IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p665-d478906.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Group-Decision-Making Framework for Evaluating Urban Flood Resilience: A Case Study in Yangtze River

Author

Listed:
  • Huagui Zhu

    (School of Management & Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210000, China)

  • Fan Liu

    (School of Management & Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210000, China)

Abstract

Floods are among the most common and destructive natural disasters confronted by cities and are further aggravated by rapid climate change and increasing urbanization, posing a great challenge to flood risk management. To cope with uncertainty, there is a need to move towards approaches to managing flood risk by taking resilience into consideration. While the evaluation of urban flood resilience has gained much attention in recent decades, studies on quantitative measurement using multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) approaches are rare. In addition, the results determined by different MCDM methods may exhibit considerable variability. It is an intractable task to gather a group consensus from these methods. In this regard, in this paper, we propose a group-decision-making framework for measuring urban resilience to flooding, combining three stages, which are (i) normalizing the data, (ii) weighting the criteria and (iii) aggregating the results. Four objective MCDM methods—i.e., the variation coefficient method, Shannon weighting method, CRITIC and ideal point method—are proposed and treated as reliable methods. A stochastic multi criteria acceptability analysis is adopted to integrate those results into a composite resilience index. The proposed methodology is applied to the resilience evaluation problem of 41 cities in the Yangtze River basin, and the results are compared with those obtained with the four MCDM methods. It is demonstrated that our method considers all possible preferences among the results provided by various MCDM methods and is thus more robust and acceptable.

Suggested Citation

  • Huagui Zhu & Fan Liu, 2021. "A Group-Decision-Making Framework for Evaluating Urban Flood Resilience: A Case Study in Yangtze River," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:665-:d:478906
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/665/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/665/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Holly P. Jones & David G. Hole & Erika S. Zavaleta, 2012. "Harnessing nature to help people adapt to climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(7), pages 504-509, July.
    2. Risto Lahdelma & Pekka Salminen, 2001. "SMAA-2: Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Group Decision Making," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 444-454, June.
    3. Honghu Sun & Xianfu Cheng & Mengqin Dai, 2016. "Regional flood disaster resilience evaluation based on analytic network process: a case study of the Chaohu Lake Basin, Anhui Province, China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 82(1), pages 39-58, May.
    4. Lahdelma, Risto & Makkonen, Simo & Salminen, Pekka, 2006. "Multivariate Gaussian criteria in SMAA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(3), pages 957-970, May.
    5. Kerri McClymont & David Morrison & Lindsay Beevers & Esther Carmen, 2020. "Flood resilience: a systematic review," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(7), pages 1151-1176, June.
    6. Tigran Melkonyan & Zvi Safra, 2016. "Intrinsic Variability in Group and Individual Decision Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(9), pages 2651-2667, September.
    7. Cheng Peng & Xunbo Wu & Yelin Fu & Kin Keung Lai, 2017. "Alternative approaches to constructing composite indicators: an application to construct a Sustainable Energy Index for APEC economies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 747-759, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Irem Sahmutoglu & Alev Taskin & Ertugrul Ayyildiz, 2023. "Assembly area risk assessment methodology for post-flood evacuation by integrated neutrosophic AHP-CODAS," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 116(1), pages 1071-1103, March.
    2. Guiyuan Li & Guo Cheng & Zhenying Wu & Xiaoxiao Liu, 2022. "Coupling Coordination Research on Disaster-Adapted Resilience of Modern Infrastructure System in the Middle and Lower Section of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-24, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Song, Lianlian & Fu, Yelin & Zhou, Peng & Lai, Kin Keung, 2017. "Measuring national energy performance via Energy Trilemma Index: A Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 313-319.
    2. Yelin Fu & Kong Xiangtianrui & Hao Luo & Lean Yu, 2020. "Constructing Composite Indicators with Collective Choice and Interval-Valued TOPSIS: The Case of Value Measure," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 117-135, November.
    3. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    4. García Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo & Aráoz Durand, Julián Arturo & Gómez, Fernando Palacios, 2009. "Integral analysis method - IAM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 891-903, February.
    5. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    6. Fu, Yelin & Lai, Kin Keung & Yu, Lean, 2021. "Multi-nation comparisons of energy architecture performance: A group decision-making method with preference structure and acceptability analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    7. Fan Liu & Ning Ma, 2019. "Multicriteria ABC Inventory Classification Using the Social Choice Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Giuseppe Pinto & Elnaz Abdollahi & Alfonso Capozzoli & Laura Savoldi & Risto Lahdelma, 2019. "Optimization and Multicriteria Evaluation of Carbon-neutral Technologies for District Heating," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, April.
    9. Lahdelma, Risto & Makkonen, Simo & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "Two ways to handle dependent uncertainties in multi-criteria decision problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 79-92, February.
    10. Tervonen, Tommi & Hakonen, Henri & Lahdelma, Risto, 2008. "Elevator planning with stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 352-362, June.
    11. Yelin Fu & Yubing Sui & Hao Luo & Biao Han, 2020. "Application of Social Choice Theory to Modify the Value Measure of Health Systems," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 1005-1019, April.
    12. Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "Prospect theory and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 961-971, October.
    13. Silvia Angilella & Maria Rosaria Pappalardo, 2022. "Performance assessment of energy companies employing Hierarchy Stochastic Multi-Attribute Acceptability Analysis," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 299-370, March.
    14. Yang Ding & Yelin Fu & Kin Keung Lai & W. K. John Leung, 2018. "Using Ranked Weights and Acceptability Analysis to Construct Composite Indicators: A Case Study of Regional Sustainable Society Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 871-885, October.
    15. Lerede, Daniele & Pinto, Giuseppe & Saccone, Mirko & Bustreo, Chiara & Capozzoli, Alfonso & Savoldi, Laura, 2021. "Application of a Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis to support decision-making within a macro-scale energy model: Case study of the electrification of the road European transport sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    16. Chen, Sihua & Du, Jiangze & He, Wei & Siponen, Mikko, 2022. "Supply chain finance platform evaluation based on acceptability analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    17. Arcidiacono, Sally Giuseppe & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2024. "Inducing a probability distribution in Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    18. García-Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo, 2020. "Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis – Matching (SMAA-M)," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 7(C).
    19. Menou, Abdellah & Benallou, Abdelhanine & Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2010. "Decision support for centralizing cargo at a Moroccan airport hub using stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 204(3), pages 621-629, August.
    20. Jiang, Yanping & Liang, Xia & Liang, Haiming & Yang, Ningman, 2018. "Multiple criteria decision making with interval stochastic variables: A method based on interval stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(2), pages 632-643.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:665-:d:478906. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.