IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v26y2024i11d10.1007_s10668-023-03784-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geospatial modeling for planning an optimum and least-cost route to link three historical sites in El-Fayoum desert, Egypt

Author

Listed:
  • Hala A. Effat

    (National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, NARSS)

  • Ahmed El-Zeiny

    (National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, NARSS)

  • M. Sowilem

    (National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, NARSS)

  • K. Mansour

    (National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, NARSS)

  • Khaled Elwan

    (National Authority for Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, NARSS)

Abstract

Improving the accessibility to archaeological sites in a desert is a crucial issue; it enhances the landscape value and helps in achieving sustainable tourism development. El-Fayoum Oasis and Governorate in Egypt, has a unique heterogenic environment that encompasses desert, lakes, agriculture lands, and urban areas. It is quite rich in historical heritage reflected by abundant archaeological and cultural sites, many of which fall in desert zones. A main constraint is the poor or lack of accessibility to such sites. In this study, we designed a geospatial model for planning a sustainable least cost tourist route (path) to link and develop three archaeological sites namely; Madinet Madi, Watfa city and Ummal-Barijat ruins. Spatial multicriteria decision analysis was integrated with the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and the least cost path modules. Three cost criteria themes were created associated with economic, social and environmental costs. A cost surface and a least-cost path were created for each criterion and for each theme. The themes were combined using weighted linear combination to create four least cost scenarios for the path. Five preference criteria were used to compare the four route scenarios. Results show that the environmental scenario scored first scoring 0.69 while the economy path scores second 0.42, the equal weights path scores third 0.40 and finally the social path comes to be the last having a preference score 0.36. The method is flexible because priority can be changed and adapted according to specifications and site variances. It can be helpful for decision makers and planners in planning routes based on visual maps and priority visions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hala A. Effat & Ahmed El-Zeiny & M. Sowilem & K. Mansour & Khaled Elwan, 2024. "Geospatial modeling for planning an optimum and least-cost route to link three historical sites in El-Fayoum desert, Egypt," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 27765-27785, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s10668-023-03784-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-023-03784-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-023-03784-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-023-03784-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    2. Dr. Yasmine Ramzy, 2017. "Managing Egyptian Tourism through Tourism Governance," Journal of Social Sciences (COES&RJ-JSS), , vol. 6(2), pages 196-210, April.
    3. Janda, Karel & Tan, Tianhao, 2017. "Integrated Multi-Attribute Value and Analytic Hierarchy Process Model of Sustainable Energy Development in Central Europe and East Asia," MPRA Paper 76716, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Leung, L. C. & Cao, D., 2000. "On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 102-113, July.
    5. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    6. repec:jso:coejss:v:6:y:2017:i:2:p:178-192 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Vicente Rodríguez Montequín & Joaquín Manuel Villanueva Balsera & Marina Díaz Piloñeta & César Álvarez Pérez, 2020. "A Bradley-Terry Model-Based Approach to Prioritize the Balance Scorecard Driving Factors: The Case Study of a Financial Software Factory," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Jochen Wulf, 2020. "Development of an AHP hierarchy for managing omnichannel capabilities: a design science research approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 39-68, April.
    3. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    4. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    5. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    6. Lucie Lidinska & Josef Jablonsky, 2018. "AHP model for performance evaluation of employees in a Czech management consulting company," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(1), pages 239-258, March.
    7. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    8. Jongseok Seo & Lidziya Lysiankova & Young-Seok Ock & Dongphil Chun, 2017. "Priorities of Coworking Space Operation Based on Comparison of the Hosts and Users’ Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-10, August.
    9. Paweł Karczmarek & Witold Pedrycz & Adam Kiersztyn, 2021. "Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in a Graphical Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 463-481, April.
    10. Scholz, Michael & Pfeiffer, Jella & Rothlauf, Franz, 2017. "Using PageRank for non-personalized default rankings in dynamic markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 388-401.
    11. Hongxun Xiang & Xia Heng & Boleng Zhai & Lichen Yang, 2024. "Digital and Culture: Towards More Resilient Urban Community Governance," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, May.
    12. R. Jothi Basu & Nachiappan Subramanian & Angappa Gunasekaran & P. L. K. Palaniappan, 2017. "Influence of non-price and environmental sustainability factors on truckload procurement process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 250(2), pages 363-388, March.
    13. Ashraf Abdelkarim & Mohamed Hssan Hassan Abdelhafez & Khaled Elkhayat & Mohammad Alshenaifi & Sultan Alfraidi & Ali Aldersoni & Ghazy Albaqawy & Amer Aldamaty & Ayman Ragab, 2024. "Spatial Suitability Index for Sustainable Urban Development in Desert Hinterland Using a Geographical-Information-System-Based Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-37, July.
    14. Ivan Ligardo-Herrera & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Hannia Gonzalez-Urango, 2019. "Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(3), pages 679-701, September.
    15. Tom Pape, 2020. "Prioritising data items for business analytics: Framework and application to human resources," Papers 2012.13813, arXiv.org.
    16. Lee, Hakyeon & Geum, Youngjung, 2017. "Development of the scenario-based technology roadmap considering layer heterogeneity: An approach using CIA and AHP," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 12-24.
    17. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2008. "Multicriteria evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1074-1089, March.
    18. Ting Kuo & Ming-Hui Chen, 2022. "On Indeterminacy of Interval Multiplicative Pairwise Comparison Matrix," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, February.
    19. Ziyue Zeng & Guoqiang Tang & Di Long & Chao Zeng & Meihong Ma & Yang Hong & Hui Xu & Jing Xu, 2016. "A cascading flash flood guidance system: development and application in Yunnan 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. 84(3), pages 2071-2093, December.
    20. Xu, Gang & Yang, Yong-ping & Lu, Shi-yuan & Li, Le & Song, Xiaona, 2011. "Comprehensive evaluation of coal-fired power plants based on grey relational analysis and analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2343-2351, May.

    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:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s10668-023-03784-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.