1. Objective
Here’s a detailed example for project on Fuzzy AHP in GIS. Fuzzy AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) is used for decision-making in situations with multiple criteria, and GIS (Geographical Information Systems) helps spatial decision-making.
2.Criteria and Alternatives for GIS-based Decision-Making with Fuzzy AHP:
Criteria
1.Proximity to Roads: Measures how close the site is to major roads, important for industrial and residential developments.
2.Slope: Important for construction feasibility and agricultural purposes.
3.Land Use/Land Cover: Describes the type of land usage, whether it’s forested, agricultural, or urbanized.
4.Soil Type: A critical factor for agriculture and construction.
5. Elevation: Affects temperature, water flow, and building challenges.
6.Water Availability: Crucial for agriculture and urban development.
7.Distance to Urban Areas: Evaluates proximity to city centers or urbanized areas.
Alternatives:
– Alternative A (Industrial Development): Prioritizes proximity to roads and urban areas.
– Alternative B (Agricultural Expansion): Focuses on soil suitability, water availability, and land cover.
– Alternative C (Residential Expansion): Requires moderate access to infrastructure but focuses on livable terrain and water.
– Alternative D (Conservation Area): Aims for high environmental quality, so low proximity to urban and industrial zones is important.
3. Pairwise comparison table
After determining the criteria and alternatives, the Pairwise comparison table matrix is formed. In the paired comparison table, the parameters (criteria or alternatives) are compared in pairs .The table below shows the pairwise comparison tables:
|
Pairwise comparison with respect to GIS |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,3.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
|
(0.333,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
(5.000,7.000,9.000) |
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(5.000,7.000,9.000) |
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
|
Alternative pairwise comparisons with respect to Proximity to Roads |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(1.000,1.000,3.000) |
|
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
(5.000,7.000,9.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.333,1.000,1.000) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
|
Alternative pairwise comparisons with respect to Slope |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
|
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
|
Alternative pairwise comparisons with respect to CriterioLand Use/Land Covern |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(5.000,7.000,9.000) |
|
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
|
Alternative pairwise comparisons with respect to Soil Type |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(5.000,7.000,9.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
|
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
|
Alternative pairwise comparisons with respect to Elevation |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(5.000,7.000,9.000) |
|
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.111,0.143,0.200) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
|
Alternative pairwise comparisons with respect to Water Availability |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
|
Alternative pairwise comparisons with respect to Distance to Urban Areas |
||||
|
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
(7.000,9.000,11.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,3.000,5.000) |
(3.000,5.000,7.000) |
|
|
(0.091,0.111,0.143) |
(0.200,0.333,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,3.000) |
|
|
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.143,0.200,0.333) |
(0.333,1.000,1.000) |
(1.000,1.000,1.000) |
|
4. Run software:
The data is placed in the software and the software is executed. The following video shows the implementation of the software:
5.Get Result
In this step, you can see the result of the report. The report is presented in three types of formats: online report, Excel and Word. You can view or download three types of formats below. In the output report, there are all the steps of AHP step by step along with the relevant table.
