, Pham Q B, Linh N T T, Mohammed S & Anh D T (2021). Development of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process based water quality model of Upper Ganga river basin, India. Journal of Environmental Management, 284, 111985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.111985
39. Tiri A, Belkhiri L & Mouni L (2018). Evaluation of surface water quality for drinking purposes using fuzzy inference system. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 6: 235-244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2018.01.006Get rights and content
40. Tu Y, Chen K, Wang H & Li Z (2020). Regional water resources security evaluation based on a hybrid fuzzy BWM-TOPSIS method. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17(14): 4987. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17144987
41. Wang Z, Ran Y, Chen Y, Yu H & Zhang G (2020). Failure mode and effects analysis using extended matter-element model and AHP. Computers & Industrial Engineering 140: 106233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106233
42. Xingfeng L I U (2017). Performance evaluation of engineering teachers in universities based AHP and fuzzy mathematical methods. Revista de la Facultad de Ingeniería, 32(5): 141-149. https://doi.org/10.2991/meici-16.2016.25
43. Yang W Z, Ge Y H, Xiong B & Wang X B (2011). Petroleum Contaminated Site Remedial Countermeasures Selection Using Fuzzy ANP Model. In International Workshop on Computer Science for Environmental Engineering and EcoInformatics (pp. 224-229). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22691-5_39
44. Zekai S E N (2008). The flow of groundwater from a fissured medium to a porous medium of variable diameter and impermeable wall. Water resources,1(1): 39-55. https://dergipark.org.trtechniques and Fuzzy-AHP with MCDM. Water Supply, 22(1): 372-390. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2021.268