Abstract
Flood risk map** is instrumental in guiding land-use decisions, development planning, disaster management, and mitigation strategies. However, the accuracy of such maps relies heavily on the availability of comprehensive data. When such data are lacking, empirical approaches are employed to estimate flood risk. Several recent studies have developed flood risk maps using multicriteria decision-making (MCDM), such as the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). However, flood risk map** methods using MCDM techniques are zero-dimensional models, and they cannot be associated with a flood of a particular exceedance probability. Notably, flood inundation models can predict floods and help map flood parameters for floods with different return periods. Accordingly, this study proposes a new framework for map** flood risk for floods with different return periods by integrating inundation maps obtained from a flood simulation model with an MCDM framework in a geographic information system (GIS) environment. The proposed method integrates remote sensing data, hydraulic modeling, and AHP combined with a sensitivity analysis to develop a flood risk map. The applicability of the proposed framework is demonstrated by employing it to create flood risk maps for flood events with different return periods in the East Fork White River (EFWR) in Columbus, Indiana, USA. The results reveal a significant correspondence between high-risk zones identified in the flood risk maps and areas with high values on an available flood damage map of the study area, confirming the efficacy of the proposed framework. This study highlights the potential of the methodology as a valuable tool for generating flood risk maps in areas where comprehensive flood risk assessment data are limited. Additionally, the flexibility of the GIS-based approach allows for the adaptation and application of the methodology to different geographic locations and flood scenarios. Thus, the proposed framework offers a robust and practical approach to flood risk map** with potential applications in disaster management and land-use planning strategies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alfieri L, Bisselink B, Dottori F, Naumann G, de Roo A, Salamon P, Wyser K, Feyen L (2017) Global projections of river flood risk in a warmer world. Earths Future 5(2):171–182. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000485
Allafta H, Opp C (2021) GIS-based multi-criteria analysis for flood prone areas map** in the trans-boundary Shatt Al-Arab basin, Iraq-Iran. Geomatics Nat Hazards Risk 12(1):2087–2116. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2021.1955755
Birkmann J (2006) Measuring vulnerability ton hazards: towards disaster resilient societies. United Nations University, Tokyo
Brunner GW, CEIWR-HEC (2016) HEC-RAS river analysis system user’s manual. US Army Corps of Engineers, https://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-ras/documentation. Accessed 16 June 2023
Chakraborty A, Joshi P (2016) Map** disaster vulnerability in India using analytical hierarchy process. Geomatics Nat Hazards Risk 7(1):308–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2014.897656
Chan SW, Abid SK, Sulaiman N, Nazir U, Azam K (2022) A systematic review of the flood vulnerability using geographic information system. Heliyon 8(3):e09075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09075
Cook A, Merwade V (2009) Effect of topographic data, geometric configuration and modeling approach on flood inundation map**. J Hydrol 377(1–2):131–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.015
Danumah JH, Odai SN, Saley BM et al (2016) Flood risk assessment and map** in Abidjan district using multi-criteria analysis (AHP) model and geoinformation techniques, (cote d’ivoire). Geoenvironmental Disasters 3:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-016-0044-y
de Brito MM, Evers M (2016) Multi-criteria decision-making for flood risk management: a survey of the current state of the art. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 16(4):1019–1033. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-1019-2016
Dikshit A, Pradhan B, Alamri AM (2021) Pathways and challenges of the application of artificial intelligence to geohazards modelling. Gondwana Res 100:290–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2020.08.007
Dutta D, Herath S, Musiake K (2003) A mathematical model for flood loss estimation. J Hydrol 277(1–2):24–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00084-2
FEMA (1996) Flood insurance study, city of Columbus, Bartholomew County, Indiana. Federal Emergency Management Agency. https://www.columbus.in.gov/planning/flood-hazard-information/floodplain-regulations. Accessed 16 June 2023
Ferdowsi A, Zolghadr-Asli B, Mousavi SF, Behzadian K (2022) Flood risk management through multi-criteria decision-making: a review. In: Gul M, Yucesan M, Erdogan M (eds) Multi-criteria decision analysis, 1st edn. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 43–54
Gain AK, Mojtahed V, Biscaro C, Balbi S, Giupponi C (2015) An integrated approach of flood risk assessment in the eastern part of Dhaka City. Nat Hazards 79:1499–1530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1911-7
Gerl T, Bochow M, Kreibich H (2014) Flood damage modeling on the basis of urban structure map** using high-resolution remote sensing data. Water 6(8):2367–2393. https://doi.org/10.3390/w6082367
Gibson SA, Pasternack GB (2016) Selecting between one-dimensional and two‐dimensional hydrodynamic models for ecohydraulic analysis. River Res Appl 32(6):1365–1381. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.2972
