当前位置: X-MOL 学术Nat. Hazards › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Comparative evaluation of GIS-based best–worst method (BWM) for emergency facility planning: perspectives from two decision-maker groups
Natural Hazards ( IF 3.7 ) Pub Date : 2020-10-12 , DOI: 10.1007/s11069-020-04348-3
Penjani Hopkins Nyimbili , Turan Erden

Nowadays, organizational decisions are made collectively in decision groups to achieve more meaningful and impactful outcomes, ranging from product design, policy and strategy formulation and resource allocation. This research, therefore, suggests a group decision-making (GDM) approach utilizing a recently developed MCDM method known as best–worst method (BWM) in combination with GIS for planning suitable areas for new emergency facilities in Istanbul. Using two decision-maker (DM) groups consisting of academic-related professionals and fire brigade practitioners, the BWM method was used to evaluate the associated weights and preference rankings of six pre-selected criteria, derived from pairwise comparisons of the best and worst criterion for each DM. The preference criteria of the two DM groups were examined to deepen the understanding of the varying perceptions about the level of influence of the criteria from a theoretical and practical view as well as to reflect a real-case scenario in typical GDM problems where group agreement or reliability is assessed by consensus using Kendall’s coefficient of concordance, W. The BWM results were compared for model validation with the AHP and found to be reliable and consistent. Further, from statistical tests conducted, it was inferred that criteria C4 (density of hazardous materials) and C1 (high population density) were perceived to be the most important by the academician and fire brigade practitioner DM group, respectively. For both DM groups, criterion C6 (distance from earthquake risk) was viewed to be the least important. Resultant raster suitability maps for both DM groups were produced for visualizing the BWM model.



中文翻译:

基于GIS的应急措施规划最佳方法(BWM)的比较评估:两个决策者小组的观点

如今,组织决策是在决策组中集体做出的,以实现更有意义和更具影响力的结果,包括产品设计,政策和策略制定以及资源分配。因此,这项研究提出了一种集体决策(GDM)方法,该方法利用最近开发的称为最佳方法(BWM)的MCDM方法与GIS相结合,为伊斯坦布尔的新应急设施规划合适的区域。BWM方法使用两个由学术相关专业人士和消防队从业人员组成的决策者(DM)组,使用BWM方法评估六个最佳选择标准的相关权重和优先等级,这些标准是根据最佳和最差标准的成对比较得出的对于每个DM。w ^。将BWM结果与AHP进行模型验证进行比较,发现结果可靠且一致。此外,从进行的统计测试中可以推断,院士和消防从业人员DM组分别认为标准C 4(危险物质的密度)和C 1(高人口密度)是最重要的。对于两个DM组,标准C 6(距地震风险的距离)被认为是最不重要的。生成了两个DM组的最终栅格适用性图,以可视化BWM模型。

更新日期:2020-10-12
down
wechat
bug