Using the analytic hierarchy process to evaluate sustainability factors in watershed planning and management

Pouya S., Türkoğlu H., Arpacioglu U.

URBANI IZZIV-URBAN CHALLENGE, cilt.31, sa.1, ss.78-88, 2020 (ESCI) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 31 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2020
  • Doi Numarası: 10.5379/urbani-izziv-en-2020-31-01-002
  • Dergi Adı: URBANI IZZIV-URBAN CHALLENGE
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, IBZ Online, International Bibliography of Social Sciences, Agricultural & Environmental Science Database, Art Source, Avery, ICONDA Bibliographic, Linguistics & Language Behavior Abstracts, Sociological abstracts, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts, Directory of Open Access Journals, Civil Engineering Abstracts
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.78-88
  • İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

With increasing population growth and economic development, water resources have faced environmental pollution and ecological deterioration. Sustainable watershed management and planning has emerged as an approach to address these problems. Following the international agreements on watershed protection, Turkey has initiated fundamental modifications in the watershed management and planning process. However, sustainable management of water resources involves various economic, social, and ecological dimensions, and it is not a straightforward process. This study ranks sustainability indicators in terms of their importance in water resource resilience. "The analytic hierarchy process is utilized to weight the sustainability factors in planning water resources and watersheds. Considering the different opinions experts may have, two groups of respondents (i.e., academics and professionals) were chosen to evaluate the factors. The results showed degrees of correspondence and contradictions among the respondents' perspectives. The groups were similar in prioritizing the social, management, and economic factors, whereas they showed considerable differences in evaluating the land use and ecological factors. The article shows that the conflicting views of various groups of experts should be identified and harmonized in order to develop an evaluation model for watershed and water basin plans.