Gigović L, Pamučar D, Bajić Z, Drobnjak S (2017) Application of GIS-interval rough AHP methodology for flood hazard map** in urban areas. Water 9(6):360. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9060360
Hajkowicz S, Collins K (2007) A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management. Water Resour Manage 1553–1566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-006-9112-5
Jesna I, Bhallamudi SM, Sudheer KP (2023) Impact of cross-sectional orientation in one‐dimensional hydrodynamic modeling on flood inundation map**. J Flood Risk Manag 16:e12893. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12893
Kayastha P, Dhital MR, De Smedt F (2013) Application of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for landslide susceptibility map**: a case study from the Tinau watershed, west Nepal. Comput Geosci 52:398–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2012.11.003
Kazakis N, Kougias I, Patsialis T (2015) Assessment of flood hazard areas at a regional scale using an index-based approach and Analytical Hierarchy process: application in Rhodope–evros region, Greece. Sci Total Environ 538:555–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.08.055
Kourgialas NN, Karatzas GP (2011) Flood management and a GIS modelling method to assess flood-hazard areas—a case study. Hydrol Sci J 56(2):212–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2011.555836
Kron W (2005) Flood risk = hazard• values• vulnerability. Water Int 30(1):58–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060508691837
Lin J, Sreng C, Oare E, Batarseh FA (2023) NeuralFlood: an AI-driven flood susceptibility index. Front Water 5:1291305. https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2023.1291305
Liu Z, Merwade V (2018) Accounting for model structure, parameter and input forcing uncertainty in flood inundation modeling using bayesian model averaging. J Hydrol 565:138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.08.009
Liu YB, Gebremeskel S, De Smedt F, Hoffmann L, Pfister L (2003) A diffusive transport approach for flow routing in GIS-based flood modeling. J Hydrol 283(1–4):91–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00242-7
Lodwick WA, Monson W, Svoboda L (1990) Attribute error and sensitivity analysis of map operations in geographical informations systems: suitability analysis. Int J Geographical Inform Syst 4(4):413–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/02693799008941556
Lombard PJ (2013) Flood-inundation maps for the East Fork White River at Columbus, Indiana. US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/sim3255. Accessed 07 March 2023
Lyu HM, Yin ZY (2023) An improved MCDM combined with GIS for risk assessment of multi-hazards in Hong Kong. Sustainable Cities Soc 91:104427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104427
Lyu HM, Shen SL, Zhou A, Yang J (2019) Perspectives for flood risk assessment and management for mega-city metro system. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 84:31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2018.10.019
Malczewski J (2002) On the use of weighted linear combination method in GIS: common and best practice approaches. Trans GIS 4(1):5–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9671.00035
Memon N, Patel DP, Bhatt N, Patel SB (2020) Integrated framework for flood relief package (FRP) allocation in semiarid region: a case of Rel River flood, Gujarat, India. Nat Hazards 100:279–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03812-z
Merz B, Kreibich H, Thieken A, Schmidtke R (2004) Estimation uncertainty of direct monetary flood damage to buildings. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 4(1):153–163. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-4-153-2004
Meyer V, Becker N, Markantonis V et al (2013) Assessing the costs of natural hazards–state of the art and knowledge gaps. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13(5):1351–1373. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-1351-2013
Morlock SE, Menke CD, Arvin DV, Kim MH (2008) Flood of June 7–9, 2008, in central and southern Indiana. USS Geological Survey Open File Report 2008–1322. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1322/pdf/ofr2008-1322.pdf. Accessed 23 March 2023
Mosavi A, Ozturk P, Chau KW (2018) Flood prediction using machine learning models: literature review. Water 10(11):1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111536
Mudashiru RB, Sabtu N, Abustan I, Balogun W (2021) Flood hazard map** methods: a review. J Hydrol 603:126846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126846
Müller A, Reiter J, Weiland U (2011) Assessment of urban vulnerability towards floods using an indicator-based approach–a case study for Santiago De Chile. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11(8):2107–2123. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-11-2107-2011
Najibi N, Devineni N (2018) Recent trends in the frequency and duration of global floods. Earth Sys Dyn 9(2):757–783. https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-757-2018
Napolitano P, Fabbri AG (1996) Single-parameter sensitivity analysis for aquifer vulnerability assessment using DRASTIC and SINTACS. IAHS Publications-Series of Proceedings and Reports. 235:559 – 66
Nasiri H, Mohd Yusof MJ, Mohammad Ali TA (2016) An overview to flood vulnerability assessment methods. Sustainable Water Resour Manage 2:331–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-016-0051-x
