A Social Network Analysis based Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Assessment of Flood Risk Management Alternatives

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Deprtment of Management, Faculty of Social Sciences and Economics, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran

2 Institute of Environment, University of Tabriz

3 Assistant Professor, Water Engineering Deprtment, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

4 Assistant Professor, Malek Ashtar University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Flood is a natural disaster that once occur, could cause serious financial damage and widespread human losses. Conventional approaches to flood risk management are mostly resistance-based. However, a resilience-based approach, taking into account uncertainties and can play a very effective role in the resilience of human settlements against this critical risk. It is essential to combine these two approaches to manage flood uncertainty through decision-making frameworks, and to use multi-criteria decision tools that can consider perspectives, goals, practical options, and stakeholder evaluation criteria. Accordingly, in focused group discussions, a hybrid set of flood crisis management alternatives were extracted and divided into three stages; pre-crisis, crisis response and post-crisis. The weights of these options were then calculated using a combination of social network analysis approach and multi-criteria decision making, and top three alternatives of each category were presented and examined. The results showed that the resilience-based approach in flood risk management has been considered by experts in cases that indicate the movement of experts from relying solely on a resistance-based approach to an adaptive approach to consider uncertainties, especially the effects of climate change.

Keywords

References

  1. UNDRR. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction: annual report. UNDRR; 2019. p. 107.
  2. UN-SPIDER. Flood [Internet]. [cited 2021 Feb 26]. Available from: https://www.un-spider.org/risks-and-disasters/natural-hazards/flood
  3. UNDRR. The human cost of disasters: an overview of the last 20 years 2000-2019. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR), Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific. 2020.
  4. UNESCO. WWAP (World Water Assessment Programme): The United Nations World Water Development Report 4: Managing Water under Uncertainty and Risk. Paris; 2012.
  5. وزارت بهداشت، درمان و آموزش پزشکی. رتبه ایران در جهان از نظر مخاطرات طبیعی [Internet]. پایگاه خبری و اطلاع‌رسانی وزارت. 1398. Available from: https://behdasht. ov.ir/اخبار/--رتبه-8-از-10-ایران-در-جهان-از-نظر-مخاطرات-طبیعی
  6. CRED. Natural Disasters 2019. Brussels: Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters; 2020. p. 8.
  7. امامی ک. بلای بلایای طبیعی. روزنامه شرق [Internet]. 1398; Available from: www.sharghdaily.ir/fa/main/print/218768
  8. نجفی‌نژاد ع، قادری س، جموعه مقالات سمینار کاهش اثرات و پیشگیری از سیل، مجموعه مقالات سمینار کاهش اثرات و پیشگیری از سیل. گرگان UNDP; 1381.
  9. Morrison A, Westbrook CJ, Noble BF. (2018). A review of the flood risk management governance and resilience literature. J Flood Risk Manag. 11(3):291–304.
  10. زکی‌پور م, طالعی م, جوادی ق. (1397). مقایسه رویکردهای انعطاف‌پذیر و مقاومتی به‌منظور مدیریت ریسک سیلاب (مطالعه موردی قزل‌اوزن در حوضه شهرستان ماه‌نشان). سنجش از دور و GIS ایران.10(1):41–56.
  11. Meyer V, Priest S, Kuhlicke C. Economic evaluation of structural and non-structural flood risk management measures: examples from the Mulde River. Nat Hazards. 2012;62:301–42.
  12. Liao KH. (2012). A theory on urban resilience to floods-A basis for alternative planning practices. Ecol Soc.17(4).
  13. European Union. Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks. 2007.
  14. Akamani K, Wilson PI. (2011). Toward the adaptive governance of transboundary water resources. Vol. 4, Conservation Letters. 409–16.
  15. van Wesenbeeck BK, Mulder JPM, Marchand M, Reed DJ, De Vries MB, De Vriend HJ, et al. (2014). Damming deltas: A practice of the past? Towards nature-based flood defenses. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci.140:1–6.
  16. de Bruijn KM. (2004). Resilience and flood risk management. Water Policy.6(1):53–65.
  17. Chitsaz N, Banihabib ME. (2015). Comparison of Different Multi Criteria Decision-Making Models in Prioritizing Flood Management Alternatives. Water Resour Manag. 29(8):2503–25.
  18. Zhu H, Liu F. (2021). A group-decision-making framework for evaluating urban flood resilience: a case study in yangtze river. Sustain.13(2):1–16.
  19. de Brito MM, Evers M. (2016). Multi-criteria decision-making for flood risk management: A survey of the current state of the art. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences. 16: 1019–33.
  20. هیأت ویژه گزارش ملی سیلاب‌ها. روایت سیلاب‌های 98-1397 ایران: گزارش اول (تشریح رخداد). تهران: دانشگاه تهران; 1398.
  21. Ghanbarpour MR, Salimi S, Hipel KW. (2013). A comparative evaluation of flood mitigation alternatives using GIS-based river hydraulics modelling and multicriteria decision analysis. J Flood Risk Manag. 6:319–31.
  22. Loos JR, Rogers SH. (2016). Understanding stakeholder preferences for flood adaptation alternatives with natural capital implications. Ecol Soc.21(3).
  23. Nivolianitou Z, Synodinou B, Manca D. (2015). Flood disaster management with the use of AHP. Int J Multicriteria Decis Mak. 5(1–2):152–64.
  24. Ouma YO, Tateishi R. (2014). Urban flood vulnerability and risk mapping using integrated multi-parametric AHP and GIS: Methodological overview and case study assessment. Water (Switzerland). 6(6):1515–45.
  25. بنی‌حبیب م, چیت‌ساز ن. (1394). استفاده از مدل برنامه‌ریزی توافقی در تصمیم‌گیری بهینه مدیریت سیلاب. پژوهش آب ایران. 9(3–18):79–87.
  26. Zibarzani M, Lamit H Bin, Ali KNB, Majid MZA, Rozan MZA. (2015). Adapted Grounded Group Decision Making Model. Proc Natl Acad Sci India Sect A - Phys Sci. 85(2):319–27.
  27. زیب ارزانی م, نکوئی م, زیدی بن عبد روزان م, اسماعیلی ا. (1392). طراحی نقشه دانش برای تشکیل تیم مدیریت بحران با استفاده از رویکرد تحلیل شبکه‌های اجتماعی و فرآیند تحلیل سلسله‌مراتبی. مدیریت بحران .بهار و تابستان(3):51–7.
  28. حیدری ع, امامی ک, جمعی از نویسندگان. پیش‌بینی و هشدار سیل. اسدالهی ا, (1385). کمیته ملی آبیاری و زهکشی ایران. 265.
  29. مطالعات زیربنایی. بررسی و تحلیل وقایع سیل فروردین ماه 1398. مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس..
  30. جلیلی م, فکری م. (1398). دلایل و پیامدهای سیل گلستان. تهران: مرکز بررسی‌های استراتژیک ریاست‌جمهوری. 30.
  31. شرکت توسعه منابع آب و نیروی ایران. (1399). گزارش عملکرد شرکت توسعه منابع آب و نیروی ایران در سیلاب‌های فروردین . 25
  32. Banihabib, M. E., Chitsaz, N., & Randhir, T. O. (2020). Non-compensatory decision model for incorporating the sustainable development criteria in flood risk management plans. SN Applied Sciences, 2(1), 1-11.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 04 April 2021
  • Revise Date: 14 June 2022
  • Accept Date: 21 January 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics