Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach
This paper presents a participatory multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach for flood vulnerability assessment while considering the relationships between vulnerability criteria. The applicability of the proposed framework is demonstrated in the municipalities of Lajeado and Estrela, Braz...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
| Online Access: | https://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/22/373/2018/hess-22-373-2018.pdf |
| _version_ | 1818474886664814592 |
|---|---|
| author | M. M. de Brito M. Evers A. D. S. Almoradie |
| author_facet | M. M. de Brito M. Evers A. D. S. Almoradie |
| author_sort | M. M. de Brito |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This paper presents a participatory multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM)
approach for flood vulnerability assessment while considering the
relationships between vulnerability criteria. The applicability of the
proposed framework is demonstrated in the municipalities of Lajeado and
Estrela, Brazil. The model was co-constructed by 101 experts from
governmental organizations, universities, research institutes, NGOs, and
private companies. Participatory methods such as the Delphi survey, focus
groups, and workshops were applied. A participatory problem structuration, in
which the modellers work closely with end users, was used to establish the
structure of the vulnerability index. The preferences of each participant
regarding the criteria importance were spatially modelled through the
analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and analytical network process (ANP)
multi-criteria methods. Experts were also involved at the end of the
modelling exercise for validation. The final product is a set of individual
and group flood vulnerability maps. Both AHP and ANP proved to be effective
for flood vulnerability assessment; however, ANP is preferred as it considers
the dependences among criteria. The participatory approach enabled experts
to learn from each other and acknowledge different perspectives towards
social learning. The findings highlight that to enhance the credibility and
deployment of model results, multiple viewpoints should be integrated without
forcing consensus. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-14T04:42:30Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-277baed3aeda47cb971b6a4f1a6ffc51 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1027-5606 1607-7938 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-14T04:42:30Z |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-277baed3aeda47cb971b6a4f1a6ffc512022-12-22T02:11:36ZengCopernicus PublicationsHydrology and Earth System Sciences1027-56061607-79382018-01-012237339010.5194/hess-22-373-2018Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approachM. M. de Brito0M. Evers1A. D. S. Almoradie2Department of Geography, University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Geography, University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Geography, University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn, GermanyThis paper presents a participatory multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach for flood vulnerability assessment while considering the relationships between vulnerability criteria. The applicability of the proposed framework is demonstrated in the municipalities of Lajeado and Estrela, Brazil. The model was co-constructed by 101 experts from governmental organizations, universities, research institutes, NGOs, and private companies. Participatory methods such as the Delphi survey, focus groups, and workshops were applied. A participatory problem structuration, in which the modellers work closely with end users, was used to establish the structure of the vulnerability index. The preferences of each participant regarding the criteria importance were spatially modelled through the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and analytical network process (ANP) multi-criteria methods. Experts were also involved at the end of the modelling exercise for validation. The final product is a set of individual and group flood vulnerability maps. Both AHP and ANP proved to be effective for flood vulnerability assessment; however, ANP is preferred as it considers the dependences among criteria. The participatory approach enabled experts to learn from each other and acknowledge different perspectives towards social learning. The findings highlight that to enhance the credibility and deployment of model results, multiple viewpoints should be integrated without forcing consensus.https://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/22/373/2018/hess-22-373-2018.pdf |
| spellingShingle | M. M. de Brito M. Evers A. D. S. Almoradie Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
| title | Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach |
| title_full | Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach |
| title_fullStr | Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach |
| title_full_unstemmed | Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach |
| title_short | Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach |
| title_sort | participatory flood vulnerability assessment a multi criteria approach |
| url | https://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/22/373/2018/hess-22-373-2018.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mmdebrito participatoryfloodvulnerabilityassessmentamulticriteriaapproach AT mevers participatoryfloodvulnerabilityassessmentamulticriteriaapproach AT adsalmoradie participatoryfloodvulnerabilityassessmentamulticriteriaapproach |