Nkwunonwo UC, Whitworth M, Baily B (2020) A review of the current status of flood modelling for urban flood risk management in the develo** countries. Sci Afr 7:e00269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00269
Papaioannou G, Loukas A, Vasiliades L, Aronica GT (2016) Flood inundation map** sensitivity to riverine spatial resolution and modelling approach. Nat Hazards. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2382-1. 83:117 – 32
Pappenberger F, Beven K, Horritt M, Blazkova SJ (2005) Uncertainty in the calibration of effective roughness parameters in HEC-RAS using inundation and downstream level observations. J Hydrol 302(1–4):46–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.06.036
Rahman M, Ningsheng C, Islam MM, Dewan A, Iqbal J, Washakh RM, Shufeng T (2019) Flood susceptibility assessment in Bangladesh using machine learning and multi-criteria decision analysis. Earth Syst Environ 3:585–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-019-00123-y
Rahmati O, Zeinivand H, Besharat M (2016) Flood hazard zoning in Yasooj region, Iran, using GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis. Geomatics Nat Hazards Risk 7(3):1000–1017. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2015.1045043
Ramkar P, Yadav SM (2021) Flood risk index in data-scarce river basins using the AHP and GIS approach. Nat Hazards 109(1):1119–1140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-021-04871-x
Saaty T (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw Hill, New York
Schröter K, Kreibich H, Vogel K, Riggelsen C, Scherbaum F, Merz B (2014) How useful are complex flood damage models? Water Resour Res 50(4):3378–3395. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014396
Shipe AP (2008) National weather service monthly report of river and flood conditions for Indianapolis hydrologic service area. National Weather Service Glossary. http://www.weather.gov/glossary/. Accessed September 22, 2023
Siddayao GP, Valdez SE, Fernandez PL (2014) Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in spatial modeling for floodplain risk assessment. Int J Mach Learn Comput 4(5):450–457. https://doi.org/10.7763/ijmlc.2014.v4.453
Sinha R, Bapalu GV, Singh LK, Rath B (2008) Flood risk analysis in the Kosi river basin, north Bihar using multi-parametric approach of analytical hierarchy process (AHP). J Indian Soc Remote Sens 36:335–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-008-0034-y
Smith DI (1994) Flood damage estimation-a review of urban stage-damage curves and loss functions. Water Sa 20(3):231–238. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/AJA03784738_1124
Tellman B, Sullivan JA, Kuhn C, Kettner AJ, Doyle CS, Brakenridge GR, Erickson TA, Slayback DA (2021) Satellite imaging reveals increased proportion of population exposed to floods. Nature 596(7870):80–86. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03695-w
Teng J, Jakeman AJ, Vaze J, Croke BF, Dutta D, Kim SJ (2017) Flood inundation modelling: a review of methods, recent advances and uncertainty analysis. Environ Model Software 90:201 – 16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.01.006.
Thieken AH, Müller M, Kreibich H, Merz B (2005) Flood damage and influencing factors: new insights from the August 2002 flood in Germany. Water Resour Res 41(12). https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004177
Tsakiris GJ (2014) Flood risk assessment: concepts, modelling, applications. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 14(5):1361–1369. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-14-1361-2014
UNDP (2004) Reducing disaster risk: a challenge for development. Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery. https://www.undp.org/bcpr. Accessed March 23, 2023
Varlas G, Anagnostou MN, Spyrou C et al (2019) A multi-platform hydrometeorological analysis of the flash flood event of 15 November 2017 in Attica, Greece. Remote Sens 11(1):45. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11010045
Velasquez M, Hester PT (2013) An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. Int J Oper Res 10(2):56–66
Wang Y, Hong H, Chen W, Li S, Pamučar D, Gigović L, Drobnjak S, Tien Bui D, Duan H (2018) A hybrid GIS multi-criteria decision-making method for flood susceptibility map** at Shangyou, China. Remote Sens 11(1):62. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11010062
Wisner B, Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis L (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Routledge, London
Wright D (1994) Methods in flood hazard and risk management. The World Bank. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/51114_capramethodsinfloodhazardandriskass.pdf. Accessed March 23, 2023
Wu Y, Zhong PA, Zhang Y, Xu B, Ma B, Yan K (2015) Integrated flood risk assessment and zonation method: a case study in Huaihe River basin, China. Nat Hazards 78:635–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1737-3
**ao Y, Yi S, Tang Z (2017) Integrated flood hazard assessment based on spatial ordered weighted averaging method considering spatial heterogeneity of risk preference. Sci Total Environ 599:1034–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.218
Zehra S, Afsar S (2016) Flood hazard map** of lower Indus basin using multi-criteria analysis. J Geoscience Environ Prot 4(4):54–62. https://doi.org/10.4236/gep.2016.44008
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Jesna, I., Kurian, C., Bhallamudi, S.M. et al. A new framework integrating flood inundation modeling and multicriteria decision-making for enhanced flood risk map**. Nat Hazards (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-024-06718-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-024-06718-7