participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach
Clicks: 95
ID: 184946
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
28.2
/100
95 views
16 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #260 of 303 articles by views in materials research bulletin
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 303 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
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.
| Reference Key |
brito2018hydrologyparticipatory
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;M. M. de Brito;M. Evers;A. D. S. Almoradie |
| Journal | materials research bulletin |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
10.5194/hess-22-373-2018
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.